数据与计算发展前沿 ›› 2026, Vol. 8 ›› Issue (5): 165-176.

CSTR: 32002.14.jfdc.CN10-1649/TP.2026.05.013

doi: 10.11871/jfdc.issn.2096-742X.2026.05.013

• 技术与应用 • 上一篇    下一篇

时序知识图谱表示学习方法综述

申舒亦(),王一帆,卜凡亮*()   

  1. 中国人民公安大学, 信息网络安全学院, 北京 100038
  • 收稿日期:2026-03-16 出版日期:2026-10-20 发布日期:2026-10-20
  • 通讯作者: *卜凡亮(E-mail: bufanliang@sina.com)
  • 作者简介:申舒亦,中国人民公安大学,硕士研究生,CCF学生会员,主要研究方向为自然语言处理、知识图谱。
    本文主要承担工作为论文的撰写和修改。
    SHEN Shuyi is a master’s student at People’s Public Security University of China, and a CCF student member. Her main research interests include natural language processing and knowledge graphs.
    In this paper, she is primarily responsible for the writing and revision of the manuscript. E-mail: 2024211547@stu.ppsuc.edu.cn|卜凡亮,中国人民公安大学,博士,教授,主要研究方向为安全防范工程、大数据技术与工程和人工智能等。
    本文主要承担工作为论文的指导和修改。
    BU Fanliang, Ph.D., is a professor at People’s Public Security University of China. His main research interests include security protection engineering, big data technology and engineering, and artificial intelligence.
    In this paper, he is primarily responsible for the revision and final review of the manuscript. E-mail: bufanliang@sina.com

A Survey on Temporal Knowledge Graph Representation Learning Methods

SHEN Shuyi(),WANG Yifan,BU Fanliang*()   

  1. School of Information Network Security, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 100038, China
  • Received:2026-03-16 Online:2026-10-20 Published:2026-10-20

摘要:

【目的】时序知识图谱通过引入时间维度刻画实体关系的动态演化过程,是事件预测与动态关系建模的重要基础。本文对时序知识图谱表示学习方法进行系统梳理,分析各类方法的建模思路和研究趋势,为相关领域研究提供参考。【方法】从建模范式角度将现有方法归纳为时间增强嵌入、张量分解、图神经网络和基于历史序列的动态演化四类,并基于时间建模、结构依赖建模和历史信息利用三个维度进行统一比较分析,同时整理了常用数据集与评估指标。【结论】分析表明,不同方法在时间表达粒度、结构建模能力及历史依赖利用方面存在显著差异,现有方法在复杂时间特征刻画和长期依赖建模等方面存在不足,未来研究需关注多源信息融合与统一建模框架的构建。

关键词: 时序知识图谱, 表示学习, 时间建模, 动态演化

Abstract:

[Purpose] Temporal knowledge graphs incorporate temporal information to model the dynamic evolution of entity relations, serving as a foundation for event prediction and dynamic relational modeling. This paper presents a systematic review of representation learning methods, analyzing their modeling paradigms and research trends, and providing a reference for research in related fields. [Methods] Existing approaches are categorized into four paradigms: time-enhanced embedding, tensor decomposition, graph neural networks, and history-based dynamic evolution. A unified comparison is conducted from three aspects: temporal modeling, structural dependency modeling, and historical information utilization. Commonly used datasets and evaluation metrics are also summarized. [Conclusions] Significant differences exist among methods in temporal granularity, structural modeling capability, and the exploitation of historical dependencies. Current approaches remain limited in modeling complex temporal patterns and long-term dependencies. Future work should emphasize multi-source information fusion and unified modeling frameworks.

Key words: temporal knowledge graph, representation learning, temporal modeling, dynamic evolution