Using knowledge graph embedding models (KGEMs) is a popular approach for predicting links in knowledge graphs (KGs). Traditionally, the performance of KGEMs for link prediction is assessed using rank-based metrics, which evaluate their ability to give high scores to ground-truth entities. However, the literature claims that the KGEM evaluation procedure would benefit from adding supplementary dimensions to assess. That is why, in this paper, we extend our previously introduced metric Sem@K that measures the capability of models to predict valid entities w.r.t. domain and range constraints. In particular, we consider a broad range of KGs and take their respective characteristics into account to propose different versions of Sem@K. We also perform an extensive study to qualify the abilities of KGEMs as measured by our metric. Our experiments show that Sem@K provides a new perspective on KGEM quality. Its joint analysis with rank-based metrics offers different conclusions on the predictive power of models. Regarding Sem@K, some KGEMs are inherently better than others, but this semantic superiority is not indicative of their performance w.r.t. rank-based metrics. In this work, we generalize conclusions about the relative performance of KGEMs w.r.t. rank-based and semantic-oriented metrics at the level of families of models. The joint analysis of the aforementioned metrics gives more insight into the peculiarities of each model. This work paves the way for a more comprehensive evaluation of KGEM adequacy for specific downstream tasks.

Knowledge graph embedding models (KGEMs) are used for various tasks related to knowledge graphs (KGs), including link prediction. They are trained with loss functions that are computed considering a batch of scored triples and their corresponding labels. Traditional approaches consider the label of a triple to be either true or false. However, recent works suggest that all negative triples should not be valued equally. In line with this recent assumption, we posit that negative triples that are semantically valid w.r.t. domain and range constraints might be high-quality negative triples. As such, loss functions should treat them differently from semantically invalid negative ones. To this aim, we propose semantic-driven versions for the three main loss functions for link prediction. In an extensive and controlled experimental setting, we show that the proposed loss functions systematically provide satisfying results on three public benchmark KGs underpinned with different schemas, which demonstrates both the generality and superiority of our proposed approach. In fact, the proposed loss functions do (1) lead to better MRR and Hits@10 values, (2) drive KGEMs towards better semantic awareness as measured by the Sem@K metric. This highlights that semantic information globally improves KGEMs, and thus should be incorporated into loss functions. Domains and ranges of relations being largely available in schema-defined KGs, this makes our approach both beneficial and widely usable in practice.