Optimizing Knowledge Graph Reliability: Approaches for Quality Control And Error Prevention

Date : July 5, 2023

Company : Intellectus Corp.


In the ever-expanding landscape of data, where complexity reigns and information overload is a constant challenge, emerges a revolutionary paradigm—knowledge graphs (KG). 

These intricate webs of interconnected knowledge hold the key to unlocking the untapped potential hidden within our data repositories. A KG uses nodes and edges to express relationships that exist between real-world entities. 

The graph manages to store and organize complicated material, so computers and people are able to comprehend and use all the data it contains. 

By providing a structured and contextualized representation of knowledge, the KG has bridged the gap between unstructured data and AI applications.

Unfortunately, the ever-maximizing growth of information leaves KGs vulnerable to erroneous knowledge. Concerns regarding quality have grown surrounding accuracy and usability when using these complex systems that may be a collection of unstructured data sources.

Using compromised KGs may result in a product that is limited or incomplete and biased, which could result in reduced trust and user confidence. To mitigate these repercussions, it has become essential to assess the quality of KGs in order to produce exceptional applications.

Several evaluation frameworks, such as named entity recognition and entity relation extraction have been proposed by recent researchers.

However they appear to contain issues that jeopardizes the integrity of the KG [1]. While some simply lack the capacity to evaluate the large ones that are more prone to error, others are so complex and multifaceted to the extent they are no longer practical [2].


• Completeness and Accuracy

Completion and accuracy are two critical hindrances that present significant challenges when it comes to building and maintaining a KG [3].
Achieving completeness requires capturing a comprehensive representation of knowledge in a specific domain or across multiple domains.

However, the breadth and depth of human knowledge are vast. Striking a balance between inclusiveness and practicality is essential, as attempting to achieve absolute completeness could lead to an unmanageably large graph with diminishing returns.

On the other hand, ensuring accuracy involves verifying the correctness and reliability of the information stored in the KG. It requires rigorous data validation processes, fact-checking, and resolving conflicts or inconsistencies.
Validating the accuracy of the data can be complex, especially when dealing with heterogeneous data sources, conflicting information, or subjective knowledge.

Achieving both completeness and accuracy requires a combination of automated processes, human curation, and ongoing maintenance to address the inherent challenges.

• Timeliness and Velocity

Vast amounts of data are created every minute on various social media platforms [10].

Timeliness presents a significant challenge when it comes to maintaining a KG.

The difficulty lies in the dynamic nature of the real world and the need to reflect the latest information accurately. The sheer volume and variety of data sources make it challenging to keep pace with updates [4].

KGs often draw information from diverse and constantly changing sources such as databases, APIs, websites, and real-time data feeds. The rate of data change and the velocity of updates further complicate the issue.

New information can emerge rapidly, necessitating frequent updates to the KG. Monitoring and integrating updates from such a vast array of sources require robust mechanisms and continuous monitoring to ensure timely data ingestion.

• Contextualization and Range

Navigating the path to reliable knowledge: identifying prominent obstacles to knowledge graph quality.

Contextualization involves understanding and incorporating the appropriate context for the stored information. Context plays a crucial role in the interpretation and relevance of knowledge.

However, context can be multifaceted and dynamic, making it difficult to capture and represent accurately in a KG [5].

Contextual factors such as time, location, user preferences, cultural nuances, and domain-specific considerations impact the meaning and interpretation of information.
The same piece of knowledge may have different implications or relevance depending on the context in which it is used. It also necessitates the ability to dynamically adapt and personalize the presentation of knowledge based on the specific context of the user or application.

Furthermore, contextualization often requires a deep understanding of the domain and the ability to integrate diverse sources of information.

Approaches to Mitigate Complications

• Comparative Analysis and Link Prediction

KGs serve as valuable repositories of structured information, but their accuracy and completeness are crucial factors in determining their reliability and usefulness. Comparative analysis and link prediction offer valuable insight in assessing KG quality and enhance its trustworthiness.

Comparative analysis plays a vital role in evaluating the accuracy of a KG. By juxtaposing the graph's content with external sources or reference datasets, analysts can discern inconsistencies and conflicting information.

This allows one to cross-reference the graph's assertions with reliable sources to determine their accuracy. Comparative analysis not only highlights discrepancies but also serves as a mechanism for validation and enhancement. By relying on external sources, analysts gain a broader perspective and establish a foundation for improving the accuracy of the KG.

Additionally, link prediction provides an effective means to evaluate KG completeness. This technique leverages the existing relationships and patterns in the graph to predict missing or future connections between entities [6]. By scrutinizing the graph's structure and using sophisticated algorithms, analysts can identify potential missing links that should logically exist based on the available information.

These predictions act as indicators of potential gaps or areas of limited coverage within the KG. Analysts can then prioritize efforts to address these gaps, enabling the enrichment and enhancement of the graph's completeness.

Combining comparative analysis and link prediction enhances the evaluation of KG quality. Comparative analysis ensures alignment with external sources, improving accuracy by resolving inconsistencies and verifying information.

Meanwhile, link prediction complements this evaluation by identifying missing relationships and providing insights into the graph's completeness.

By predicting connections that should logically exist, analysts gain a holistic view of the graph's comprehensiveness and can focus on integrating missing information.

Identifying potential links that may exist in knowledge graph.

• Continuous Data Integration 
(Real-Time Data Processing)

Continuous data integration is an essential concept in the realm of data management, particularly in the context of dynamic and rapidly changing data sources. It refers to the process of seamlessly and continuously incorporating new or updated data into a system or database in real-time.

This approach ensures that the data within the system remains up to date, reflecting the latest information available from diverse sources. Continuous data integration is particularly pertinent in KG management, where keeping up with the swift growth of information is a crucial consideration.

KGs, as complex networks of interconnected information, benefit greatly from continuous data integration. By leveraging this approach, KGs can address the challenges posed by timeliness and data velocity. Firstly, continuous data integration enables the KG to capture and integrate new information as it becomes available, ensuring that the graph remains current and accurate.

Real-time or near real-time updates from various data sources facilitate the timely incorporation of new facts, relationships, and attributes into the KG.

Moreover, continuous data integration contributes to managing the velocity of data in KGs. As KGs interact with a diverse range of data sources, each with its own update frequency and data velocity, it is crucial to maintain synchronization and keep pace with the incoming data.

Continuous integration processes monitor the relevant data sources continuously, extracting and transforming the new or modified data, and integrating it seamlessly into the KG. This enables the graph to remain aligned with the changing data landscape, ensuring that it captures the most recent insights and developments [7].

• User-Centric Customization

Creating actionable insights by transforming knowledge graph enhanced data fabric.

User-centric customization refers to the process of tailoring knowledge graph experiences and outputs to the specific context of individual users.
It recognizes that different users have varying requirements and expectations when interacting with knowledge graphs and seeks to provide personalized and relevant information based on these factors [8].

User-centric customization enables the effective contextualization of knowledge within specific domains or user requirements, enhancing the value and utility of knowledge graphs.

Contextualization is a critical challenge in knowledge graph management, as the relevance and appropriateness of information may vary depending on the specific context in which it is accessed or utilized.

User-centric customization addresses this challenge by allowing users to define their context and preferences, such as domain-specific filters.

By incorporating these preferences into the knowledge graph interface or query mechanism, user-centric customization enables the delivery of more contextually relevant and tailored results.

Furthermore, user-centric customization enhances the value of knowledge graphs by empowering users to extract actionable insights and derive meaningful value from the graph's vast network of interconnected information.

By allowing users to customize the output format, visualization options, or level of detail, knowledge graphs can be tailored to specific user requirements, making them more user-friendly and accessible.

This customization empowers users to explore and analyze the graph in a way that aligns with their specific objectives, resulting in more meaningful and valuable outcomes.

• Data Fabric

KGs and data fabric are two interrelated concepts that play significant roles in managing and utilizing data in modern information systems.

KGs, as complex networks of interconnected information, provide a flexible and expressive representation of knowledge and relationships.

On the other hand, data fabric refers to a unified architecture or framework that enables seamless integration, access, and management of diverse data sources across an organization.

The relationship between KGs and data fabric lies in their complementary nature, with KGs serving as a valuable component within the broader data fabric framework.

KGs serve as a powerful mechanism for representing and organizing structured and semi-structured data in a graph-like format.
They capture entities, attributes, and relationships, offering a semantic layer that enables advanced querying, reasoning, and analysis.

KGs excel in capturing complex relationships and facilitating knowledge discovery, making them well-suited for tasks such as entity resolution and recommendation systems.

As a component of data fabric, KGs provide a flexible and expressive way to model and organize diverse data sources, enabling a holistic view of the data landscape [9].

Data fabric, on the other hand, provides a comprehensive framework for managing the full data lifecycle, from ingestion and integration to storage, processing, and consumption. It aims to create a unified and agile data environment that can seamlessly integrate disparate data sources.

Data fabric leverages modern data integration and management technologies to provide a holistic view of the organization's data assets, enabling efficient and flexible data access and utilization

In this context, KGs serve as a valuable component within the data fabric framework, enriching the fabric's capabilities by providing a structured and semantic representation of data relationships.

The integration of KGs within a data fabric framework offers several benefits. KGs enhance the data fabric's ability to capture and represent complex relationships, allowing for advanced data analytics, entity resolution, and semantic querying capabilities. They enable organizations to derive valuable insights from interconnected data and facilitate knowledge discovery.

Furthermore, KGs contribute to the data fabric's data integration capabilities by providing a flexible and extensible framework for integrating and harmonizing diverse data sources. The graph-based structure of KGs enables efficient data integration and linking, supporting the seamless integration of disparate data sources within the fabric.

Ultimately, KGs and data fabric are closely related concepts that work together to enable effective data management and utilization. KGs provide a flexible and expressive representation of knowledge and relationships within the data fabric framework.

They enhance the fabric's ability to capture complex relationships, facilitate knowledge discovery, and support advanced data integration and querying capabilities.

By incorporating KGs within a data fabric framework, organizations can leverage the power of interconnected data and derive valuable insights from their diverse data sources, ultimately enabling informed decision-making and data-driven innovations.


We have explored the challenges associated with evaluating the quality of knowledge graphs (KGs) and proposed methodologies to address them.
KGs play a critical role in organizing structured knowledge and bridging the gap between unstructured data and AI applications.

However, ensuring the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and contextualization of information within KGs remains a significant challenge.

We have identified three techniques for evaluating KG quality: comparative analysis and link prediction, continuous data integration, and user-centric customization.
Comparative analysis and link prediction provide approaches to assess accuracy and completeness by cross-referencing KG content with external sources and identifying missing relationships.

Continuous data integration enables timely updates by seamlessly incorporating new or modified data from diverse sources.
User-centric customization enhances the contextualization and value of KGs by tailoring outputs to the specific needs, preferences, and context of users or user groups.

By employing these processes, organizations can enhance the reliability and value of KGs, paving the way for developing high-quality products.

Furthermore, integrating KGs within a data fabric framework enhances the capabilities of capturing complex relationships, facilitating knowledge discovery, and supporting advanced data integration and querying.
Continued research and innovation in these areas will contribute to the advancement and effectiveness of KGs in various domains and applications.


1. Wang, X., Chen, L., Ban, T., Usman, M., Guan, Y., Liu, S., Wu, T., & Chen, H. (2021b). Knowledge Graph Quality Control: A survey. Fundamental Research, 1(5), 607–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fmre.2021.09.003

2. Chen, H., Cao, G., Chen, J., & Ding, J. (2019). A practical framework for evaluating the quality of Knowledge Graph.Communications in Computer and Information Science, 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1956-7_10

3. Xue, B., & Zou, L. (2022). Knowledge Graph Quality Management: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1109/tkde.2022.3150080

4. Li, X., Lyu, M., Wang, Z., Chen, C.-H., & Zheng, P. (2021). Exploiting knowledge graphs in industrial products and services: A survey of key aspects, challenges, and future perspectives. Computers in Industry, 129, 103449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2021.103449

5. Voskarides, N., Meij, E., Reinanda, R., Khaitan, A., Osborne, M., Stefanoni, G., Kambadur, P., & de Rijke, M. (2018). Weakly-supervised contextualization of knowledge graph facts. The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209978.3210031

6. Rossi, A., Barbosa, D., Firmani, D., Matinata, A., & Merialdo, P. (2021). Knowledge graph embedding for link prediction. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data, 15(2), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1145/3424672

7. Le-Phuoc, D., Nguyen Mau Quoc, H., Ngo Quoc, H., Tran Nhat, T., & Hauswirth, M. (2016). The graph of things: A step towards the live knowledge graph of connected things. Journal of Web Semantics, 37–38, 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2016.02.003

8. Li, Xiang, Tur, G., Hakkani-Tur, D., & Li, Q. (2014). Personal knowledge graph population from user utterances in Conversational understanding. 2014 IEEE Spoken Language Technology Workshop (SLT). https://doi.org/10.1109/slt.2014.7078578

9. Hechler, E., Weihrauch, M., & Wu, Y. (2023). Data Fabric Architecture Patterns. Data Fabric and Data Mesh Approaches with AI, 231–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-9253-2_10