KARMA: Leveraging Multi-Agent LLMs for Automated Knowledge Graph Enrichment

AI-generated keywords: Artificial Intelligence Knowledge Graphs KARMA Framework Multi-Agent LLMs Automated Enrichment

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • Maintaining comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge graphs is crucial for optimal performance
  • Manual curation struggles to keep pace with the rapid expansion of scientific literature
  • Introduction of a groundbreaking framework called [Framework Name]
  • Innovative approach leverages AI to automate KG enrichment by analyzing unstructured text in a structured manner
  • Framework operates through nine collaborative agents specializing in tasks like entity discovery, relation extraction, schema alignment, and conflict resolution
  • Agents work iteratively to parse documents, verify extracted knowledge, and integrate it into existing graph structures while adhering to domain-specific schema requirements
  • Experiments conducted on 1,200 PubMed articles across three domains showcased impressive results:
  • Identified up to 38,230 new entities with an LLM-verified correctness rate of 83.1%
  • Reduced conflict edges by 18.6% through multi-layer assessments
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Yuxing Lu, Jinzhuo Wang

24 pages, 3 figures, 2 tables

Abstract: 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.

Submitted to arXiv on 10 Feb. 2025

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2502.06472v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

In the realm of , maintaining comprehensive and up-to-date is crucial for optimal performance. The manual curation process often struggles to keep pace with the rapid expansion of scientific literature. To address this challenge, a groundbreaking framework called has been introduced. This innovative approach leverages to automate KG enrichment by analyzing unstructured text in a structured manner. The operates through nine collaborative agents, each specializing in different tasks such as entity discovery, relation extraction, schema alignment, and conflict resolution. These agents work together iteratively to parse documents, verify extracted knowledge, and seamlessly integrate it into existing graph structures while adhering to domain-specific schema requirements. To validate the effectiveness of , experiments were conducted on 1,200 PubMed articles spanning three distinct domains. The results were impressive, showcasing the framework's ability to identify up to 38,230 new entities with an impressive LLM-verified correctness rate of 83.1%. Moreover, demonstrated its capability to reduce conflict edges by 18.6% through multi-layer assessments.
Created on 02 Jul. 2025
Available in other languages: fr

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.