Multi-modal Knowledge Graph Completion (MMKGC) aims to predict missing entities, relations, or attributes in knowledge graphs by collaboratively modeling the triple structure and multimodal information (e.g., text, images, videos) associated with entities.

Entity alignment (EA) aims to merge two knowledge graphs (KGs) by identifying equivalent entity pairs. Existing methods can be categorized into symbolic and neural models. Symbolic models, while precise, struggle with substructure heterogeneity and sparsity, whereas neural models, although effective, generally lack interpretability and cannot handle uncertainty. We propose NeuSymEA, a unified neuro-symbolic reasoning framework that combines the strengths of both methods to fully exploit the cross-KG structural pattern for robust entity alignment. NeuSymEA models the joint probability of all possible pairs' truth scores in a Markov random field, regulated by a set of rules, and optimizes it with the variational EM algorithm.

Continual learning in computer vision faces the critical challenge of catastrophic forgetting, where models struggle to retain prior knowledge while adapting to new tasks. Although recent studies have attempted to leverage the generalization capabilities of pre-trained models to mitigate overfitting on current tasks, models still tend to forget details of previously learned categories as tasks progress, leading to misclassification. To address these limitations, we introduce a novel Knowledge Graph Enhanced Generative Multi-modal model (KG-GMM) that builds an evolving knowledge graph throughout the learning process. Our approach utilizes relationships within the knowledge graph to augment the class labels and assigns different relations to similar categories to enhance model differentiation. During testing, we propose a Knowledge Graph Augmented Inference method that locates specific categories by analyzing relationships within the generated text, thereby reducing the loss of detailed information about old classes when learning new knowledge and alleviating forgetting. Experiments demonstrate that our method effectively leverages relational information to help the model correct mispredictions, achieving state-of-the-art results in both conventional CIL and few-shot CIL settings, confirming the efficacy of knowledge graphs at preserving knowledge in the continual learning scenarios.

Knowledge Graph Question Answering (KGQA) systems rely on high-quality benchmarks to evaluate complex multi-hop reasoning. However, despite their widespread use, popular datasets such as WebQSP and CWQ suffer from critical quality issues, including inaccurate or incomplete ground-truth annotations, poorly constructed questions that are ambiguous, trivial, or unanswerable, and outdated or inconsistent knowledge. Through a manual audit of 16 popular KGQA datasets--including WebQSPand CWQ--we find that the average factual correctness rate is only 57%. To address these issues, we introduce KGQAGen, an LLM-inthe-loop framework that systematically resolves these pitfalls. KGQAGencombines structured knowledge grounding, LLM-guided generation, and symbolic verification to produce challenging and verifiable QA instances. Using KGQAGen, we construct KGQAGen-10k, a 10K-scale benchmark grounded in Wikidata, and evaluate a diverse set of KG-RAG models. Experimental results demonstrate that even state-of-the-art systems struggle on this benchmark, highlighting its ability to expose limitations of existing models. Our findings advocate for more rigorous benchmark construction and position KGQAGen as a scalable framework for advancing KGQA evaluation 1.

Maintaining comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge graphs (KGs) is critical for modern AI systems, but manual curation struggles to scale with the rapid growth of scientific literature. This paper presents KARMA, a novel framework employing multi-agent large language models (LLMs) to automate KG enrichment through structured analysis of unstructured text. Our approach employs nine collaborative agents, spanning entity discovery, relation extraction, schema alignment, and conflict resolution that iteratively parse documents, verify extracted knowledge, and integrate it into existing graph structures while adhering to domain-specific schema. Experiments on 1,200 PubMed articles from three different domains demonstrate the effectiveness of KARMA in knowledge graph enrichment, with the identification of up to 38,230 new entities while achieving 83.1% LLM-verified correctness and reducing conflict edges by 18.6% through multi-layer assessments.

The integration of logic programs with embedding models resulted in a class of neurosymbolic frameworks that jointly learn symbolic rules and representations for the symbols in the logic (constant or predicate). The key idea that enabled this integration was the differentiable relaxation of unification, the algorithm for variable instantiation during inference in logic programs. Unlike unification, its relaxed counterpart exploits the similarity between symbols in the embedding space to decide when two symbols are semantically equivalent. We show that this similarity between symbols violates the transitive law of equivalence, leading to undesirable side effects in learning and inference. To alleviate those side effects, we are the first to revamp the well-known possible world semantics of probabilistic logic programs into new semantics called equivalence semantics. In our semantics, a probabilistic logic program induces a probability distribution over all possible equivalence relations between symbols, instead of a probability distribution over all possible subsets of probabilistic facts. We propose a factorization of the equivalence distribution using latent random variables and characterize its expressivity. Additionally, we propose both exact and approximate techniques for reasoning in our semantics. Experiments on well-known benchmarks show that the equivalence semantics leads to neurosymbolic models with up to 42% higher results than state-of-the-art baselines.

Knowledge graphs (KGs) are vital for enabling knowledge reasoning across various domains. Recent KG reasoning methods that integrate both global and local information have achieved promising results. However, existing methods often suffer from score over-smoothing, which blurs the distinction between correct and incorrect answers and hinders reasoning effectiveness. To address this, we propose DuetGraph, a coarse-to-fine KG reasoning mechanism with dual-pathway global-local fusion. DuetGraph tackles over-smoothing by segregating--rather than stacking--the processing of local (via message passing) and global (via attention) information into two distinct pathways, preventing mutual interference and preserving representational discrimination. In addition, DuetGraph introduces a coarse-to-fine optimization, which partitions entities into high-and low-score subsets. This strategy narrows the candidate space and sharpens the score gap between the two subsets, which alleviates over-smoothing and enhances inference quality. Extensive experiments on various datasets demonstrate that DuetGraph achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, with up to an 8.7% improvement in reasoning quality and a 1.8 acceleration in training efficiency.

We take two key steps in automating the open-ended discovery of new mathematical theories, a grand challenge in artificial intelligence. First, we introduce FERMAT, a reinforcement learning (RL) environment that models concept discovery and theorem-proving using a set of symbolic actions, opening up a range of RL problems relevant to theory discovery. Second, we explore a specific problem through FERMAT: automatically scoring the interestingness of mathematical objects. We investigate evolutionary algorithms for synthesizing nontrivial interestingness measures. In particular, we introduce an LLM-based evolutionary algorithm that features function abstraction, leading to notable improvements in discovering elementary number theory and finite fields over hard-coded baselines.

Recent interest in building foundation models for knowledge graphs has highlighted a fundamental challenge: knowledge graph data is scarce. The best-known knowledge graphs are primarily human-labeled, created by pattern-matching, or extracted using early NLP techniques. While human-generated knowledge graphs are in short supply, automatically extracted ones are of questionable quality. We present KGGen, a novel text-to-knowledge-graph generator that uses language models to extract high-quality graphs from plain text with a novel entity resolution approach that clusters related entities, significantly reducing the sparsity problem that plagues existing extractors. Unlike other KG generators, KGGen clusters and de-duplicates related entities to reduce sparsity in extracted KGs. Along with KGGen, we release Measure of Information in Nodes and Edges (MINE), the first benchmark to test an extractor's ability to produce a useful KG from plain text. We benchmark our new tool against leading existing generators such as Microsoft's GraphRAG; we achieve comparable retrieval accuracy on the generated graphs and better information retention.

Evaluating the open-form textual responses generated by Large Language Models (LLMs) typically requires measuring the semantic similarity of the response to a (human generated) reference. However, there is evidence that current semantic similarity methods may capture syntactic or lexical forms over semantic content. While benchmarks exist for semantic equivalence, they often suffer from high generation costs due to reliance on subjective human judgment, limited availability for domain-specific applications, and unclear definitions of equivalence. This paper introduces a novel method for generating benchmarks to evaluate semantic similarity methods for LLM outputs, specifically addressing these limitations. Our approach leverages knowledge graphs (KGs) to generate pairs of naturallanguage statements that are semantically similar or dissimilar, with dissimilar pairs categorized into one of four sub-types. We generate benchmark datasets in four different domains (general knowledge, biomedicine, finance, biology), and conduct a comparative study of semantic similarity methods including traditional natural language processing scores and LLM-as-a-judge predictions. We observe that the sub-type of semantic variation, as well as the domain of the benchmark impact the performance of semantic similarity methods, with no method being consistently superior.