Ontology Learning and Knowledge Graph Construction

Citation: da Cruz, T., Tavares, B., & Belo, F. (2025). Ontology Learning and Knowledge Graph Construction: A Comparison of Approaches and Their Impact on RAG Performance. arXiv:2511.05991.

Core Question

How do different knowledge graph construction strategies influence RAG performance, specifically comparing vector-based retrieval, GraphRAG, and ontology-guided approaches derived from either text corpora or relational databases?

Key Findings

Performance results (20-question evaluation):

  • GraphRAG: 90% correct (18/20)
  • Text Ontology KG with chunks: 90% correct
  • RDB Ontology KG with chunks: 90% correct
  • Vector RAG baseline: 60% correct (12/20)
  • Ontology KGs without chunks: 15-20% correct

Critical insight: Chunk integration is essential. Adding textual chunks to KG nodes dramatically improves performance. The symbolic structure alone isn’t enough.

Practical finding: Database-derived ontologies perform as well as text-derived ones, with two advantages:

  1. One-time ontology learning (schemas are stable)
  2. No complex ontology merging required

Methodology

Compared six configurations on a real grant application corpus:

  • Vector RAG (FAISS + cosine similarity)
  • Microsoft GraphRAG (default local search)
  • Text Ontology KG (with and without chunks)
  • RDB Ontology KG (with and without chunks)

Custom retriever using Prize-Collecting Steiner Tree optimization for subgraph extraction.

Extracted Content

06-atom—chunk-integration-critical04-atom—schema-stability-advantage06-atom—ontology-merging-complexity07-molecule—vectors-vs-graphs06-atom—ontology-guided-kg-construction