Cargando…

Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature

Today’s search engines and digital libraries offer little or no support for discovering those scientific artifacts (hypotheses, supporting/contradicting statements, or findings) that form the core of scientific written communication. Consequently, we currently have no means of identifying central th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Groza, Tudor, Hassanzadeh, Hamed, Hunter, Jane
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Libertas Academica 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3623603/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23645987
http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/BII.S11572
_version_ 1782265935981182976
author Groza, Tudor
Hassanzadeh, Hamed
Hunter, Jane
author_facet Groza, Tudor
Hassanzadeh, Hamed
Hunter, Jane
author_sort Groza, Tudor
collection PubMed
description Today’s search engines and digital libraries offer little or no support for discovering those scientific artifacts (hypotheses, supporting/contradicting statements, or findings) that form the core of scientific written communication. Consequently, we currently have no means of identifying central themes within a domain or to detect gaps between accepted knowledge and newly emerging knowledge as a means for tracking the evolution of hypotheses from incipient phases to maturity or decline. We present a hybrid Machine Learning approach using an ensemble of four classifiers, for recognizing scientific artifacts (ie, hypotheses, background, motivation, objectives, and findings) within biomedical research publications, as a precursory step to the general goal of automatically creating argumentative discourse networks that span across multiple publications. The performance achieved by the classifiers ranges from 15.30% to 78.39%, subject to the target class. The set of features used for classification has led to promising results. Furthermore, their use strictly in a local, publication scope, ie, without aggregating corpus-wide statistics, increases the versatility of the ensemble of classifiers and enables its direct applicability without the necessity of re-training.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3623603
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Libertas Academica
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36236032013-05-03 Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature Groza, Tudor Hassanzadeh, Hamed Hunter, Jane Biomed Inform Insights Original Research Today’s search engines and digital libraries offer little or no support for discovering those scientific artifacts (hypotheses, supporting/contradicting statements, or findings) that form the core of scientific written communication. Consequently, we currently have no means of identifying central themes within a domain or to detect gaps between accepted knowledge and newly emerging knowledge as a means for tracking the evolution of hypotheses from incipient phases to maturity or decline. We present a hybrid Machine Learning approach using an ensemble of four classifiers, for recognizing scientific artifacts (ie, hypotheses, background, motivation, objectives, and findings) within biomedical research publications, as a precursory step to the general goal of automatically creating argumentative discourse networks that span across multiple publications. The performance achieved by the classifiers ranges from 15.30% to 78.39%, subject to the target class. The set of features used for classification has led to promising results. Furthermore, their use strictly in a local, publication scope, ie, without aggregating corpus-wide statistics, increases the versatility of the ensemble of classifiers and enables its direct applicability without the necessity of re-training. Libertas Academica 2013-04-02 /pmc/articles/PMC3623603/ /pubmed/23645987 http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/BII.S11572 Text en © 2013 the author(s), publisher and licensee Libertas Academica Ltd. This is an open access article. Unrestricted non-commercial use is permitted provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Groza, Tudor
Hassanzadeh, Hamed
Hunter, Jane
Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature
title Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature
title_full Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature
title_fullStr Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature
title_full_unstemmed Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature
title_short Recognizing Scientific Artifacts in Biomedical Literature
title_sort recognizing scientific artifacts in biomedical literature
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3623603/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23645987
http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/BII.S11572
work_keys_str_mv AT grozatudor recognizingscientificartifactsinbiomedicalliterature
AT hassanzadehhamed recognizingscientificartifactsinbiomedicalliterature
AT hunterjane recognizingscientificartifactsinbiomedicalliterature