Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38671032›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A novel customizing knowledge graph evaluation method for incorporating user needs.

Ying Zhang, Gang Xiao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ying ZhangInstitute of Systems Engineering, Academy of Military Sciences (AMS), Beijing, 100107, China. yingzhang199608@foxmail.com.
Gang XiaoInstitute of Systems Engineering, Academy of Military Sciences (AMS), Beijing, 100107, China.

Funding

National Key Laboratory for Complex Systems Simulation Foundation NO.6142006190301
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowledge graphs are now widely used in various domains, including Question-and-answer systems, intelligent search and recommendation systems, and intelligent decision-making systems. However, knowledge graphs inevitably contain inaccurate and incomplete knowledge during the creation process, which leads to a reduction in the usefulness of knowledge graphs. Therefore, to assess the usefulness of knowledge graphs based on specific application requirements, quality assessment is particularly important. Among them, accuracy assessment, as a necessary dimension, reflects the degree of correctness of the triples. However, in the actual assessment process, the existing assessment methods do not consider the user's needs and do not implement the concept of "Fitness for Use". Meanwhile, it takes a lot of labor cost to evaluate the accuracy of large-scale knowledge graphs. Therefore, to ensure the accuracy of the assessment in a cost-saving way while meeting the needs of users, we propose and implement a novel accuracy assessment method that focuses on the requirements of users by designing an effective sampling method to obtain accurate assessment results that are more practical and instructive for users. Finally, the performance of our proposed method is evaluated by comparing it with the real accuracy rate, and the experimental results show that the accuracy rate obtained by the proposed method is very close to the real accuracy rate, and the sample size is minimized.

Indexed as

Accuracy assessmentKnowledge graph quality assessmentUser requirement

Identifiers

PMID38671032
PMCPMC11052994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.