skip to main content
10.1145/3565387.3565441acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescsaeConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A Novel Method for Constructing Knowledge Graph of Railway Safety Risk

Published: 13 December 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Accurately and quickly constructing a high-quality knowledge graph of railway safety is an important challenge in the field of knowledge engineering. This paper adopts the "four-step method" to construct an accurate and efficient knowledge graph in the field of railway safety risk, including domain ontology construction, crowdsourcing semi-automatic semantic annotation, external data completion and knowledge acquisition. Then the sub-graph of public works safety risk is analyzed, and the application is discussed. Experiments show that the "four-step method" can quickly and accurately acquire knowledge in the field of railway safety, providing a powerful tool for integrating multi-source and heterogeneous railway safety risk knowledge, and making the use of railway safety risk-related information resources more convenient.

References

[1]
Shen Bibo, She Wei, Ye Yangdong, Jia Limin. 2016. A tc-cpn-based method for fault traceability diagnosis of urban rail train doors. Railway Journal 38(4), 51-58.
[2]
Liu Jinghui, Dai Xianchun, Guo Zhan, Wang Yang. 2009. Risk-based quantitative safety assessment method for railway systems. China Railway Science 30(05), 123-128.
[3]
Chen Hongtian, Bin Jiang. 2019. A review of fault detection and diagnosis for the traction system in high-speed trains. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems21(2), 450-465.
[4]
Hu Hexuan, 2017. Intelligent Fault Diagnosis of the High-Speed Train with Big Data Based on Deep Neural Networks. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics13(4), 2106-2116.
[5]
Yang Yuji, Xu Bin, Hu Jiawei, Tong Meihan, Zhang Peng, Zheng Li. 2018. An Accurate and Efficient Method for Building Domain Knowledge Graph. Journal of Software 29(10), 2931-2947.
[6]
Deng Kai, Yang Pin, Li Yizhou, Yang Xing, Zeng Fanrui, Zhang Zhenyu. 2022. A method for constructing domain knowledge graph that can be quickly transferred. Computer Science 49(S1), 100-108.
[7]
Bizer C, Lehmann J, Kobilarov G, 2009. DBpedia—A crystallization point for the Web of data. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web7(3), 154-165.
[8]
Bollacker K, Evans C, Paritosh P, 2008. Freebase: A collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD Int'l Conf. on Management of Data. ACM Press. 1247-1250.
[9]
Suchanek FM, Kasneci G, Weikum G. 2007. Yago: A core of semantic knowledge. In Proceedings of the 16th Int'l Conf. on World Wide Web. ACM Press, 2007. 697-706.
[10]
Singhal A. 2012. Introducing the knowledge graph: Things, not strings. Official Google Blog.
[11]
Audema, Yang Yunfei, Sui Zhifang, Dai Damei, Chang Baobao, Li Sujian, Zan Hongying. 2019. A preliminary study on the construction of cmekg of Chinese medical knowledge graph. Chinese Journal of Informatics 33(10), 1–9.
[12]
Hong Wenxing, Hu Zhiqiang, Weng Yang, Zhang Heng, Wang Zhu, Guo Zhixin. 2020 Automatic Construction of Case Knowledge Graph for Judicial Cases. Journal of Chinese Information Science 34(01), 34–44.
[13]
Chen Qiang, Dai Shiya. 2021. Accounting Fraud Risk Identification Method Based on Financial Knowledge Graph. Big Data 7(3), 14.
[14]
Noy N F, McGuinness D L. 2001. Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology.
[15]
Hu F H. 2014. Chinese knowledge graph construction method based on multiple data sources. East China University of Science and Technology.
[16]
Wang Bo, Wang Guanwei, Wang Youwei, 2021. A K-means clustering method with feature learning for unbalanced vehicle fault diagnosis. Smart and Resilient Transport.
[17]
Grassi M, Morbidoni C, Nucci M, 2012. Pundit: Semantically Structured Annotations for Web Contents and Digital Libraries(SDA). 49-60.
[18]
Liao, Xiaofeng, and Zhiming Zhao. 2019. Unsupervised approaches for textual semantic annotation, a survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 1-45.
[19]
Zhang, Dongxu, and Dong Wang. 2015. Relation classification via recurrent neural network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.01006.
[20]
Zhang, Jingren, 2019. Feature fusion text classification model combining CNN and BiGRU with multi-attention mechanism. Future Internet 11(11), 237.
[21]
Mintz M, Bills S, Snow R, 2009. Distant supervision for relation extraction without labeled data. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP. 1003-1011.
[22]
Hasegawa, Takaaki, Satoshi Sekine, and Ralph Grishman. 2004. Discovering relations among named entities from large corpora. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-04).
[23]
Mihalcea, Rada, and Paul Tarau. 2004. Textrank: Bringing order into text. In Proceedings of the 2004 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing. 404-411.
[24]
DeRose S, Maler E, Daniel R. 2000. XML pointer language (XPointer). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2771988_Xml_Pointer_Language_XPointer.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. A Novel Method for Constructing Knowledge Graph of Railway Safety Risk

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    CSAE '22: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Science and Application Engineering
    October 2022
    411 pages
    ISBN:9781450396004
    DOI:10.1145/3565387
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 13 December 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Knowledge acquisition
    2. Knowledge engineering
    3. Knowledge graph
    4. Railway safety risk

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    CSAE 2022

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 368 of 770 submissions, 48%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)21
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 06 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all

    View Options

    Get Access

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media