跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.01276 · v1

OntoDoc: Automatically Generating Ontology Resource Descriptions

首次提交 2026-11-01 05:23
版本更新 2026-11-01 05:23
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:43
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Knowledge graphs and ontologies form the backbone of structured, machine-readable knowledge representation, yet ontology terms often lack natural language descriptions, limiting their accessibility and reuse. Existing ontology verbalization approaches tend to rely on rule-based or template-driven techniques that operate on strict, formal schema axioms, resulting in rigid verbalizations that fail to convey richer contextual semantics. We present OntoDoc, a multi-agent framework for automatically generating natural language descriptions for any Internationalized Resource Identifier (IRI) within a SPARQL endpoint or RDF file. OntoDoc operates through a four-stage pipeline: (1) a Database Context agent that adaptively explores the knowledge graph via SPARQL to collect semantically informative triples about the target IRI; (2) a Web Context agent that retrieves and re-ranks encyclopedic background knowledge from Wikipedia and the open web; (3) an Assumption Generation agent that synthesizes both contexts into a structured, evidence-grounded list of intermediate assumptions; and (4) a Description Generation agent that produces the final natural language description from the grounded assumptions. We evaluate OntoDoc on three knowledge graphs spanning biomedical, agricultural, and cross-domain settings, using both automatic scoring via Large Language Models (LLMs) and human evaluation with 11 annotators. OntoDoc consistently matches or exceeds a naive LLM baseline and a template-based ontology verbalizer in accuracy. Furthermore, it vastly outperforms both baselines in the completeness of the generated descriptions, delivering an average 12% improvement in completeness over the naive baseline across all domains, and improving completeness scores by as much as 2.8 points on a 5-point scale relative to the ontology verbalizer.

作者备注:Submitted to ISWC2026

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-01 05:23 · 最新观测版本

OntoDoc: Automatically Generating Ontology Resource Descriptions

Knowledge graphs and ontologies form the backbone of structured, machine-readable knowledge representation, yet ontology terms often lack natural language descriptions, limiting their accessibility and reuse. Existing ontology verbalization approaches tend to rely on rule-based or template-driven techniques that operate on strict, formal schema axioms, resulting in rigid verbalizations that fail to convey richer contextual semantics. We present OntoDoc, a multi-agent framework for automatically generating natural language descriptions for any Internationalized Resource Identifier (IRI) within a SPARQL endpoint or RDF file. OntoDoc operates through a four-stage pipeline: (1) a Database Context agent that adaptively explores the knowledge graph via SPARQL to collect semantically informative triples about the target IRI; (2) a Web Context agent that retrieves and re-ranks encyclopedic background knowledge from Wikipedia and the open web; (3) an Assumption Generation agent that synthesizes both contexts into a structured, evidence-grounded list of intermediate assumptions; and (4) a Description Generation agent that produces the final natural language description from the grounded assumptions. We evaluate OntoDoc on three knowledge graphs spanning biomedical, agricultural, and cross-domain settings, using both automatic scoring via Large Language Models (LLMs) and human evaluation with 11 annotators. OntoDoc consistently matches or exceeds a naive LLM baseline and a template-based ontology verbalizer in accuracy. Furthermore, it vastly outperforms both baselines in the completeness of the generated descriptions, delivering an average 12% improvement in completeness over the naive baseline across all domains, and improving completeness scores by as much as 2.8 points on a 5-point scale relative to the ontology verbalizer.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗