Randomized trial compares performance of five encoder-decoder models in generating RDF facts from text, indicating effective syntaxes for learning.
The choice made for representing the inputs and outputs of generative pretrained language models (PLMs) can impact their fine-tuning on a new task. This article focuses on the fine-tuning and linearization process to generate facts extracted from text. On a restricted relation extraction (RE) task, we challenged five encoder–decoder models, including BART, T5, CodeT5, FlanT5, and PileT5 by fine-tuning them on 13 linearization variations, including RDF standard syntaxes and variations thereof. Our benchmark covers the validity of the produced triples, the model’s performance, the training behavior, and the resources needed. We show these PLMs can learn some syntaxes more easily than others, and we identify a promising “Turtle Light” syntax supporting the quick and robust learning of the RE task.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ringwald et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: