Reasoning on Knowledge Graphs with Debate Dynamics
We propose a novel method for automatic reasoning on knowledge graphs based on debate dynamics. The main idea is to frame the task of triple classification as a debate game between two reinforcement learning agents which extract arguments -- paths in the knowledge graph -- with the goal to promote the fact being true (thesis) or the fact being false (antithesis), respectively. Based on these arguments, a binary classifier, called the judge, decides whether the fact is true or false. The two agents can be considered as sparse, adversarial feature generators that present interpretable evidence for either the thesis or the antithesis. In contrast to other black-box methods, the arguments allow users to get an understanding of the decision of the judge. Since the focus of this work is to create an explainable method that maintains a competitive predictive accuracy, we benchmark our method on the triple classification and link prediction task. Thereby, we find that our method outperforms several baselines on the benchmark datasets FB15k-237, WN18RR, and Hetionet. We also conduct a survey and find that the extracted arguments are informative for users.
Code (2)
Tasks
General ClassificationKnowledge GraphsLink PredictionReinforcement LearningTriple ClassificationSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Debate Dynamics for Human-comprehensible Fact-checking on Knowledge Graphs
We propose a novel method for fact-checking on knowledge graphs based on debate dynamics. The underlying idea is to frame the task of triple classification as a debate game between two reinforcement learning agents which…
Common Sense ReasoningFact CheckingFairnessKnowledge Graphs+2SMAGDi: Socratic Multi Agent Interaction Graph Distillation for Efficient High Accuracy Reasoning
Multi-agent systems (MAS) often achieve higher reasoning accuracy than single models, but their reliance on repeated debates across agents makes them computationally expensive. We introduce SMAGDi, a distillation framewo…
Automatic Paper Reviewing with Heterogeneous Graph Reasoning over LLM-Simulated Reviewer-Author Debates
Existing paper review methods often rely on superficial manuscript features or directly on large language models (LLMs), which are prone to hallucinations, biased scoring, and limited reasoning capabilities. Moreover, th…
Debate on Graph: a Flexible and Reliable Reasoning Framework for Large Language Models
Large Language Models (LLMs) may suffer from hallucinations in real-world applications due to the lack of relevant knowledge. In contrast, knowledge graphs encompass extensive, multi-relational structures that store a va…
Answer GenerationGraph Question AnsweringKnowledge GraphsQuestion AnsweringDebateKG: Automatic Policy Debate Case Creation with Semantic Knowledge Graphs
Recent work within the Argument Mining community has shown the applicability of Natural Language Processing systems for solving problems found within competitive debate. One of the most important tasks within competitive…
Argument MiningKnowledge Graphs