Cross-lingual Entity Typing (CLET) aims at improving the quality of entity type prediction by transferring semantic knowledge learned from rich-resourced languages to low-resourced languages. In this paper, by utilizing multilingual transfer learning via the mixture-of-experts approach, our model dynamically capture the relationship between target language and each source language, and effectively generalize to predict types of unseen entities in new languages. Extensive experiments on multi-lingual datasets show that our method significantly outperforms multiple baselines and can robustly handle negative transfer. We questioned the relationship between language similarity and the performance of CLET. A series of experiments refute the commonsense that the more source the better, and suggest the Similarity Hypothesis for CLET.

Entity Matching (EM) aims at recognizing entity records that denote the same real-world object. Neural EM models learn vector representation of entity descriptions and match entities end-to-end. Though robust, these methods require many annotated resources for training, and lack of interpretability. In this paper, we propose a novel EM framework that consists of Heterogeneous Information Fusion (HIF) and Key Attribute Tree (KAT) Induction to decouple feature representation from matching decision. Using self-supervised learning and mask mechanism in pre-trained language modeling, HIF learns the embeddings of noisy attribute values by inter-attribute attention with unlabeled data. Using a set of comparison features and a limited amount of annotated data, KAT Induction learns an efficient decision tree that can be interpreted by generating entity matching rules whose structure is advocated by domain experts. Experiments on 6 public datasets and 3 industrial datasets show that our method is highly efficient and outperforms SOTA EM models in most cases. We will release the codes upon acceptance.

Multi-hop reasoning has been widely studied in recent years to obtain more interpretable link prediction. However, we find in experiments that many paths given by these models are actually unreasonable, while little work has been done on interpretability evaluation for them. In this paper, we propose a unified framework to quantitatively evaluate the interpretability of multi-hop reasoning models so as to advance their development. In specific, we define three metrics, including path recall, local interpretability, and global interpretability for evaluation, and design an approximate strategy to calculate these metrics using the interpretability scores of rules. We manually annotate all possible rules and establish a benchmark. In experiments, we verify the effectiveness of our benchmark. Besides, we run nine representative baselines on our benchmark, and the experimental results show that the interpretability of current multi-hop reasoning models is less satisfactory and is 51.7% lower than the upper bound given by our benchmark. Moreover, the rule-based models outperform the multi-hop reasoning models in terms of performance and interpretability, which points to a direction for future research, i.e., how to better incorporate rule information into the multi-hop reasoning model. We will publish our codes and datasets upon acceptance.