Researcher profile

Mitchell Joblin

Mitchell Joblin contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

On Calibration of Graph Neural Networks for Node Classification

Graphs can model real-world, complex systems by representing entities and their interactions in terms of nodes and edges. To better exploit the graph structure, graph neural networks have been developed, which learn entity and edge embeddings for tasks such as node classification and link prediction. These models achieve good performance with respect to accuracy, but the confidence scores associated with the predictions might not be calibrated. That means that the scores might not reflect the ground-truth probabilities of the predicted events, which would be especially important for safety-critical applications. Even though graph neural networks are used for a wide range of tasks, the calibration thereof has not been sufficiently explored yet. We investigate the calibration of graph neural networks for node classification, study the effect of existing post-processing calibration methods, and analyze the influence of model capacity, graph density, and a new loss function on calibration. Further, we propose a topology-aware calibration method that takes the neighboring nodes into account and yields improved calibration compared to baseline methods.

preprint2022arXiv

TLogic: Temporal Logical Rules for Explainable Link Forecasting on Temporal Knowledge Graphs

Conventional static knowledge graphs model entities in relational data as nodes, connected by edges of specific relation types. However, information and knowledge evolve continuously, and temporal dynamics emerge, which are expected to influence future situations. In temporal knowledge graphs, time information is integrated into the graph by equipping each edge with a timestamp or a time range. Embedding-based methods have been introduced for link prediction on temporal knowledge graphs, but they mostly lack explainability and comprehensible reasoning chains. Particularly, they are usually not designed to deal with link forecasting -- event prediction involving future timestamps. We address the task of link forecasting on temporal knowledge graphs and introduce TLogic, an explainable framework that is based on temporal logical rules extracted via temporal random walks. We compare TLogic with state-of-the-art baselines on three benchmark datasets and show better overall performance while our method also provides explanations that preserve time consistency. Furthermore, in contrast to most state-of-the-art embedding-based methods, TLogic works well in the inductive setting where already learned rules are transferred to related datasets with a common vocabulary.

preprint2020arXiv

Debate Dynamics for Human-comprehensible Fact-checking on Knowledge Graphs

We propose a novel method for fact-checking on knowledge graphs based on debate dynamics. The underlying idea is to frame the task of triple classification as a debate game between two reinforcement learning agents which extract arguments -- paths in the knowledge graph -- with the goal to justify the fact being true (thesis) or the fact being false (antithesis), respectively. Based on these arguments, a binary classifier, referred to as the judge, decides whether the fact is true or false. The two agents can be considered as sparse feature extractors that present interpretable evidence for either the thesis or the antithesis. In contrast to black-box methods, the arguments enable the user to gain an understanding for the decision of the judge. Moreover, our method allows for interactive reasoning on knowledge graphs where the users can raise additional arguments or evaluate the debate taking common sense reasoning and external information into account. Such interactive systems can increase the acceptance of various AI applications based on knowledge graphs and can further lead to higher efficiency, robustness, and fairness.

preprint2020arXiv

Integrating Logical Rules Into Neural Multi-Hop Reasoning for Drug Repurposing

The graph structure of biomedical data differs from those in typical knowledge graph benchmark tasks. A particular property of biomedical data is the presence of long-range dependencies, which can be captured by patterns described as logical rules. We propose a novel method that combines these rules with a neural multi-hop reasoning approach that uses reinforcement learning. We conduct an empirical study based on the real-world task of drug repurposing by formulating this task as a link prediction problem. We apply our method to the biomedical knowledge graph Hetionet and show that our approach outperforms several baseline methods.

preprint2020arXiv

Reasoning on Knowledge Graphs with Debate Dynamics

We propose a novel method for automatic reasoning on knowledge graphs based on debate dynamics. The main idea is to frame the task of triple classification as a debate game between two reinforcement learning agents which extract arguments -- paths in the knowledge graph -- with the goal to promote the fact being true (thesis) or the fact being false (antithesis), respectively. Based on these arguments, a binary classifier, called the judge, decides whether the fact is true or false. The two agents can be considered as sparse, adversarial feature generators that present interpretable evidence for either the thesis or the antithesis. In contrast to other black-box methods, the arguments allow users to get an understanding of the decision of the judge. Since the focus of this work is to create an explainable method that maintains a competitive predictive accuracy, we benchmark our method on the triple classification and link prediction task. Thereby, we find that our method outperforms several baselines on the benchmark datasets FB15k-237, WN18RR, and Hetionet. We also conduct a survey and find that the extracted arguments are informative for users.