Paper detail

Diagnosing and Mitigating Semantic Inconsistencies in Wikidata's Classification Hierarchy

Wikidata is currently the largest open knowledge graph on the web, encompassing over 120 million entities. It integrates data from various domain-specific databases and imports a substantial amount of content from Wikipedia, while also allowing users to freely edit its content. This openness has positioned Wikidata as a central resource in knowledge graph research and has enabled convenient knowledge access for users worldwide. However, its relatively loose editorial policy has also led to a degree of taxonomic inconsistency. Building on prior work, this study proposes and applies a novel validation method to confirm the presence of classification errors, over-generalized subclass links, and redundant connections in specific domains of Wikidata. We further introduce a new evaluation criterion for determining whether such issues warrant correction and develop a system that allows users to inspect the taxonomic relationships of arbitrary Wikidata entities-leveraging the platform's crowdsourced nature to its full potential.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.