Cargando…
Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery
Objective Literature-based discovery (LBD) aims to identify “hidden knowledge” in the medical literature by: (1) analyzing documents to identify pairs of explicitly related concepts (terms), then (2) hypothesizing novel relations between pairs of unrelated concepts that are implicitly related via a...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4986660/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25971437 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv002 |
_version_ | 1782448218585432064 |
---|---|
author | Preiss, Judita Stevenson, Mark Gaizauskas, Robert |
author_facet | Preiss, Judita Stevenson, Mark Gaizauskas, Robert |
author_sort | Preiss, Judita |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective Literature-based discovery (LBD) aims to identify “hidden knowledge” in the medical literature by: (1) analyzing documents to identify pairs of explicitly related concepts (terms), then (2) hypothesizing novel relations between pairs of unrelated concepts that are implicitly related via a shared concept to which both are explicitly related. Many LBD approaches use simple techniques to identify semantically weak relations between concepts, for example, document co-occurrence. These generate huge numbers of hypotheses, difficult for humans to assess. More complex techniques rely on linguistic analysis, for example, shallow parsing, to identify semantically stronger relations. Such approaches generate fewer hypotheses, but may miss hidden knowledge. The authors investigate this trade-off in detail, comparing techniques for identifying related concepts to discover which are most suitable for LBD. Materials and methods A generic LBD system that can utilize a range of relation types was developed. Experiments were carried out comparing a number of techniques for identifying relations. Two approaches were used for evaluation: replication of existing discoveries and the “time slicing” approach.(1) Results Previous LBD discoveries could be replicated using relations based either on document co-occurrence or linguistic analysis. Using relations based on linguistic analysis generated many fewer hypotheses, but a significantly greater proportion of them were candidates for hidden knowledge. Discussion and Conclusion The use of linguistic analysis-based relations improves accuracy of LBD without overly damaging coverage. LBD systems often generate huge numbers of hypotheses, which are infeasible to manually review. Improving their accuracy has the potential to make these systems significantly more usable. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4986660 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49866602016-09-01 Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery Preiss, Judita Stevenson, Mark Gaizauskas, Robert J Am Med Inform Assoc Focus on Natural Language Processing Objective Literature-based discovery (LBD) aims to identify “hidden knowledge” in the medical literature by: (1) analyzing documents to identify pairs of explicitly related concepts (terms), then (2) hypothesizing novel relations between pairs of unrelated concepts that are implicitly related via a shared concept to which both are explicitly related. Many LBD approaches use simple techniques to identify semantically weak relations between concepts, for example, document co-occurrence. These generate huge numbers of hypotheses, difficult for humans to assess. More complex techniques rely on linguistic analysis, for example, shallow parsing, to identify semantically stronger relations. Such approaches generate fewer hypotheses, but may miss hidden knowledge. The authors investigate this trade-off in detail, comparing techniques for identifying related concepts to discover which are most suitable for LBD. Materials and methods A generic LBD system that can utilize a range of relation types was developed. Experiments were carried out comparing a number of techniques for identifying relations. Two approaches were used for evaluation: replication of existing discoveries and the “time slicing” approach.(1) Results Previous LBD discoveries could be replicated using relations based either on document co-occurrence or linguistic analysis. Using relations based on linguistic analysis generated many fewer hypotheses, but a significantly greater proportion of them were candidates for hidden knowledge. Discussion and Conclusion The use of linguistic analysis-based relations improves accuracy of LBD without overly damaging coverage. LBD systems often generate huge numbers of hypotheses, which are infeasible to manually review. Improving their accuracy has the potential to make these systems significantly more usable. Oxford University Press 2015-09 2015-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4986660/ /pubmed/25971437 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv002 Text en © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Focus on Natural Language Processing Preiss, Judita Stevenson, Mark Gaizauskas, Robert Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
title | Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
title_full | Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
title_fullStr | Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
title_full_unstemmed | Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
title_short | Exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
title_sort | exploring relation types for literature-based discovery |
topic | Focus on Natural Language Processing |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4986660/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25971437 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv002 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT preissjudita exploringrelationtypesforliteraturebaseddiscovery AT stevensonmark exploringrelationtypesforliteraturebaseddiscovery AT gaizauskasrobert exploringrelationtypesforliteraturebaseddiscovery |