Sign In

Enhancing Complex Logic Query Answering by Integrating Large Language Models and Knowledge Graph Reasoning

Core Concepts
The core message of this paper is to propose a novel model called 'Logic-Query-of-Thoughts' (LGOT) that combines the strengths of Large Language Models (LLMs) and knowledge graph reasoning to effectively answer complex logic queries.
The paper addresses the limitations of both Large Language Models (LLMs) and Knowledge Graph Question Answering (KGQA) methods when it comes to answering complex logic queries. LLMs tend to suffer from the hallucination problem and struggle with factual recall, while KGQA methods deteriorate quickly when the underlying knowledge graph is incomplete. To overcome these challenges, the authors introduce the 'Logic-Query-of-Thoughts' (LGOT) framework. LGOT seamlessly integrates knowledge graph reasoning and LLMs, breaking down complex logic queries into easier-to-answer subquestions. It utilizes both knowledge graph reasoning and LLMs to derive answers for each subquestion, and then aggregates the results to select the highest quality candidate answers. The key components of LGOT include: Interfaces for LLMs and KGQA to perform logical operations like projection and intersection. A method to combine the outputs of LLMs and KGQA, leveraging the likelihood ratio test and fuzzy vector representations. Techniques to guide LLMs in accordance with the logic query structure, including relation parsing and prompt engineering for projection and intersection operations. An optional answer evaluation module that employs LLMs to assess the quality of the generated responses. The experimental results on various real-world datasets demonstrate that LGOT significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, including ChatGPT, Chain-of-Thought, and knowledge graph reasoning methods, with up to 20% improvement in performance.
"The knowledge graph for the MetaQA dataset contains 43,234 entities and 18 relations, with 150,160 training edges and 8,000 test edges. The 50% incomplete knowledge graph has 66,791 training edges and 4,000 test edges." "The knowledge graph for the ComplexWebQuestions dataset contains 81,272 entities and 338 relations, with 423,663 training edges and 35,558 test edges. The 50% incomplete knowledge graph has 245,876 training edges and 35,558 test edges." "The knowledge graph for the GraphQuestions dataset contains 64,625 entities and 715 relations, with 70,291 training edges and 14,015 test edges. The 50% incomplete knowledge graph has 35,145 training edges and 14,059 test edges."
"LLMs tend to memorize facts and knowledge present in their training data (Petroni et al., 2019). However, research has revealed that LLMs struggle with factual recall and could generate factually incorrect statements, leading to hallucinations (Pan et al., 2023)." "Different from Large Language Models (LLMs), knowledge graphs store structured human knowledge, making them a valuable resource for finding answers. Knowledge Graph Question Answering (KGQA) (Liu et al., 2023b, 2022a, 2023a) aims to identify an answer entity within the knowledge graph to respond to a given question. Compared with LLMs, KGQA generates more accurate results when the knowledge graph is complete. However, the performance of KGQA deteriorates quickly when the underlying KG itself is incomplete with missing relations."

Key Insights Distilled From

by Lihui Liu,Zi... at 04-09-2024
Logic Query of Thoughts

Deeper Inquiries

How can the proposed LGOT framework be extended to handle more complex logical operations beyond projection and intersection, such as negation and union?

To extend the LGOT framework to handle more complex logical operations like negation and union, we can introduce additional modules that specifically cater to these operations. For negation, the framework can incorporate a mechanism to handle logical negation in queries by modifying the input prompts for the language model accordingly. This would involve formulating prompts that guide the model to consider the absence or exclusion of certain entities or relations. For union operations, the framework can be expanded to combine results from multiple branches of reasoning, allowing for the integration of different paths of logic. This would involve creating prompts that guide the model to consider the union of results obtained from different subquestions or reasoning paths. By incorporating these additional logical operations, LGOT can be enhanced to handle a wider range of complex queries that involve negation, union, and other advanced logical constructs.

What are the potential limitations of the current LGOT approach, and how could it be further improved to handle more diverse and challenging logic queries?

One potential limitation of the current LGOT approach is its reliance on the accuracy of the underlying knowledge graph for providing correct answers. If the knowledge graph is incomplete or contains errors, it can impact the quality of the results generated by LGOT. To address this limitation, LGOT could be improved by incorporating mechanisms for knowledge graph completion or error correction. This could involve leveraging techniques from knowledge graph refinement to enhance the quality and completeness of the underlying knowledge graph. Furthermore, LGOT may face challenges in handling highly complex and multi-faceted logic queries that require intricate reasoning steps. To improve its capability in handling diverse and challenging logic queries, LGOT could benefit from incorporating more sophisticated reasoning mechanisms, such as probabilistic reasoning, temporal reasoning, or causal reasoning. By integrating these advanced reasoning techniques into the framework, LGOT can enhance its ability to tackle a broader range of complex logic queries effectively.

Given the advancements in large language models and knowledge graph reasoning, how might these techniques be applied to other domains beyond question answering, such as automated reasoning, decision support, or knowledge-driven task planning?

The advancements in large language models and knowledge graph reasoning offer significant potential for application in various domains beyond question answering: Automated Reasoning: Large language models can be utilized for automated reasoning tasks by formulating prompts that guide the model to perform logical deductions, inferencing, and decision-making based on given information. Knowledge graph reasoning can complement this by providing structured data for the models to reason over, enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of automated reasoning systems. Decision Support: Large language models can assist in decision support systems by analyzing complex data, generating insights, and providing recommendations based on the input criteria. Knowledge graph reasoning can contribute by organizing and connecting relevant information for decision-making processes, enabling more informed and data-driven decisions. Knowledge-Driven Task Planning: By combining large language models with knowledge graph reasoning, systems can be developed to perform knowledge-driven task planning. These systems can leverage the structured knowledge in graphs to plan and execute tasks efficiently, considering dependencies, constraints, and logical relationships between entities. This integration can enhance the intelligence and effectiveness of task planning processes in various domains.