3 ms·
Haven’t read the paper yet, but a great list of authors! I have worked on Knowledge Graphs at two companies, and I am fairly opinionated about them. I think tha
by mark_l_watson 5y ago
Haven’t read the paper yet, but a great list of authors! I have worked on Knowledge Graphs at two companies, and I am fairly opinionated about them. I think that large fast KGs (i.e., no OWL reasoning) are a good tool for organizing different data sources, but I have lost my interest in KGs for Knowledge Representation (in the AI sense). Just a personal opinion, lots of people in the field would disagree with me.
- sjg007 5y agoWhat about embedding KGs? That could be useful?
- gglitch 5y agoMark would you say more about use of KGs for organizing data sources, or give an example situation? Thanks in advance.
- zenkat 5y agoNot Mark, but I'm one of the original leads on Google's Knowledge Graph. KGs are great for data integration because they are naturally composable. If you have two data sources represented as graphs, and their node identifiers are in the same range (ie, they have been reconciled), and their edge labels are mapped to the same schema, then you can combine them just by taking the union of all their triples. This works across different vertical domains -- for instance, you can create a joint film + music KG just by unioning all the triples from a film KG and a music KG, as long as you've mapped the node identifiers to a common namespace (eg Wikipedia). You can then do cross-vertical queries like soundtracks for Will Smith movies, etc.
- lolive 5y agoThanks for having made the SemWeb/LinkedData a reality for people.
- amkkma 5y ago>I have lost my interest in KGs for Knowledge Representation (in the AI sense) Hi! Can you say more about that please?