Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Are Large Language Models a Good Replacement of Taxonomies?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.11131 v2 pith:7K6PIJXZ submitted 2024-06-17 cs.CL cs.AIcs.DB

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.DB
keywords llmsknowledgetaxonomiescommontaxonomylanguagelevelsspecialized
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate an impressive ability to internalize knowledge and answer natural language questions. Although previous studies validate that LLMs perform well on general knowledge while presenting poor performance on long-tail nuanced knowledge, the community is still doubtful about whether the traditional knowledge graphs should be replaced by LLMs. In this paper, we ask if the schema of knowledge graph (i.e., taxonomy) is made obsolete by LLMs. Intuitively, LLMs should perform well on common taxonomies and at taxonomy levels that are common to people. Unfortunately, there lacks a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates the LLMs over a wide range of taxonomies from common to specialized domains and at levels from root to leaf so that we can draw a confident conclusion. To narrow the research gap, we constructed a novel taxonomy hierarchical structure discovery benchmark named TaxoGlimpse to evaluate the performance of LLMs over taxonomies. TaxoGlimpse covers ten representative taxonomies from common to specialized domains with in-depth experiments of different levels of entities in this taxonomy from root to leaf. Our comprehensive experiments of eighteen state-of-the-art LLMs under three prompting settings validate that LLMs can still not well capture the knowledge of specialized taxonomies and leaf-level entities.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Leveraging Large Language Models for Generating Research Topic Ontologies: A Multi-Disciplinary Study

    cs.DL 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fine-tuned open-weight LLMs classify research-topic relationships with up to 93.5% F1 on a new multi-disciplinary benchmark, and cross-domain transfer loses only about 5 points.

  2. Benchmarking Resource-Efficient LLMs for Research Topic Ontology Generation in the Biomedical Field

    cs.DL 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning small open-source LLMs on a new MeSH-derived benchmark (MeSH-Rel-4K) raises semantic-relation classification F1 by 34.1 points on average, reaching 91.6% for gemma-2-9b.

Pith tools