- From: Chris Harding <chris@lacibus.net>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 11:21:00 +0100
- To: xyzscy <1047571207@qq.com>
- CC: paoladimaio10@googlemail.com, semantic-web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5D02238C.9070809@lacibus.net>
I should have said that it is a collection of triples to which someone attaches meaning. The triples might or might not be in a triple store. Chris Harding wrote: > What is a knowledge graph? > > I looked it up in Wikipedia, and the definition seemed to be "What > Google does". Reading a bit more widely, I came to the conclusion that > it is a triple store to which someone attaches meaning. (Of course, > this is most, if not all, triple stores.) What is interesting is the > impressive amount of theory and practice, associated with the > "knowledge graph" label, for using AI and other techniques to obtain > transformations or measurements of the triple stores that add to the > meaning that people attach to them. > > I found these articles helpful: > http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2322/dsi4-6.pdf > https://towardsdatascience.com/neural-network-embeddings-explained-4d028e6f0526 > https://content.iospress.com/articles/data-science/ds007 > > xyzscy wrote: >> Thank you for your response. I think the KG term is spread by GOOGLE, >> while I don’t how google implement it. I used to think the semantic >> network is the key technology of KG,but google has never statement that. >>> 在 2019年6月13日,下午2:46,Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com >>> <mailto:paola.dimaio@gmail.com>> 写道: >>> >>> Thank you for asking this, >>> >>> I ll leave the experts to reply to scalability and other questions >>> >>> In general, much depends on the language one uses, which in turn >>> depends on the domain (which planet you come from) >>> >>> When I first studied knowledge engineering, the expression knowledge >>> graph >>> was not in use at all. I was doing an MSc and studied the body of >>> knowledge >>> from ESPRIT project (some folks on this list worked on it) >>> https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/193e/b66909b0c87d5dbcdbd6b20d78ed93fc95a7.pdf >>> >>> >>> I d be curious to learn when such term knowledge graph came in use >>> and who coined it >>> >>> I then heard it in relation to the SW and this list, and always >>> tried to figure out what exactly >>> a KG is (in relation the wider Knowledge Representation domain I was >>> studying) >>> >>> Knowledge graphs are a type of knowledge representation, and they >>> can be visualized >>> graphically, or represented using algebra (again, depends on what >>> planet you are on) >>> Engineers tend to use diagrams, others tend to use algebra >>> >>> But more importantly, is that they enable machine readability >>> querying and computational manipulation of complex (combined) data >>> sets, assuming knowledge is some kind of data in context, as some say. >>> I dont use the term knowledge graph much either. Let's see if the KG >>> folks can offer more info >>> >>> PDM >>> Knowledge Graph Representation >>> *Knowledge graphs* provide a unified format for representing >>> *knowledge* about relationships between entities. A *knowledge >>> graph* is a collection of triples, with each triple (h,t,r) denoting >>> the fact that relation r exists between head entity h and tail en- >>> tity t. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2322/dsi4-6.pdf >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 1:40 PM 我 <1047571207@qq.com >>> <mailto:1047571207@qq.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Dear all: >>> >>> When I first touch knowledge graph, I'm very confused. Different >>> from the other AI theory, it is not an pattern recognization >>> algorithm which will give some "output" given some "input"(such >>> as classify algorithms) ,but a program language(such as owl,rdf) >>> and database(such as neo4j) instead. So in my opinion, knowledge >>> graph is more like a problem of engineering than mathematic theory. >>> >>> Then I realized that different from the pattern recognization >>> algorithm, the knowledge graph is created aimed at making the >>> computes all over the world to communicate with each other with >>> a common language, and I have a question: Is scalability the key >>> property of knowledge graph? >>> >>> There are many knowledge vaults edited by different >>> language(such as owl,rdf ),but is it always hard to merge them >>> and there is not a standard knowledge vault on which we can do >>> advanced development. So is it necessary to open a scalable and >>> standard knowledge vault so that everyone can keep extended it >>> and make it more perfect just like linux kernel or wiki pedia? >>> What kind of knowledge should be contained in the standard >>> knowledge vault so that it can be universal? I imagine that the >>> standard knowledge vault is an originator, and all of the other >>> application copy the originator, then all of the other >>> application can communicate under the same common sense, for >>> example when a application decelerate ''night", all of the other >>> application will know it's dark. >>> >>> As I know, the knowlege graph is implement as a query service, >>> but is it possible to implement it as a program language,just >>> like c++,java? In this way ,the compute can directly know nature >>> language, and human can communicate with compute with nature >>> language, also a compute can communicate with another compute >>> with nature language. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Regards > > Chris > ++++ > > Chief Executive, Lacibus <https://lacibus.net> Ltd > chris@lacibus.net > -- Regards Chris ++++ Chief Executive, Lacibus <https://lacibus.net> Ltd chris@lacibus.net
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2019 10:21:28 UTC