Shrestha Ghosh

Shrestha Ghosh, Simon Razniewski, Gerhard Weikum

Questions on class cardinality comparisons are quite tricky to answer and come with its own challenges. They require some kind of reasoning since web documents and knowledge bases, indispensable sources of information, rarely store direct answers to questions, such as, ``Are there more astronauts or Physics Nobel Laureates?'' We tackle questions on class cardinality comparison by tapping into three sources for absolute cardinalities as well as the cardinalities of orthogonal subgroups of the classes. We propose novel techniques for aggregating signals with partial coverage for more reliable estimates and evaluate them on a dataset of 4005 class pairs, achieving an accuracy of 83.7%.

Tassallah Abdullahi, Shrestha Ghosh, Hamish S Fraser et al.

Persona conditioning can be viewed as a behavioral prior for large language models (LLMs) and is often assumed to confer expertise and improve safety in a monotonic manner. However, its effects on high-stakes clinical decision-making remain poorly characterized. We systematically evaluate persona-based control in clinical LLMs, examining how professional roles (e.g., Emergency Department physician, nurse) and interaction styles (bold vs.\ cautious) influence behavior across models and medical tasks. We assess performance on clinical triage and patient-safety tasks using multidimensional evaluations that capture task accuracy, calibration, and safety-relevant risk behavior. We find systematic, context-dependent, and non-monotonic effects: Medical personas improve performance in critical care tasks, yielding gains of up to $\sim+20\%$ in accuracy and calibration, but degrade performance in primary-care settings by comparable margins. Interaction style modulates risk propensity and sensitivity, but it's highly model-dependent. While aggregated LLM-judge rankings favor medical over non-medical personas in safety-critical cases, we found that human clinicians show moderate agreement on safety compliance (average Cohen's $κ= 0.43$) but indicate a low confidence in 95.9\% of their responses on reasoning quality. Our work shows that personas function as behavioral priors that introduce context-dependent trade-offs rather than guarantees of safety or expertise. The code is available at https://github.com/rsinghlab/Persona\_Paradox.

Yujia Hu, Tuan-Phong Nguyen, Shrestha Ghosh et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have majorly advanced NLP and AI, and next to their ability to perform a wide range of procedural tasks, a major success factor is their internalized factual knowledge. Since Petroni et al. (2019), analyzing this knowledge has gained attention. However, most approaches investigate one question at a time via modest-sized pre-defined samples, introducing an ``availability bias'' (Tversky&Kahnemann, 1973) that prevents the analysis of knowledge (or beliefs) of LLMs beyond the experimenter's predisposition. To address this challenge, we propose a novel methodology to comprehensively materialize an LLM's factual knowledge through recursive querying and result consolidation. Our approach is a milestone for LLM research, for the first time providing constructive insights into the scope and structure of LLM knowledge (or beliefs). As a prototype, we build GPTKB, a knowledge base (KB) comprising 101 million relational triples for over 2.9 million entities from GPT-4o-mini. We use GPTKB to exemplarily analyze GPT-4o-mini's factual knowledge in terms of scale, accuracy, bias, cutoff and consistency, at the same time. GPTKB is accessible at https://gptkb.org

Yujia Hu, Tuan-Phong Nguyen, Shrestha Ghosh et al.

Language models are powerful tools, yet their factual knowledge is still poorly understood, and inaccessible to ad-hoc browsing and scalable statistical analysis. This demonstration introduces GPTKB v1.5, a densely interlinked 100-million-triple knowledge base (KB) built for $14,000 from GPT-4.1, using the GPTKB methodology for massive-recursive LLM knowledge materialization (Hu et al., ACL 2025). The demonstration experience focuses on three use cases: (1) link-traversal-based LLM knowledge exploration, (2) SPARQL-based structured LLM knowledge querying, (3) comparative exploration of the strengths and weaknesses of LLM knowledge. Massive-recursive LLM knowledge materialization is a groundbreaking opportunity both for the research area of systematic analysis of LLM knowledge, as well as for automated KB construction. The GPTKB demonstrator is accessible at https://gptkb.org.

Shrestha Ghosh, Luca Giordano, Yujia Hu et al.

LLMs are remarkable artifacts that have revolutionized a range of NLP and AI tasks. A significant contributor is their factual knowledge, which, to date, remains poorly understood, and is usually analyzed from biased samples. In this paper, we take a deep tour into the factual knowledge (or beliefs) of a frontier LLM, based on GPTKB v1.5 (Hu et al., 2025a), a recursively elicited set of 100 million beliefs of one of the strongest currently available frontier LLMs, GPT-4.1. We find that the models' factual knowledge differs quite significantly from established knowledge bases, and that its accuracy is significantly lower than indicated by previous benchmarks. We also find that inconsistency, ambiguity and hallucinations are major issues, shedding light on future research opportunities concerning factual LLM knowledge.

Shrestha Ghosh, Moritz Schneider, Carina Reinicke et al.

Recent advances in LLMs have greatly improved general-domain NLP tasks. Yet, their adoption in critical domains, such as clinical trial recruitment, remains limited. As trials are designed in natural language and patient data is represented as both structured and unstructured text, the task of matching trials and patients benefits from knowledge aggregation and reasoning abilities of LLMs. Classical approaches are trial-specific and LLMs with their ability to consolidate distributed knowledge hold the potential to build a more general solution. Yet recent applications of LLM-assisted methods rely on proprietary models and weak evaluation benchmarks. In this survey, we are the first to analyze the task of trial-patient matching and contextualize emerging LLM-based approaches in clinical trial recruitment. We critically examine existing benchmarks, approaches and evaluation frameworks, the challenges to adopting LLM technologies in clinical research and exciting future directions.

Simon Razniewski, Hiba Arnaout, Shrestha Ghosh et al.

General-purpose knowledge bases (KBs) are a cornerstone of knowledge-centric AI. Many of them are constructed pragmatically from Web sources, and are thus far from complete. This poses challenges for the consumption as well as the curation of their content. While several surveys target the problem of completing incomplete KBs, the first problem is arguably to know whether and where the KB is incomplete in the first place, and to which degree. In this survey we discuss how knowledge about completeness, recall, and negation in KBs can be expressed, extracted, and inferred. We cover (i) the logical foundations of knowledge representation and querying under partial closed-world semantics; (ii) the estimation of this information via statistical patterns; (iii) the extraction of information about recall from KBs and text; (iv) the identification of interesting negative statements; and (v) relaxed notions of relative recall. This survey is targeted at two types of audiences: (1) practitioners who are interested in tracking KB quality, focusing extraction efforts, and building quality-aware downstream applications; and (2) data management, knowledge base and semantic web researchers who wish to understand the state of the art of knowledge bases beyond the open-world assumption. Consequently, our survey presents both fundamental methodologies and their working, and gives practice-oriented recommendations on how to choose between different approaches for a problem at hand.

Shrestha Ghosh, Simon Razniewski, Gerhard Weikum

Predicate constraints of general-purpose knowledge bases (KBs) like Wikidata, DBpedia and Freebase are often limited to subproperty, domain and range constraints. In this demo we showcase CounQER, a system that illustrates the alignment of counting predicates, like staffSize, and enumerating predicates, like workInstitution^{-1} . In the demonstration session, attendees can inspect these alignments, and will learn about the importance of these alignments for KB question answering and curation. CounQER is available at https://counqer.mpi-inf.mpg.de/spo.

Shrestha Ghosh, Simon Razniewski, Gerhard Weikum

Knowledge Bases (KBs) contain a wealth of structured information about entities and predicates. This paper focuses on set-valued predicates, i.e., the relationship between an entity and a set of entities. In KBs, this information is often represented in two formats: (i) via counting predicates such as numberOfChildren and staffSize, that store aggregated integers, and (ii) via enumerating predicates such as parentOf and worksFor, that store individual set memberships. Both formats are typically complementary: unlike enumerating predicates, counting predicates do not give away individuals, but are more likely informative towards the true set size, thus this coexistence could enable interesting applications in question answering and KB curation. In this paper we aim at uncovering this hidden knowledge. We proceed in two steps. (i) We identify set-valued predicates from a given KB predicates via statistical and embedding-based features. (ii) We link counting predicates and enumerating predicates by a combination of co-occurrence, correlation and textual relatedness metrics. We analyze the prevalence of count information in four prominent knowledge bases, and show that our linking method achieves up to 0.55 F1 score in set predicate identification versus 0.40 F1 score of a random selection, and normalized discounted gains of up to 0.84 at position 1 and 0.75 at position 3 in relevant predicate alignments. Our predicate alignments are showcased in a demonstration system available at https://counqer.mpi-inf.mpg.de/spo.