ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2026
Benchmarking the impact of data leakage on the performance of knowledge graph embedding models for biomedical link prediction.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- From benchmark accuracy to pharmacological credibility: why mechanistic explainability must define the next generation of AI for drug repurposing.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- DARKIN: a zero-shot benchmark for phosphosite-dark kinase association using protein language models.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- SynVerse: a modular framework for building and evaluating deep learning-based drug synergy prediction models.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationKnowledge graphs (KGs) organize complex biomedical knowledge into structured representations of entities and relations. Knowledge graph embedding (KGE) models learn compact representations of KGs, and are widely applied for biomedical link prediction. Despite extensive work on KGE models, current evaluations often overlook the issue of data leakage, which can artificially inflate performance and undermine benchmark validity. Data leakage can arise when (i) there is redundancy between training and test sets, (ii) the model leverages illegitimate features, or (iii) the test set does not accurately reflect real-world inference.
resultsWe assess the impact of data leakage on KGE-based link prediction across three biomedical KGs, using decoder-only and GNN-based models. We first demonstrate the impact of train-test redundancies and implement a systematic procedure to detect and remove them. Using permutation experiments, we also investigate whether node degree acts as an illegitimate predictive feature, and find no evidence that predictions are driven by degree alone. Finally, we evaluate how well common test set sampling strategies reflect real-world inference in drug repurposing. We compare random and cold-start data splits with an independent test set from Orphanet, and observe a substantial performance drop on the latter, indicating that current benchmarking practices may overestimate how well KGE models generalize to practical applications. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of rigorous benchmark design and careful evaluation of the generalization ability of KGE models for biomedical link prediction. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Code and results are openly available on GitHub at https://github.com/galadrielbriere/data_leakage_kge_benchmark.git and archived on Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21885112.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.