arXiv:2604.23972cs.CLcs.AI2026-04

让知识图谱学会判断事实是否适用于具体病人,提升医疗问答准确率。

Quantum Knowledge Graph: Modeling Context-Dependent Triplet Validity

论文配图:Quantum Knowledge Graph: Modeling Context-Dependent Triplet Validity
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 将关系有效性建模为与上下文相关的函数,构建可动态调整的量子知识图谱
  • 在2788个医学问题上,结合上下文匹配的QKG使准确率提升1.40个百分点
  • 适合医疗AI、临床推理系统研究者,尤其关注上下文敏感性建模的场景

知识图谱(KG)被广泛用于支持大语言模型(LLM)的推理,但传统三元组式知识图谱将每个关系视为全局有效。在许多场景中,关系是否作为证据取决于具体上下文。为此,本文将三元组有效性建模为上下文相关函数,提出量子知识图谱(QKG)。以糖尿病为中心的PrimeKG子图包含68,651个上下文敏感关系,并标注了患者群体特异性约束。在包含2,788个问题的医学推理数据集MedReason上评估,使用Haiku-4.5作为推理器和验证器时,基于知识图谱的验证显著优于无验证基线(+0.61 pp),而结合上下文匹配的QKG取得最大提升,优于无上下文匹配的KG验证(+0.79 pp)和无验证基线(+1.40 pp;配对McNemar检验,所有p<0.05)。当使用更强的验证器Qwen-3.6-Plus时,原始QKG相对于无验证基线的增益从+1.40 pp增至+5.96 pp;上下文匹配差距在原始集上不显著(p=0.73),但在校正知识泄露与可疑问题后趋于边缘显著(p=0.05),表明已接近基准上限而非QKG局限。结果表明,知识图谱在基于LLM的临床推理中的价值不仅在于存储医学事实,更在于表达这些事实是否适用于特定患者上下文。为促进复现与研究,项目代码与数据集已开源。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Knowledge graphs (KGs) are increasingly used to support large lan guage model (LLM) reasoning, but standard triplet-based KGs treat each relation as globally valid. In many settings, whether a relation should count as evidence depends on the context. We therefore formulate triplet validity as a triplet-specific function of context and refer to this formulation as a Quantum Knowledge Graph (QKG). We instantiate QKG in medicine using a diabetes-centered PrimeKG subgraph, whose 68,651 context-sensitive relations are further annotated with patient-group-specific constraints. We evaluate it in a reasoner--validator pipeline for medical question answering on a KG-grounded subset of MedReason containing 2,788 questions. With Haiku-4.5 as both the Reasoner and the Validator, KG-backed validation significantly improves over a no-validator baseline ($+0.61$ pp), and QKG with context matching yields the largest gain, outperforming both KG validation without context matching ($+0.79$ pp) and the no-validator baseline ($+1.40$ pp; paired McNemar, all $p<0.05$). Under a stronger validator (Qwen-3.6-Plus), the raw QKG gain over the no-validator baseline grows from $+1.40$ pp to $+5.96$ pp; the context-matching gap is non-significant ($p=0.73$) on the raw set but becomes borderline significant ($p=0.05$) after adjustment for knowledge leakage and suspicious questions, consistent with a benchmark-gold ceiling rather than a QKG limitation. Taken together, the results support the view that the value of a KG in LLM-based clinical reasoning lies not merely in storing medically related facts, but in representing whether those facts are applicable to the specific patient context. For reproducibility and further research, we release the curated QKG datasets and source code.\footnote{https://github.com/HKAI-Sci/QKG}

知识图谱医疗AI上下文感知大模型推理

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。