Column Vocabulary Association (CVA): semantic interpretation of dataless tables
This addresses the challenge of semantic table interpretation in data-scarce scenarios, but it is incremental as it evaluates existing methods on a new task.
The paper tackled the problem of semantic annotation of column headers using only metadata, without underlying data, as introduced in the SemTab challenge, and found that Large Language Models (LLMs) achieved up to 100% accuracy in certain cases, but traditional methods outperformed LLMs when data and glossary were related.
Traditional Semantic Table Interpretation (STI) methods rely primarily on the underlying table data to create semantic annotations. This year's SemTab challenge introduced the ``Metadata to KG'' track, which focuses on performing STI by using only metadata information, without access to the underlying data. In response to this new challenge, we introduce a new term: Column Vocabulary Association (CVA). This term refers to the task of semantic annotation of column headers solely based on metadata information. In this study, we evaluate the performance of various methods in executing the CVA task, including a Large Language Models (LLMs) and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) approach, as well as a more traditional similarity approach with SemanticBERT. Our methodology uses a zero-shot setting, with no pretraining or examples passed to the Large Language Models (LLMs), as we aim to avoid a domain-specific setting. We investigate a total of 7 different LLMs, of which three commercial GPT models (i.e. gpt-3.5-turbo-0.125, gpt-4o and gpt-4-turbo) and four open source models (i.e. llama3-80b, llama3-7b, gemma-7b and mixtral-8x7b). We integrate this models with RAG systems, and we explore how variations in temperature settings affect performances. Moreover, we continue our investigation by performing the CVA task utilizing SemanticBERT, analyzing how various metadata information influence its performance. Initial findings indicate that LLMs generally perform well at temperatures below 1.0, achieving an accuracy of 100\% in certain cases. Nevertheless, our investigation also reveal that the nature of the data significantly influences CVA task outcomes. In fact, in cases where the input data and glossary are related (for example by being created by the same organizations) traditional methods appear to surpass the performance of LLMs.