Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34920707›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2021

Concept recognition as a machine translation problem.

Mayla R Boguslav, Negacy D Hailu, Michael Bada, William A Baumgartner, Lawrence E Hunter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mayla R BoguslavComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, 12635 East Montview Blvd, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA. mayla.boguslav@cuanschutz.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0439-3107
Negacy D HailuComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, 12635 East Montview Blvd, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Michael BadaComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, 12635 East Montview Blvd, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
William A BaumgartnerComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, 12635 East Montview Blvd, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.
Lawrence E HunterComputational Bioscience Program, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, 12635 East Montview Blvd, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.

Funding

Computational Bioscience Program Training GrantT15LM009451 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Katherina Kechris-Mays, Arjun Krishnan · 2007 to 2026
$11.7M
Technology Development for a MolBio Knowledge-BaseR01LM008111 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI HUNTER, LAWRENCE E · 2004 to 2021
$9.7M
High Performance Text Mining for TranslatorOT2TR003422 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI BAUMGARTNER, WILLIAM ANTHONY · 2020 to 2024
$3.0M
Scientific Questions: A New Target for Biomedical NLPR01LM013400 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI BAUMGARTNER, WILLIAM ANTHONY · 2020 to 2023
$1.8M
NCATS NIH HHS OT2 TR003422NIH HHS OT2TR003422NIH HHS R01LM008111NIH HHS T15LM009451NLM NIH HHS R01 LM008111NLM NIH HHS R01 LM013400NLM NIH HHS T15 LM009451
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAutomated assignment of specific ontology concepts to mentions in text is a critical task in biomedical natural language processing, and the subject of many open shared tasks. Although the current state of the art involves the use of neural network language models as a post-processing step, the very large number of ontology classes to be recognized and the limited amount of gold-standard training data has impeded the creation of end-to-end systems based entirely on machine learning. Recently, Hailu et al. recast the concept recognition problem as a type of machine translation and demonstrated that sequence-to-sequence machine learning models have the potential to outperform multi-class classification approaches.

methodsWe systematically characterize the factors that contribute to the accuracy and efficiency of several approaches to sequence-to-sequence machine learning through extensive studies of alternative methods and hyperparameter selections. We not only identify the best-performing systems and parameters across a wide variety of ontologies but also provide insights into the widely varying resource requirements and hyperparameter robustness of alternative approaches. Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of such systems suggest promising avenues for future improvements as well as design choices that can increase computational efficiency with small costs in performance.

resultsBidirectional encoder representations from transformers for biomedical text mining (BioBERT) for span detection along with the open-source toolkit for neural machine translation (OpenNMT) for concept normalization achieve state-of-the-art performance for most ontologies annotated in the CRAFT Corpus. This approach uses substantially fewer computational resources, including hardware, memory, and time than several alternative approaches.

conclusionsMachine translation is a promising avenue for fully machine-learning-based concept recognition that achieves state-of-the-art results on the CRAFT Corpus, evaluated via a direct comparison to previous results from the 2019 CRAFT shared task. Experiments illuminating the reasons for the surprisingly good performance of sequence-to-sequence methods targeting ontology identifiers suggest that further progress may be possible by mapping to alternative target concept representations. All code and models can be found at: https://github.com/UCDenver-ccp/Concept-Recognition-as-Translation .

Indexed as

Computational resourcesConcept recognitionMachine translationNamed entity normalizationNamed entity recognition

Identifiers

PMID34920707
PMCPMC8678974

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.