In this task, you are given a part of an article. Your task is to generate headline (title) for this text. Preferred headlines are under fifteen words.
--------
Question: Knowledge graph embedding aims to represent entities and relations in a large-scale knowledge graph as elements in a continuous vector space. Existing methods, e.g., TransE and TransH, learn embedding representation by defining a global margin-based loss function over the data. However, the optimal loss function is determined during experiments whose parameters are examined among a closed set of candidates. Moreover, embeddings over two knowledge graphs with different entities and relations share the same set of candidate loss functions, ignoring the locality of both graphs. This leads to the limited performance of embedding related applications. In this paper, we propose a locally adaptive translation method for knowledge graph embedding, called TransA, to find the optimal loss function by adaptively determining its margin over different knowledge graphs. Experiments on two benchmark data sets demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method, as compared to the-state-of-the-art ones.

Answer: Locally Adaptive Translation for Knowledge Graph Embedding


Question: Latent tree analysis seeks to model the correlations among a set of random variables using a tree of latent variables. It was proposed as an improvement to latent class analysis — a method widely used in social sciences and medicine to identify homogeneous subgroups in a population. It provides new and fruitful perspectives on a number of machine learning areas, including cluster analysis, topic detection, and deep probabilistic modeling. This paper gives an overview of the research on latent tree analysis and various ways it is used in practice. Much of machine learning is about modeling and utilizing correlations among variables. In classification, the task is to establish relationships between attributes and class variables so that unseen data can be classified accurately. In Bayesian networks, dependencies among variables are represented as directed acyclic graphs and the graphs are used to facilitate efficient probabilistic inference. In topic models, word cooccurrences are accounted for by assuming that all words are generated probabilistically from the same set of topics, and the generation process is reverted via statistical inference to determine the topics. In deep belief networks, correlations among observed units are modeled using multiple levels of hidden units, and the top-level hidden units are used as a representation of the data for further analysis. Latent tree analysis (LTA) seeks to model the correlations among a set of observed variables using a tree model, called latent tree model (LTM), where the leaf nodes represent observed variables and the internal nodes represent latent variables.The dependence between two observed variables is explained by the path between them. Despite their simplicity, LTMs subsume two classes of models widely used in academic research. The first one is latent class models (LCMs) (Lazarsfeld and Henry, 1968; Knott and Bartholomew, 1999), which are LTMs with a single latent variable. They are used for categorical data clustering in social sciences and medicine. The second class is probabilistic phylogenetic trees (Durbin et al., 1998), which are a tool for determining the evolution history of a set of species. Phylogenetic trees are special LTMs where the model structures are binary (bifurcating) trees and all the Copyright c © 2017, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. variables have the same number of possible states. LTA also provides new and fruitful perspectives on a number of machine learning areas. One area is cluster analysis. Here finite mixture models such as LCMs are commonly used. A finite mixture model has one latent variable and consequently it gives one soft partition of data. An LTM typically has multiple latent variables and hence LTA yields multiple soft partitions of data simultaneously. In other words, LTA performs multidimensional clustering (Chen et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2013). It is interesting because complex data usually have multiple facets and can be meaningfully clustered in multiple ways. Another area is topic detection. Applying LTA to text data, we can partition a collection of documents in multiple ways. The document clusters in the partitions can be interpreted as topics. Furthermore, it is possible to learn hierarchical LTMs where the latent variables are organized into multiple layers. This leads to an alternative method for hierarchical topic detection (Liu, Zhang, and Chen, 2014; Chen et al., 2016a), which has been shown to find more meaningful topics and topic hierarchies than the state-of-the-art method based on latent Dirichlet allocation (Paisley et al., 2015). The third area is deep probabilistic modeling. Hierarchical LTM and deep belief network (DBN) (Hinton, Osindero, and Teh, 2006) are similar in that they both consist of multiple layers of variables, with an observed layer at the bottom and multiple layers of hidden units on top of it. One difference is that, in DBN, units from adjacent layers are fully connected, while HLTM is tree-structured. It would be interesting to explore the middle ground between the two extreme and develop algorithms for learning what might be called sparse DBNs. Learning structures for deep models is an interesting open problem. Extension of LTA might offer one solution (Chen et al., 2016b). The concept of latent tree models was introduced in (Zhang, 2002, 2004), where they were referred to as hierarchical latent class models. The term “latent tree models” first appeared in (Zhang et al., 2008; Wang, Zhang, and Chen, 2008). Mourad et al. (2013) surveyed the research on latent tree models as of 2012 in details. This paper provides a concise overview of the methodology. The exposition are more conceptual and less technical than (Mourad et al., 2013). Developments after 2012 are also included. ar X iv :1 61 0. 00 08 5v 1 [ cs .L G ] 1 O ct 2 01 6

Answer: Latent Tree Analysis


Question: Recent developments in controlled natural language editors for knowledge engineering (KE) have given rise to expectations that they will make KE tasks more accessible and perhaps even enable non-engineers to build knowledge bases. This exploratory research focussed on novices and experts in knowledge engineering during their attempts to learn a controlled natural language (CNL) known as OWL Simplified English and use it to build a small knowledge base. Participants’ behaviours during the task were observed through eye-tracking and screen recordings. This was an attempt at a more ambitious user study than in previous research because we used a naturally occurring text as the source of domain knowledge, and left them without guidance on which information to select, or how to encode it. We have identified a number of skills (competencies) required for this difficult task and key problems that authors face.

Answer:
How Easy is it to Learn a Controlled Natural Language for Building a Knowledge Base?