Do LLMs Dream of Ontologies?

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across diverse natural language processing tasks, yet their ability to memorize structured knowledge remains underexplored. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which general-purpose pre-trained LLMs retain and correctly reproduce concept identifier (ID)–label associations from publicly available ontologies. We conduct a systematic evaluation across multiple ontological resources, including the Gene Ontology, Uberon, Wikidata, and ICD-10, using LLMs such as Pythia-12B , Gemini-1.5-Flash , GPT-3.5 , and GPT-4 . Our findings reveal that only a small fraction of ontological concepts is accurately memorized, with GPT-4 demonstrating the highest performance. To understand why certain concepts are memorized more effectively than others, we analyze the relationship between memorization accuracy and concept popularity on the Web. Our results indicate a strong correlation between the frequency of a concept’s occurrence online and the likelihood of accurately retrieving its ID from the label. This suggests that LLMs primarily acquire such knowledge through indirect textual exposure rather than directly from structured ontological resources. Furthermore, we introduce new metrics to quantify prediction invariance, demonstrating that the stability of model responses across variations in prompt language and temperature settings can serve as a proxy for estimating memorization robustness.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
Published
2025-03-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3725852
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.61
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do LLMs Dream of Ontologies?

Simone Paolo Ponzetto, Marco Bombieri, Marco Rospocher, Paolo Fiorini
2 citations
ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
1.61
article

Do LLMs Dream of Ontologies?

Simone Paolo Ponzetto, Marco Bombieri, Marco Rospocher, Paolo Fiorini
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across diverse natural language processing tasks, yet their ability to memorize structured knowledge remains underexplored. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which general-purpose pre-trained LLMs retain and correctly reproduce concept identifier (ID)–label associations from publicly available ontologies. We conduct a systematic evaluation across multiple ontological resources, including the Gene Ontology, Uberon, Wikidata, and ICD-10, using LLMs such as Pythia-12B , Gemini-1.5-Flash , GPT-3.5 , and GPT-4 . Our findings reveal that only a small fraction of ontological concepts is accurately memorized, with GPT-4 demonstrating the highest performance. To understand why certain concepts are memorized more effectively than others, we analyze the relationship between memorization accuracy and concept popularity on the Web. Our results indicate a strong correlation between the frequency of a concept’s occurrence online and the likelihood of accurately retrieving its ID from the label. This suggests that LLMs primarily acquire such knowledge through indirect textual exposure rather than directly from structured ontological resources. Furthermore, we introduce new metrics to quantify prediction invariance, demonstrating that the stability of model responses across variations in prompt language and temperature settings can serve as a proxy for estimating memorization robustness.

ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology
University of Verona (IT), University of Mannheim (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
1.61
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.