In recent years, countless research papers have addressed the topics of knowledge graph creation, extension, or completion in order to create knowledge graphs that are larger, more correct, or more diverse. This research is typically motivated by the argumentation that using such enhanced knowledge graphs to solve downstream tasks will improve performance. Nonetheless, this is hardly ever evaluated. Instead, the predominant evaluation metrics - aiming at correctness and completeness - are undoubtedly valuable but fail to capture the complete picture, i.e., how useful the created or enhanced knowledge graph actually is. Further, the accessibility of such a knowledge graph is rarely considered (e.g., whether it contains expressive labels, descriptions, and sufficient context information to link textual mentions to the entities of the knowledge graph). To better judge how well knowledge graphs perform on actual tasks, we present KGrEaT - a framework to estimate the quality of knowledge graphs via actual downstream tasks like classification, clustering, or recommendation. Instead of comparing different methods of processing knowledge graphs with respect to a single task, the purpose of KGrEaT is to compare various knowledge graphs as such by evaluating them on a fixed task setup. The framework takes a knowledge graph as input, automatically maps it to the datasets to be evaluated on, and computes performance metrics for the defined tasks. It is built in a modular way to be easily extendable with additional tasks and datasets.

Knowledge about entities and their interrelations is a crucial factor of success for tasks like question answering or text summarization. Publicly available knowledge graphs like Wikidata or DBpedia are, however, far from being complete. In this paper, we explore how information extracted from similar entities that co-occur in structures like tables or lists can help to increase the coverage of such knowledge graphs. In contrast to existing approaches, we do not focus on relationships within a listing (e.g., between two entities in a table row) but on the relationship between a listing’s subject entities and the context of the listing. To that end, we propose a descriptive rule mining approach that uses distant supervision to derive rules for these relationships based on a listing’s context. Extracted from a suitable data corpus, the rules can be used to extend a knowledge graph with novel entities and assertions. In our experiments we demonstrate that the approach is able to extract up to 3M novel entities and 30M additional assertions from listings in Wikipedia. We find that the extracted information is of high quality and thus suitable to extend Wikipedia-based knowledge graphs like DBpedia, YAGO, and CaLiGraph. For the case of DBpedia, this would result in an increase of covered entities by roughly 50%.