Deploying mutation impact text-mining software with the SADI Semantic Web Services framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mutation impact extraction is an important task designed to harvest relevant annotations from scientific documents for reuse in multiple contexts. Our previous work on text mining for mutation impacts resulted in (i) the development of a GATE-based pipeline that mines texts for information about impacts of mutations on proteins, (ii) the population of this information into our OWL DL mutation impact ontology, and (iii) establishing an experimental semantic database for storing the results of text mining. RESULTS: This article explores the possibility of using the SADI framework as a medium for publishing our mutation impact software and data. SADI is a set of conventions for creating web services with semantic descriptions that facilitate automatic discovery and orchestration. We describe a case study exploring and demonstrating the utility of the SADI approach in our context. We describe several SADI services we created based on our text mining API and data, and demonstrate how they can be used in a number of biologically meaningful scenarios through a SPARQL interface (SHARE) to SADI services. In all cases we pay special attention to the integration of mutation impact services with external SADI services providing information about related biological entities, such as proteins, pathways, and drugs. CONCLUSION: We have identified that SADI provides an effective way of exposing our mutation impact data such that it can be leveraged by a variety of stakeholders in multiple use cases. The solutions we provide for our use cases can serve as examples to potential SADI adopters trying to solve similar integration problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".