Dataset Information

An overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track III: interactive text mining task.

ABSTRACT: In many databases, biocuration primarily involves literature curation, which usually involves retrieving relevant articles, extracting information that will translate into annotations and identifying new incoming literature. As the volume of biological literature increases, the use of text mining to assist in biocuration becomes increasingly relevant. A number of groups have developed tools for text mining from a computer science/linguistics perspective, and there are many initiatives to curate some aspect of biology from the literature. Some biocuration efforts already make use of a text mining tool, but there have not been many broad-based systematic efforts to study which aspects of a text mining tool contribute to its usefulness for a curation task. Here, we report on an effort to bring together text mining tool developers and database biocurators to test the utility and usability of tools. Six text mining systems presenting diverse biocuration tasks participated in a formal evaluation, and appropriate biocurators were recruited for testing. The performance results from this evaluation indicate that some of the systems were able to improve efficiency of curation by speeding up the curation task significantly (?1.7- to 2.5-fold) over manual curation. In addition, some of the systems were able to improve annotation accuracy when compared with the performance on the manually curated set. In terms of inter-annotator agreement, the factors that contributed to significant differences for some of the systems included the expertise of the biocurator on the given curation task, the inherent difficulty of the curation and attention to annotation guidelines. After the task, annotators were asked to complete a survey to help identify strengths and weaknesses of the various systems. The analysis of this survey highlights how important task completion is to the biocurators' overall experience of a system, regardless of the system's high score on design, learnability and usability. In addition, strategies to refine the annotation guidelines and systems documentation, to adapt the tools to the needs and query types the end user might have and to evaluate performance in terms of efficiency, user interface, result export and traditional evaluation metrics have been analyzed during this task. This analysis will help to plan for a more intense study in BioCreative IV.

SUBMITTER: Arighi CN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3625048 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track III: interactive text mining task.

Arighi Cecilia N CN Carterette Ben B Cohen K Bretonnel KB Krallinger Martin M Wilbur W John WJ Fey Petra P Dodson Robert R Cooper Laurel L Van Slyke Ceri E CE Dahdul Wasila W Mabee Paula P Li Donghui D Harris Bethany B Gillespie Marc M Jimenez Silvia S Roberts Phoebe P Matthews Lisa L Becker Kevin K Drabkin Harold H Bello Susan S Licata Luana L Chatr-aryamontri Andrew A Schaeffer Mary L ML Park Julie J Haendel Melissa M Van Auken Kimberly K Li Yuling Y Chan Juancarlos J Muller Hans-Michael HM Cui Hong H Balhoff James P JP Chi-Yang Wu Johnny J Lu Zhiyong Z Wei Chih-Hsuan CH Tudor Catalina O CO Raja Kalpana K Subramani Suresh S Natarajan Jeyakumar J Cejuela Juan Miguel JM Dubey Pratibha P Wu Cathy C

Database : the journal of biological databases and curation 20130117

In many databases, biocuration primarily involves literature curation, which usually involves retrieving relevant articles, extracting information that will translate into annotations and identifying new incoming literature. As the volume of biological literature increases, the use of text mining to assist in biocuration becomes increasingly relevant. A number of groups have developed tools for text mining from a computer science/linguistics perspective, and there are many initiatives to curate ...[more]

PMID: 23327936

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe BioCreative challenge evaluation is a community-wide effort for evaluating text mining and information extraction systems applied to the biological domain. The biocurator community, as an active user of biomedical literature, provides a diverse and engaged end user group for text mining tools. Earlier BioCreative challenges involved many text mining teams in developing basic capabilities relevant to biological curation, but they did not address the issues of system usage, insertion into the workflow and adoption by curators. Thus in BioCreative III (BC-III), the InterActive Task (IAT) was introduced to address the utility and usability of text mining tools for real-life biocuration tasks. To support the aims of the IAT in BC-III, involvement of both developers and end users was solicited, and the development of a user interface to address the tasks interactively was requested.ResultsA User Advisory Group (UAG) actively participated in the IAT design and assessment. The task focused on gene normalization (identifying gene mentions in the article and linking these genes to standard database identifiers), gene ranking based on the overall importance of each gene mentioned in the article, and gene-oriented document retrieval (identifying full text papers relevant to a selected gene). Six systems participated and all processed and displayed the same set of articles. The articles were selected based on content known to be problematic for curation, such as ambiguity of gene names, coverage of multiple genes and species, or introduction of a new gene name. Members of the UAG curated three articles for training and assessment purposes, and each member was assigned a system to review. A questionnaire related to the interface usability and task performance (as measured by precision and recall) was answered after systems were used to curate articles. Although the limited number of articles analyzed and users involved in the IAT experiment precluded rigorous quantitative analysis of the results, a qualitative analysis provided valuable insight into some of the problems encountered by users when using the systems. The overall assessment indicates that the system usability features appealed to most users, but the system performance was suboptimal (mainly due to low accuracy in gene normalization). Some of the issues included failure of species identification and gene name ambiguity in the gene normalization task leading to an extensive list of gene identifiers to review, which, in some cases, did not contain the relevant genes. The document retrieval suffered from the same shortfalls. The UAG favored achieving high performance (measured by precision and recall), but strongly recommended the addition of features that facilitate the identification of correct gene and its identifier, such as contextual information to assist in disambiguation.DiscussionThe IAT was an informative exercise that advanced the dialog between curators and developers and increased the appreciation of challenges faced by each group. A major conclusion was that the intended users should be actively involved in every phase of software development, and this will be strongly encouraged in future tasks. The IAT Task provides the first steps toward the definition of metrics and functional requirements that are necessary for designing a formal evaluation of interactive curation systems in the BioCreative IV challenge.

Project description:The Precision Medicine Initiative is a multicenter effort aiming at formulating personalized treatments leveraging on individual patient data (clinical, genome sequence and functional genomic data) together with the information in large knowledge bases (KBs) that integrate genome annotation, disease association studies, electronic health records and other data types. The biomedical literature provides a rich foundation for populating these KBs, reporting genetic and molecular interactions that provide the scaffold for the cellular regulatory systems and detailing the influence of genetic variants in these interactions. The goal of BioCreative VI Precision Medicine Track was to extract this particular type of information and was organized in two tasks: (i) document triage task, focused on identifying scientific literature containing experimentally verified protein-protein interactions (PPIs) affected by genetic mutations and (ii) relation extraction task, focused on extracting the affected interactions (protein pairs). To assist system developers and task participants, a large-scale corpus of PubMed documents was manually annotated for this task. Ten teams worldwide contributed 22 distinct text-mining models for the document triage task, and six teams worldwide contributed 14 different text-mining systems for the relation extraction task. When comparing the text-mining system predictions with human annotations, for the triage task, the best F-score was 69.06%, the best precision was 62.89%, the best recall was 98.0% and the best average precision was 72.5%. For the relation extraction task, when taking homologous genes into account, the best F-score was 37.73%, the best precision was 46.5% and the best recall was 54.1%. Submitted systems explored a wide range of methods, from traditional rule-based, statistical and machine learning systems to state-of-the-art deep learning methods. Given the level of participation and the individual team results we find the precision medicine track to be successful in engaging the text-mining research community. In the meantime, the track produced a manually annotated corpus of 5509 PubMed documents developed by BioGRID curators and relevant for precision medicine. The data set is freely available to the community, and the specific interactions have been integrated into the BioGRID data set. In addition, this challenge provided the first results of automatically identifying PubMed articles that describe PPI affected by mutations, as well as extracting the affected relations from those articles. Still, much progress is needed for computer-assisted precision medicine text mining to become mainstream. Future work should focus on addressing the remaining technical challenges and incorporating the practical benefits of text-mining tools into real-world precision medicine information-related curation.

Project description:The BioCreative National Library of Medicine (NLM)-Chem track calls for a community effort to fine-tune automated recognition of chemical names in the biomedical literature. Chemicals are one of the most searched biomedical entities in PubMed, and-as highlighted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic-their identification may significantly advance research in multiple biomedical subfields. While previous community challenges focused on identifying chemical names mentioned in titles and abstracts, the full text contains valuable additional detail. We, therefore, organized the BioCreative NLM-Chem track as a community effort to address automated chemical entity recognition in full-text articles. The track consisted of two tasks: (i) chemical identification and (ii) chemical indexing. The chemical identification task required predicting all chemicals mentioned in recently published full-text articles, both span [i.e. named entity recognition (NER)] and normalization (i.e. entity linking), using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). The chemical indexing task required identifying which chemicals reflect topics for each article and should therefore appear in the listing of MeSH terms for the document in the MEDLINE article indexing. This manuscript summarizes the BioCreative NLM-Chem track and post-challenge experiments. We received a total of 85 submissions from 17 teams worldwide. The highest performance achieved for the chemical identification task was 0.8672 F-score (0.8759 precision and 0.8587 recall) for strict NER performance and 0.8136 F-score (0.8621 precision and 0.7702 recall) for strict normalization performance. The highest performance achieved for the chemical indexing task was 0.6073 F-score (0.7417 precision and 0.5141 recall). This community challenge demonstrated that (i) the current substantial achievements in deep learning technologies can be utilized to improve automated prediction accuracy further and (ii) the chemical indexing task is substantially more challenging. We look forward to further developing biomedical text-mining methods to respond to the rapid growth of biomedical literature. The NLM-Chem track dataset and other challenge materials are publicly available at https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/lu/BC7-NLM-Chem-track/. Database URL https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/lu/BC7-NLM-Chem-track/.

Project description:BackgroundWe report the Gene Normalization (GN) challenge in BioCreative III where participating teams were asked to return a ranked list of identifiers of the genes detected in full-text articles. For training, 32 fully and 500 partially annotated articles were prepared. A total of 507 articles were selected as the test set. Due to the high annotation cost, it was not feasible to obtain gold-standard human annotations for all test articles. Instead, we developed an Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm approach for choosing a small number of test articles for manual annotation that were most capable of differentiating team performance. Moreover, the same algorithm was subsequently used for inferring ground truth based solely on team submissions. We report team performance on both gold standard and inferred ground truth using a newly proposed metric called Threshold Average Precision (TAP-k).ResultsWe received a total of 37 runs from 14 different teams for the task. When evaluated using the gold-standard annotations of the 50 articles, the highest TAP-k scores were 0.3297 (k=5), 0.3538 (k=10), and 0.3535 (k=20), respectively. Higher TAP-k scores of 0.4916 (k=5, 10, 20) were observed when evaluated using the inferred ground truth over the full test set. When combining team results using machine learning, the best composite system achieved TAP-k scores of 0.3707 (k=5), 0.4311 (k=10), and 0.4477 (k=20) on the gold standard, representing improvements of 12.4%, 21.8%, and 26.6% over the best team results, respectively.ConclusionsBy using full text and being species non-specific, the GN task in BioCreative III has moved closer to a real literature curation task than similar tasks in the past and presents additional challenges for the text mining community, as revealed in the overall team results. By evaluating teams using the gold standard, we show that the EM algorithm allows team submissions to be differentiated while keeping the manual annotation effort feasible. Using the inferred ground truth we show measures of comparative performance between teams. Finally, by comparing team rankings on gold standard vs. inferred ground truth, we further demonstrate that the inferred ground truth is as effective as the gold standard for detecting good team performance.

Dataset Information

An overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track III: interactive text mining task.

Publications

An overview of the BioCreative 2012 Workshop Track III: interactive text mining task.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets