Clinical records contain rich evidence about patient state, but converting that evidence into reliable, structured knowledge graphs remains difficult because extraction errors, ontology mismatch, missing relations, and temporal ambiguity can propagate into downstream systems. We propose a clinical knowledge graph construction and refinement framework that combines multi-agent relation proposal, ontology-aware normalization, deterministic evidence scoring, and JEPA-based latent refinement. Rather than treating a clinical knowledge graph as a static extraction artifact, we treat it as a predictive patient-state representation. For each admission, the system constructs an evidence-scored graph from structured MIMIC-IV records and inferred clinical cross-links, then learns to recover held-out clinical relations from the observed graph context. We evaluate the refiner with leakage-free leave-one-out edge recovery (MRR and Hits@k) and held-out batch-mask evaluation (AUC and MRR). To isolate the contribution of discharge-note context, we compare a note-embedding-free configuration with a note-augmented configuration that injects real discharge-note representations only into note-grounded entities. Under the same cohort and evaluation protocol, entity-grounded note injection improves overall leave-one-out MRR by 31% relative improvement.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.22583
Synthetic clinical data generation with large language models addresses the scarcity that limits cancer staging research, but oncology hallucinations are categorically harmful: one clinically impossible staging assignment contaminates every downstream model trained on it. Neuro-symbolic pipelines validate during generation, yet the contribution of individual quality-assurance components remains unclear. We report three controlled studies isolating gate necessity, constraint attribution, and retrieval conditionality, holding generation protocol, diversity thresholds, and fine-tuning hyperparameters constant across adapter conditions. The symbolic gate enforces schema completeness, ontology coverage against the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine, and staging-logic consistency under American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth-edition rules. Ungated, 29.9% of records contain schema failures and 20.1% contain clinically invalid staging. Schema validation is the load-bearing filter: within the fully gated corpus it rejects 148 of 512 records, ontology grounding a further 24, and staging-logic validation none---the only generator producing logic violations is already excluded on schema, making clinical-logic validation a generator-conditional safeguard rather than the dominant filter. Retrieval augmentation is strongly model-dependent: it improves gate compliance for one generator by 12.5 percentage points, has no measurable effect for a second, and collapses output in a third. Across gated configurations ontology density is largely unchanged, indicating that symbolic validation improves clinical validity rather than vocabulary richness. Symbolic gating therefore buys corpus validity but no commensurate gain on real lung-cancer notes in this study; retrieval should be evaluated per model, and ontology density should not be reported as a proxy for corpus quality.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.22085
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enables large language models to incorporate external knowledge during generation, improving factual grounding and domain adaptability. However, existing RAG pipelines assume that evidence retrieved from multiple repositories can be ranked globally using a single similarity function. While suitable for open-domain retrieval, this assumption breaks down in enterprise document generation, where heterogeneous knowledge bases (such as policies, regulations, technical documentation, and departmental guidelines) serve distinct roles and must be jointly represented in the generated document. As a result, global ranking often produces unbalanced context dominated by a subset of sources, leading to incomplete enterprise drafts. To address this limitation, we propose W-RAG, a source-aware retrieval framework that performs ontology-guided retrieval, local ranking within each knowledge base, and source-level weighting to regulate evidence composition. We further introduce a new dataset for retrieval-grounded enterprise document generation spanning multiple document types and industry domains. Experiments show that standard RAG pipelines struggle on this task, while W-RAG significantly improves document coverage and generation quality.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.22081
We align three upper ontologies that sit under UK and NATO defence data infrastructure: the Information Exchange Standard (IES), the Higher Quality Data Model (HQDM) that underpins the National Digital Twin, and Basic Formal Ontology (BFO). No public alignment between IES and HQDM existed. Promoting a hand-curated 17-correspondence crosswalk to OWL and reasoning over the complete merged ontologies with HermiT produces three results that we believe matter beyond this pair.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.21914
Users increasingly turn to large language models for emotional support, yet little is known about how these models actually conduct a psychotherapy interaction. We introduce an ontology of ten therapeutic moves: compact, function-based categories grounded in the MULTI-60 inventory, validated through an annotation campaign with five licensed psychologists, and scaled with a judge-based approach that matches expert agreement. Applying it to real counseling transcripts and model-led sessions, we compare the move distributions between human clinicians and a panel of frontier models. Models over-use inquiry at up to three times the human rate, neglect psychoeducation, and are strongly context-anchored: they carry forward strategies initiated by a human clinician but rarely initiate them themselves. Exposing the ontology as a set of tools roughly halves the mean deviation from the human move distribution and improves turn-level alignment with human therapist by 7-9 percentage points, without any fine-tuning.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.21325
Recently, there has been a great deal of research into improving AI methods and their application. The main focus is on tracking progress, enabling transparent comparisons, and fostering a more profound understanding of AI. In that process, different organizations generate and use plenty of assets that need to be tracked, traced and managed. Moreover, it is important to discover assets relevant for the task at hand. This paper presents research aiming to contribute to answering the question of what is required to exchange and manage AI models and related assets effectively without semantic gaps in an industrial context. We introduce a platform for AI model exchange, which facilitates the usage, exchange, and analysis of AI models and datasets. The platform incorporates an ontology that can foster a more profound common understanding of what is required in these tasks and help tackle the issues mentioned above. Finally, we elucidate the utility of the platform through the illustration of a use case in the context of real-time critical systems.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.21224
Document-Level Relation Extraction (DocRE) relies heavily on costly manually annotated datasets, while large distant supervision resources such as DocRED distant remain underexploited due to noise. We show that a critical yet overlooked source of noise lies in structural inconsistencies within relational triples, including violations of ontology constraints and logical contradictions. We introduce an ontology-driven framework to quantify and enforce structural consistency in DocRE datasets. Our analysis reveals substantial structural noise in DocRED distant and demonstrates that such inconsistencies propagate to model predictions. Enforcing structural well-formedness during training significantly reduces logical contradictions and consistently improves generalization performance. These findings establish structural consistency as a missing axis of supervision in DocRE and highlight structural regularization as an effective strategy for leveraging distant data at scale.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20856
Enterprise adoption of large language models in finance is constrained less by fluency than by trust: in Financial Planning and Analysis (FP&A) and other regulated workflows, an answer is usable only if it is traceable to authoritative sources and auditable after the fact. This paper argues that retrieval-augmented generation for enterprise finance should be evaluated on auditability alongside accuracy, and presents the Knowledge-Driven Analytics Framework (KDAF), which builds ontology-driven knowledge systems through six iterative stages and retrieves evidence via Context-Aware Relevance Propagation (CARP), so that every retrieved fact carries its relationship type, confidence, and source lineage. An evaluation on FinanceBench (145 questions) compares KDAF against zero-context inference, BM25, concept-weighted lexical retrieval, and ungrounded graph traversal. First, retrieval is necessary: zero-context inference reaches 4.1% correctness against 10-12% for retrieval-augmented conditions. Second, on answer correctness the retrieval conditions are statistically indistinguishable (KDAF vs BM25: -0.007, 95% CI [-0.021, 0.000]), so accuracy alone does not justify structured retrieval here -- a negative result we report explicitly. Third, on auditability the ordering reverses: KDAF attains the highest citation traceability F1 (0.515), exceeding ungrounded traversal by +0.027 (CI [0.006, 0.050]) and BM25 by +0.052 (CI [0.024, 0.083]), intervals excluding zero. Graph-structured retrieval also admits no evidence from outside the question subject entity (0 of 426 items, against 16.8% and 20.2% for lexical baselines), and every selected item resolves to a complete provenance chain. We argue that auditability, not accuracy, is the axis on which ontology-grounded retrieval earns its cost.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20661
Class expression learning often produces complex OWL class expressions that are difficult to interpret and reason over. However, by following theoretically grounded simplification principles, this complexity can be reduced. In this paper, we propose Class Expression Simplifier (CES), a novel algorithm for the syntactic simplification of class expressions in Description Logics (DL). CES aims to preserve formal semantics while reducing representational complexity. It systematically applies rewriting rules to eliminate redundancies and identify simpler yet equivalent expressions, thereby producing more compact and human-readable representations without altering logical entailments. We evaluate the effectiveness of CES on class expressions learned from two medium-sized ontologies, demonstrating measurable improvements in reasoning efficiency and reductions in verbosity. This work contributes to the broader goal of making ontology-driven applications more accessible, maintainable, and scalable, with direct implications for knowledge graph construction, semantic search, and Web-scale reasoning. CES is implemented within the open-source Python framework OWLAPY and is publicly available.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18899
Cyber threat intelligence (CTI) is increasingly consumed not by human analysts but by LLM agents that compose multi-step investigations at query time. The harness side of this shift has matured rapidly (planning loops, tool protocols, context management), but the corpus side has not: threat reports and vulnerability databases are still packaged for retrieval-augmented generation, as opaque chunks behind an embedding index. We argue that this substrate, not model capability, is the bottleneck on agentic CTI investigation, and present CTIFoundry, an agent-native corpus scaffold. At build time, CTIFoundry materializes the latent structure of a CTI corpus: a deterministic ontology graph over four authoritative knowledge bases (CVE, CWE, CAPEC, ATT&CK) whose official cross-references become typed, traversable edges; a span-grounded report layer whose canonical, alias-resolved cross-vendor entities index provenance-carrying chunks; and hybrid dense+lexical retrieval surfaces. At query time this structure is exposed through seven typed tools and three procedural skills mounted on a stock open-source agent harness. On the public CTIConnect benchmark, swapping only the action surface lifts the identically-harnessed agent by +0.19 to +0.28 overall F1 across a four-model, two-provider panel: a small model on CTIFoundry surpasses a flagship on the flat substrate, and the gain is not bought with search effort, since on both Claude models the scaffolded agent is more accurate at roughly half the tool calls. An ablation attributes it: typed structure carries the larger share, procedural skills convert structure into discipline, and the two compose super-additively, because skills bind only to structure that exists.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18613
Current evaluation of computer-use agents is split between long-horizon workflow benchmarks and atomic GUI-grounding tests. This leaves an under-instrumented middle layer: realistic component-centered interactions (e.g., toggle a button set) that are short enough to diagnose and rich enough to capture the burdens of modern interfaces. We present ComponentBench, a benchmark and diagnostic pipeline for component-level evaluation of computer-use agents on modern web UIs. ComponentBench is organized around a library-agnostic ontology of 97 canonical UI components instantiated as 2,910 programmatically verified tasks across widely used component libraries, paired with cleaned human reference trajectories that enable evaluation of both task success and interaction efficiency. Beyond task collection, we introduce a scalable pipeline for auditing realized structural difficulty after implementation and synthesizing structured failure analyses across tasks and component families. Evaluating seven models -- GPT-5.4, Gemini 3 Flash, GPT-5.4 mini, GPT-5 mini, Gemini 3.1 Flash-Lite, Qwen3-VL-235B, and UI-TARS-1.5-7B -- across four observation and action spaces, we show that these design choices critically impact performance. Within a single shared harness, changing only the observation and action space shifts task success by more than 30% for the same model: GPT-5 mini falls from 83.1% with accessibility-tree observations to 48.9% with coordinate-only Pixel control. Moreover, even the fastest configuration takes 3.7x as long as the matched human reference, and spatial manipulations that are trivial for humans continue to challenge current agents.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18307
OWL 2 DL ontologies, grounded in the description logic $\mathcal{SROIQ}$, express large knowledge bases in biomedicine and the Semantic Web. Neuro-symbolic (NeSy) learners over description logics either embed the ontology in a continuous space, abandoning classical entailment, or restrict to the Horn fragment $\mathcal{EL}^{++}$, which has a single canonical model. We present Baobab, which compiles a $\mathcal{SROIQ}$ ontology with a finite ABox into a Sentential Decision Diagram (SDD): it saturates a propositional core under a consequence-based calculus and instantiates the remaining $\mathcal{SROIQ}$ features (nominals, number restrictions, and the role axioms) over the active domain. The SDD's evidence-conditioned weighted model count then trains a perception network to recognize real images under partial ABox supervision: on an ontology that exercises every distinctive $\mathcal{SROIQ}$ feature, a CNN learns to read MNIST digits coupled by a successor relation and recovers latent ontology concepts that an independent perception leaves at chance. When the supervision admits several ontology-consistent completions, an independent perception collapses onto one, a reasoning shortcut: we show that a mixture indexed by the query's justifications can represent the calibrated posterior no independent perception can, and that seeding it from the circuit's enumerated completions attains the Bayes-optimal posterior on a real-image MNIST task where single-WMC and learned mixtures (the BEARS-ensemble hypothesis class) do not: to our knowledge the first to characterize and mitigate reasoning shortcuts in a non-Horn description logic. Soundness of the compiler and the representation result are machine-checked in Lean 4. Code is available at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.17741
This paper presents an ontology-supported approach to tackle the complexity of the Robustness Validation (RV) process of automotive electrical/electronic (E/E) components. The approach uses formalized knowledge from the RV process and stress, operating, and load profiles, so-called Mission Profiles (MPs). In contrast to the error-prone industrially established manual procedure, we show how component characteristics are formalized in OWL in order to form the foundation of an efficient automated analysis selection and decision support during the RV process. The proposed approach is based on the idea of mapping MPs to an OWL representation so to allow to perform semantic queries against MP data to improve their integration into the RV process. The resulting ontology-supported application framework has been applied to an industrial use-case from automotive power electronics. We present experimental results showing that the RV process can be significantly improved in terms of reduced design time and increased exhaustiveness by automating the analyses selection step and the provisioning of all the relevant data to be used.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.16421
As AI systems become increasingly capable of autonomous action, determining whether an agent is technically capable of performing an action is insufficient: the system must also determine whether the action is authorised in its context. This paper introduces the Authority Resolution Framework (ARF), a five-domain ontology for representing and resolving authority across organisational roles and informal influence, business concepts, codified processes, machine-readable permissions and executable systems, and external real-world context. ARF defines the Authority Relation (AR) as a cross-domain primitive binding an actor, action, object, bounded context, justification chain, and a calibration measure termed the DNA-Coefficient, which captures divergence between documented authority structures and authority as practiced. The framework provides a machine-interpretable representation of authority provenance and scope, with JSON-LD representations and knowledge-graph query patterns for authority resolution. ARF is designed to support AI agents in determining the provenance, scope and contextual validity of authority before executing consequential actions. The framework positions authority resolution as a knowledge-representation and reasoning problem at the intersection of ontology engineering, semantic AI, agentic AI and AI governance.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.15832
Knowledge graphs modeled in RDF are powerful for describing static knowledge, but they cannot capture or reason about the dynamic behavior of physical systems, e.g., systems described by differential equations, which is a critical gap for AI-driven cyber-physical systems. To solve this, we propose RDFdL, a framework that integrates RDF with Differential Dynamic Logic (dL) to represent and reason about both static knowledge and the continuous dynamics of physical systems. For the dynamic part, we syntactically represent differential equations and ranges in the state space in RDF and SHACL and provide semantics using a translation to dL. Linking RDF and dL through their shared foundation in first-order logic achieves a unique integration: verification results for safety and reachability properties in the dynamic logic domain become available as entailment to SPARQL queries over RDF data. We implement the pipeline using Apache Jena for ontology-driven RDF reasoning and KeYmaera X, the theorem prover for dL, and sketch its applicability in manufacturing.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.18165
LLMs are increasingly used in morally sensitive contexts, yet it is unclear whether they apply ethical principles consistently across situations. A model that can state a moral principle may still violate it when the same scenario is rephrased or reframed. This inconsistency is a problem for any system whose outputs are used to inform moral decisions. If generative systems exhibit internal inconsistency, then the epistemic integrity of AI-mediated systems becomes uncertain. To study this concern, we investigate the stability of moral reasoning in LLMs within a controlled prompting framework across three major philosophical schools of thought: deontology, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics. We construct sets of morally equivalent scenarios in which the underlying situation is held constant while the framing varies to reflect different ethical stances and stylistic perturbations. We then evaluate responses from multiple models, including GPT, Mistral, and Llama. To assess consistency, we convert model outputs into structured logical statements and identify contradictions across responses generated within the same school of thought. Our results reveal substantial inconsistency with contradiction rates reaching up to 78% across scenarios. These findings point to a broader phenomenon of epistemic instability in generative AI wherein models fail to reliably maintain coherence with respect to their own prior outputs. This kind of instability carries real consequences. As generative systems influence how people form beliefs, judge actions, and absorb values, their inconsistencies can shape human reasoning and decision-making as well. Moreover, if a system cannot consistently represent its own normative commitments, then value alignment becomes a moving target rather than a well-defined objective. Thus, we argue that demonstrating internal incoherence is a necessary precursor to AI alignment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.15354
Machine intelligence has conquered the symbolic world but stalled at the physical one. The stall is structural: physical AI faces a cold-start deadlock -- no intelligence without data, no data without deployed intelligence. Our thesis: the deadlock is real but unevenly distributed, and the exception has a name: the artificial physical world. Buildings, industrial facilities, and infrastructure are intentionally constituted and documented: designed artifacts ship with readable archives that precede and constitute their instances; here, norms are promulgated before instances, not averaged from them. Four contributions. (i) From a four-world ontology we derive a legitimacy criterion for constitutive prior frameworks: prior extraction is legitimate if and only if the object domain is intentionally constituted and has left a readable archive; the criterion is testable through direction of fit -- deviation from a constitutive norm is a violation in the world, not a revision of the model. (ii) We establish a layering lower bound: any such framework has at least four layers -- syntax, concept, knowledge, instance -- because four construction goals pair into mutually incompatible carriers. (iii) We register deployment claims across five industrial domains and a 32-class failure-mode vocabulary. (iv) We stake the framework on five falsifiable predictions, the central one checkable on the public engineering record: if it fails, the framework fails. Semi-formal arguments back these claims (Appendix A): a Gold-type boundary on rule coverage in archiveless worlds, a decidability result for failure reduction over closed concept layers, and a boundary theorem for certificate-anchored calculi. Large language models find an honored place here -- as readers of the archive, not as the archive. First of three companion works; the companions take up the questions deliberately left open.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.15147
The Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL) is a W3C recommendation to express syntactic constraints, called shapes, on RDF graphs. SHACL validators are used to test whether a given graph adheres to such a shape. However, RDF graphs often come with OWL ontologies, whose implicit knowledge needs to be taken into account. This is classically handled by first applying reasoning and then performing the constraint checking on the results, often using different technologies which makes the process inefficient and vulnerable for mistakes. To overcome this, we propose to internalise the OWL axioms in the SHACL constraints; we construct a rewriting which takes as input both shapes and an OWL EL$^-$ ontology -- a fragment of OWL EL restricting the usage of existential restrictions -- and produces SHACL constraints. This output can then be evaluated by any validator supporting SHACL core regardless of its reasoning support, while yielding the same results as the traditional approach. The implementation of our translation is evaluated both against applying state-of-the-art reasoners and validators consecutively, as against validators with built-in reasoning support. For our benchmark, we show that our approach is in general more efficient in finding violations compared to the sequential approach, thus providing a powerful tool which simplifies combining reasoning with validation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.14104
Authoritative scientific knowledge in geoscience remains largely trapped in legacy monographs and historical literature, where unstructured text and complex layouts hinder computational access. We introduce HERMES, a scalable multi-agent framework that extracts structured data from ultra-long scientific documents. Using a coordinating large language model, HERMES integrates domain constraints, validation rules and evidence tracing within a unified document-level extraction process that incorporates parsed text, tables, figures and captions. Applied to the 55-volume Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, the system produced a structured database of 32,277 fossil taxonomic entities and 451,878 attributes, released online at this https URL. Extraction performance remained stable across fossil groups (average F1 scores of approximately 0.90 for entities and 0.91 for attributes), improving per-volume efficiency approximately sixfold relative to the tested fully manual baseline. Evaluation in palaeomagnetism and geochemistry, conducted without additional model training, demonstrated transfer across distinct geoscience domains. This work provides a practical pathway to transform historical scientific literature into FAIR-oriented structured data, offering a sustainable infrastructure for data-intensive disciplines and large-scale knowledge integration.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.14055
EV-WM represents candidate quality with feature and event scores, but these scores do not explicitly record an unmet task predicate, a route label for an available correction mechanism, or a post-correction acceptance result. We present Onto-EV-WM, an ontology-grounded diagnosis and verification-gated correction interface layered above EV-WM rather than a replacement world-model architecture. The implemented task-local TBox defines entity types, predicate signatures, and constraints; source-specific grounding maps predicted or simulator-observed states to task ABoxes; and deterministic rules retain each missing predicate and its arguments when assigning a route label. Learned or heuristic proposers remain separate from this symbolic interface; native task predicates determine acceptance, and the bounded protocol determines whether a failed verification is retried. In the aligned PointMaze evaluation, EV-WM and Onto-EV-WM both report 94% success, with mean final-state distances of 0.90573 and 0.61177, respectively; the separately budgeted search reaches 100% success. On LIBERO-Goal, the ontology represents failed task conditions as typed records, retains their predicate arguments, and associates them with the declared source/joint correction route and predicate-gated acceptance; the complete configuration reports 93.8% corrected-window success on seed 0 and 94.05 +- 0.30% across four evaluation-sampling seeds. On the fixed 10,030-task LIBERO-Plus registry, Onto-EV-WM succeeds on 8,526 tasks (85.00%), with suite-level success rates of 65.98% for LIBERO-10, 91.39% for LIBERO-Goal, and 91.38% for both LIBERO-Object and LIBERO-Spatial. These numbers report the performance of the complete ontology-grounded configurations under the tested simulator protocols; an ontology-only causal share is not measured separately, and real-robot recovery is not evaluated.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.13901