learning to construct and reason with a large kb of extracted information
DESCRIPTION
Learning to Construct and Reason with a Large KB of Extracted Information. William W. Cohen Machine Learning Dept and Language Technology Dept joint work with: Tom Mitchell, Ni Lao, William Wang, Kathryn Rivard Mazaitis, - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Learning to Construct and Reason with a Large KB of
Extracted InformationWilliam W. Cohen
Machine Learning Dept and Language Technology Dept
joint work with:
Tom Mitchell, Ni Lao, William Wang, Kathryn Rivard Mazaitis,Richard Wang, Frank Lin, Ni Lao, Estevam Hruschka, Jr., Burr
Settles, Partha Talukdar, Derry Wijaya, Edith Law, Justin Betteridge, Jayant Krishnamurthy, Bryan Kisiel, Andrew
Carlson, Weam Abu Zaki , Bhavana Dalvi, Malcolm Greaves, Lise Getoor, Jay Pujara, Hui Miao, …
Outline• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL
– Coupled learning– Multi-view, multi-strategy learning
• Inference in NELL– Inference as another learning strategy
• Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• ProPPR
– Promotion as inference
• Conclusions & summary
But first….some backstory
..and an unrelated project…
..called SimStudent…
SimStudent will learn rules to solve a problem step-by-step and guide a student through
how solve problems step-by-step
Quinlan’s FOIL
Summary of SimStudent• Possible for a human author (eg middle school teacher) to
build an ITS system– by building a GUI, then demonstrating problem solving and
having the system learn how from examples• The rules learned by SimStudent can be used to construct
a “student model” – with parameter tuning this can predict how well individual
students will learn– better than state-of-the-art in some cases!
• AI problem solving with a cognitively predictive model … and ILP is a key component!
Information Extraction• Goal:
– Extract facts about the world automatically by reading text
– IE systems are usually based on learning how to recognize facts in text
• .. and then (sometimes) aggregating the results• Latest-generation IE systems need not require large
amounts of training• … and IE does not necessarily require subtle analysis of
any particular piece of text
Never Ending Language Learning (NELL)
• NELL is a broad-coverage IE system– Simultaneously learning 500-600 concepts and relations
(person, celebrity, emotion, aquiredBy, locatedIn, capitalCityOf, ..)
– Starting point: containment/disjointness relations between concepts, types for relations, and O(10) examples per concept/relation
– Uses 500M web page corpus + live queries– Running (almost) continuously for over three years– Has learned over 50M beliefs, over 1M high-confidence ones
• about 85% of high-confidence beliefs are correct
NELL Screenshots
NELL Screenshots
NELL Screenshots
More examples of what NELL knows
Outline• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL
– Coupled learning– Multi-view, multi-strategy learning
• Inference in NELL– Inference as another learning strategy
• Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• ProPPR
– Promotion as inference
• Conclusions & summary
Bootstrapped SSL learning of lexical patterns
ParisPittsburgh
SeattleCupertino
mayor of arg1live in arg1
San FranciscoAustindenial
arg1 is home oftraits such as arg1
it’s underconstrained!!
anxietyselfishness
Berlin
Extract cities:
Given: four seed examples of the class “city”
NP1 NP2
Krzyzewski coaches the Blue Devils.
athleteteam
coachesTeam(c,t)
person
coach
sport
playsForTeam(a,t)
NP
Krzyzewski coaches the Blue Devils.
coach(NP)
hard (underconstrained)semi-supervised learning
problem
much easier (more constrained)semi-supervised learning problem
teamPlaysSport(t,s)
playsSport(a,s)
One Key to Accurate Semi-Supervised Learning
1. Easier to learn many interrelated tasks than one isolated task2. Also easier to learn using many different types of information
Outline• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL
– Coupled learning– Multi-view, multi-strategy learning
• Inference in NELL– Inference as another learning strategy
• Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• ProPPR
– Promotion as inference
• Conclusions & summary
Ontology and
populated KB
the Web
CBL
text extraction patterns
SEAL
HTML extraction patterns
evidence integration
PRA
learned inference
rules
Morph
Morphologybased
extractor
Another key idea: use multiple types of information
Outline• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL
– Coupled learning– Multi-view, multi-strategy learning
• Inference in NELL– Inference as another learning strategy
• Background: Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• ProPPR
– Promotion as inference
• Conclusions & summary
proposal
CMU
NSF
graph
William
6/18/07
6/17/07
Sent To
Term In Subject
Background: Personal Info Management as Similarity Queries on a Graph
[SIGIR 2006, EMNLP 2008, TOIS 2010]
Einat Minkov, Univ Haifa
Learning about graph similarity• Personalized PageRank aka Random Walk with Restart:
– Similarity measure for nodes in a graph, analogous to TFIDF for text in a WHIRL database
– natural extension to PageRank– amenable to learning parameters of the walk (gradient
search, w/ various optimization metrics):• Toutanova, Manning & NG, ICML2004; Nie et al,
WWW2005; Xi et al, SIGIR 2005– or: reranking, etc– queries:Given type t* and node x, find y:T(y)=t* and y~xGiven type t* and nodes X, find y:T(y)=t* and y~X
Many tasks can be reduced to similarity queries
Person namePerson namedisambiguationdisambiguation
ThreadingThreading
Alias findingAlias finding
[ term “andy” file msgId ]
“person”
[ file msgId ]
“file”
What are the adjacent messages in this thread? A proxy for finding “more messages like this one”
What are the email-addresses of Jason ?... [ term Jason ]
“email-address”
Meeting Meeting attendees finderattendees finder
Which email-addresses (persons) should I notify about this meeting? [ meeting mtgId ]
“email-address”
Learning about graph similarity:the next generation
• Personalized PageRank aka Random Walk with Restart:– Given type t* and nodes X, find y:T(y)=t* and y~X
• Ni Lao’s thesis (2012): New, better learning methods– richer parameterization– faster PPR inference– structure learning
• Other tasks:– relation-finding in parsed text– information management for biologists– inference in large noisy knowledge bases
Lao: A learned random walk strategy is a weighted set of random-walk “experts”, each of which is a walk constrained by a path (i.e., sequence of relations)
6) approx. standard IR retrieval
1) papers co-cited with on-topic papers
7,8) papers cited during the past two years
12-13) papers published during the past two years
Recommending papers to cite in a paper being prepared
Another study:learning inference rules for a noisy KB(Lao, Cohen, Mitchell 2011)(Lao et al, 2012)
Synonyms of the query team
American
IsA
PlaysIn
AthletePlaysInLeagueHinesWard
SteelersAthletePlaysForTeam
NFL
TeamPlaysInLeague
?
isa-1
Random walk interpretation is crucial
i.e. 10-15 extra points in MRR
Ontology and
populated KB
the Web
CBL
text extraction patterns
SEAL
HTML extraction patterns
evidence integration
PRA
learned inference
rules
Morph
Morphologybased
extractor
Another key idea: use multiple types of information
Outline
• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL• Inference in NELL
– Inference as another learning strategy• Background: Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• PRA + FOL: ProPPR and joint learning for inference
– Promotion as inference
• Conclusions & summary
How can you extend PRA to
• Non-binary predicates?• Paths that include constants?• Recursive rules?• …. ?
• Current direction: using ideas from PRA in a general first-order logic: ProPPR
athletePlaySportViaRule(Athlete,Sport) onTeamViaKB(Athlete,Team), teamPlaysSportViaKB(Team,Sport)
teamPlaysSportViaRule(Team,Sport) memberOfViaKB(Team,Conference), hasMemberViaKB(Conference,Team2),playsViaKB(Team2,Sport).
teamPlaysSportViaRule(Team,Sport) onTeamViaKB(Athlete,Team), athletePlaysSportViaKB(Athlete,Sport)
A limitation• Paths are learned separately for each relation
type, and one learned rule can’t call another• PRA can learn this….
A limitation• Paths are learned separately for each relation
type, and one learned rule can’t call another• But PRA can’t learn this…..
athletePlaySport(Athlete,Sport) onTeam(Athlete,Team), teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport)
athletePlaySport(Athlete,Sport) athletePlaySportViaKB(Athlete,Sport)
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) memberOf(Team,Conference), hasMember(Conference,Team2),plays(Team2,Sport).
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) onTeam(Athlete,Team), athletePlaysSport(Athlete,Sport)
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) teamPlaysSportViaKB(Team,Sport)
Solution: a major extension from PRA to include large subset of Prolog
athletePlaySport(Athlete,Sport) onTeam(Athlete,Team), teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport)
athletePlaySport(Athlete,Sport) athletePlaySportViaKB(Athlete,Sport)
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) memberOf(Team,Conference), hasMember(Conference,Team2),plays(Team2,Sport).
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) onTeam(Athlete,Team), athletePlaysSport(Athlete,Sport)
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) teamPlaysSportViaKB(Team,Sport)
Sample ProPPR program….
Horn rules features of rules(vars from head ok)
.. and search space…
D’oh! This is a graph!
• Score for a query soln (e.g., “Z=sport” for “about(a,Z)”) depends on probability of reaching a ☐ node*• learn transition probabilities based on features of the rules• implicit “reset” transitions with (p≥α) back to query node
• Looking for answers supported by many short proofs
“Grounding” size is O(1/αε) … ie independent of DB size fast approx incremental inference (Reid,Lang,Chung, 08)
Learning: supervised variant of personalized PageRank (Backstrom & Leskovic, 2011)
*Exactly as in Stochastic Logic Programs[Cussens, 2001]
Sample Task: Citation Matching• Task:
• citation matching (Alchemy: Poon & Domingos).• Dataset:
• CORA dataset, 1295 citations of 132 distinct papers.• Training set: section 1-4.• Test set: section 5.• ProPPR program:
• translated from corresponding Markov logic network (dropping non-Horn clauses)
• # of rules: 21.
Task: Citation Matching
Time: Citation Matchingvs Alchemy
“Grounding” is independent of DB size
Accuracy: Citation Matching
AUC scores: 0.0=low, 1.0=hiw=1 is before learning
UW rules
Our rules
It gets better…..• Learning uses many example queries
• e.g: sameCitation(c120,X) with X=c123+, X=c124-, …
• Each query is grounded to a separate small graph (for its proof)
• Goal is to tune weights on these edge features to optimize RWR on the query-graphs.
• Can do SGD and run RWR separately on each query-graph
• Graphs do share edge features, so there’s some synchronization needed
Learning can be parallelized by splitting on the separate “groundings” of each query
Ontology and
populated KB
the Web
CBL
text extraction patterns
SEAL
HTML extraction patterns
evidence integration
PRA
learned inference
rules
Morph
Morphologybased
extractor
Back to NELL……
Experiment:•Take top K paths for each predicate learned by Lao’s PRA
• (I don’t know how to do structure learning for ProPPR yet)•Convert to a mutually recursive ProPPR program•Train weights on entire program
athletePlaySport(Athlete,Sport) onTeam(Athlete,Team), teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport)
athletePlaySport(Athlete,Sport) athletePlaySportViaKB(Athlete,Sport)
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) memberOf(Team,Conference), hasMember(Conference,Team2),plays(Team2,Sport).
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) onTeam(Athlete,Team), athletePlaysSport(Athlete,Sport)
teamPlaysSport(Team,Sport) teamPlaysSportViaKB(Team,Sport)
More details
• Train on NELL’s KB as of iteration 713• Test on new facts from later iterations• Try three “subdomains” of NELL
– pick a seed entity S– pick top M entities nodes in a (simple untyped
RWR) from S– project KB to just these M entities– look at three subdomains, six values of M
Outline• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL
– Coupled learning– Multi-view, multi-strategy learning
• Inference in NELL– Inference as another learning strategy
• Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• ProPPR
– Promotion as inference• Conclusions & summary
More detail on NELL
• For iteration i=1,….,715,…:– For each view (lexical patterns, …, PRA):
• Distantly-train for that view using KBi
• Propose new “candidate beliefs” based on the learned view-specific classifier
– Hueristically find the “best” candidate beliefs and “promote” them into KBi+1
Not obvious how to promote in a principled way …
Promotion: identifying new correct extractions from a pool of noisy extractions
• Many types of noise are possible:• co-referent entities• missing or spurious labels• missing or spurious relations• violations of ontology (e.g., an athlete that is not a person)
• Identifying true extractions requires joint reasoning, e.g.• Pooling information about co-referent entities• Enforcing mutual exclusion of labels and relations
Problem: How can we integrate extractions from multiple sources in the presence of ontological constraints at the scale of millions of extractions?
An example
Ontology:Dom(hasCapital, country)Mut(country, bird)
Sample Extractions:Lbl(Kyrgyzstan, bird)Lbl(Kyrgyzstan, country)Lbl(Kyrgyz Republic, country)Rel(Kyrgyz Republic, Bishkek,
hasCapital)Entity Resolution:SameEnt(Kyrgyz Republic,
Kyrgyzstan)
country
Kyrgyzstan Kyrgyz Republic
bird
Bishkek
SameEnt
Dom
Mut
Lbl
Rel(hasCapital)
Lbl Lbl
Kyrgyzstan
Kyrgyz RepublicBishkekcountry
Rel(hasCapital)Lbl
A knowledge graph view of NELL’s extractions
What you want
Knowledge graph
country
Kyrgyzstan Kyrgyz Republic
bird
Bishkek
SameEnt
Dom
Mut
Lbl
Rel(hasCapital)
Lbl Lbl
Representation as a noisy knowledge graph
Kyrgyzstan
Kyrgyz RepublicBishkekcountry
Rel(hasCapital)LblAfter Knowledge Graph Identification
graph identification
Lise Getoor, Jay Pujara, and Hui Miao @ UMD
Graph Identification as Joint Reasoning: Probabilistic Soft Logic (PSL)
• Templating language for hinge-loss MRFs, much more scalable!• Model specified as a collection of logical formulas
– Formulas are ground by substituting literal values– Truth values of atoms relaxed to [0,1] interval– Truth values of formulas derived from Lukasiewicz t-norm
• Each ground rule, r, has a weighted potential, ϕr corresponding to a distance to satisfaction
• PSL defines a probability distribution over atom truth value assignments, I:
• Most probable explanation (MPE) inference is convex• Running time scales linearly with grounded rules (|R|)
€
P(I) =1Zexp − wrr∈R∑ ?r(I)
p[ ]
PSL Representation of Heuristics for PromotionPromote any candidate
Promote “hints” (old promotion strategy)
Be consistent about labels for duplicate entities
PSL Representation of Ontological Rules
Adapted from Jiang et al., ICDM 2012
Be consistent with constraints from ontology
Too expressive for ProPPR
Datasets & Results• Evaluation on NELL dataset from iteration 165:
• 1.7M candidate facts • 70K ontological constraints
• Predictions on 25K facts from a 2-hop neighborhood around test data
• Beats other methods, runs in just 10 seconds!
F1 AUCBaseline .828 .873NELL .673 .765MLN (Jiang, 12) .836 .899KGI-PSL .853 .904
Summary• Background: information extraction and NELL• Key ideas in NELL
– Coupled learning– Multi-view, multi-strategy learning
• Inference in NELL– Inference as another learning strategy
• Learning in graphs • Path Ranking Algorithm• ProPPR
– Promotion as inference
• Conclusions & summary