Large language models (LLMs) are often asked to produce JSON conforming to a fixed schema, powering information extraction, tool calling, agentic planning, and knowledge-graph construction. Measuring how closely an output matches a gold reference is essential yet surprisingly hard: exact match is brittle, text similarity ignores structure, and an LLM judge is expensive, opaque, and non-deterministic.
arXiv:2607. 25579v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Entity alignment (EA) identifies entities across knowledge graphs (KGs) that refer to the same real-world object.
By Xinran Liu, Shengtao Li, Shouqian Shi, Ge Wang, Xin-Wei Yao
arXiv:2607. 18642v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mined code corpora are abundant but uncontrolled: a snippet's semantics, surface "messiness," and difficulty are whatever the wild contained; there is no known-optimal reference to grade against; and any public sample may already sit in a model's training set.
By Yuxiang Ji
The paper introduces EXYGEN, a framework that enables conversational access to large knowledge graphs by combining VoID descriptions, ShEx schemas, retrieved triples, and example question‑query pairs in a retrieval‑augmented generation pipeline. On the SciQA benchmark, this approach achieves an exact‑match score of 0.419 without fine‑tuning any large language model, and shows that larger general‑purpose LLMs can outperform smaller code‑specialized ones when provided sufficient context. To scale metadata generation for very large KGs, the authors propose a predicate‑coverage‑aware parallel graph sampling strategy that preserves structural diversity, reduces runtime by over 80× on OpenCitations Meta and GESIS, and is the only tractable method for obtaining complete metadata on ORKG.
By Harshdeep Singh, Yurui Zhu, Giovanni Colavizza, Matteo Romanello
arXiv:2608.31137v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Ontology alignment (OA) has evolved through several methodological paradigms, ranging from lexical and structural aligners to knowledge graph embedding...
By Hamed Babaei Giglou, S\"oren Auer, Peio Popov, Mahsa Sanaei, Jennifer D'Souza
arXiv:2608. 11431v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Graph learning presupposes a graph, and tables and relational databases do not come with one.
By Tamara Cucumides, Floris Geerts
arXiv:2607. 10771v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Matching dependency is a generalization of the functional dependency concept, which allows users to apply custom similarity functions for matching individual attributes.
By Alexey Shlyonskikh, Michael Sinelnikov, Daniil Nikolaev, Yurii Litvinov, George Chernishev
arXiv:2607. 22766v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) is increasingly bottlenecked by data quality.
By Yunting Song, Matthew Watson, Peter Grabowski, Jun Qin
arXiv:2606. 03705v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Knowledge Graphs (KGs) are widely used to mitigate the limitations of Large Language Models (LLMs), such as outdated knowledge and hallucinations.
By Weiwei Ding, Zixuan Li, Long Bai, Zhuo Chen, Kun Su, Fei Wang, Xiaolong Jin, Jin Zhang, Jiafeng Guo, Xueqi Cheng
arXiv:2608. 14228v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Life science knowledge graphs make large collections of structured data available through SPARQL, but each resource uses its own schema, identifiers, and links.
By Yiming Zhang, Koji Tsuda
arXiv:2511. 07457v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in modeling sequential textual data and generalizing across diverse tasks.
By Jiarui Feng, Donghong Cai, Yixin Chen, Muhan Zhang
CONSISTRE is a consistency‑aware framework for document‑level relation extraction that tackles contradictions in large language model predictions. It offers two tracks: an inference‑time track that refines black‑box LLM outputs through constraint‑aware prompting, verification, and self‑reflection, and a training‑time track that distills consistency knowledge into smaller open‑source models via supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning. Experiments on DocRED show both tracks outperform baselines, with the inference‑time track matching competitive F1 scores and the training‑time track narrowing the performance gap to proprietary LLMs while reducing inference cost.
By Mingxuan Sun