Adapting a General Semantic Interpretation Approach to Biological Event Extraction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The second BioNLP Shared Task on Event Extraction (BioNLP-ST’11) follows up the previous shared task competition with a focus on generalization with respect to text types, event types and subject domains. In this spirit, we re-engineered and extended our event extraction system, emphasizing linguistic generalizations and avoiding domain-, event typeor text type-specific optimizations. Similar to our earlier system, syntactic dependencies form the basis of our approach. However, diverging from that system’s more pragmatic nature, we more clearly distinguish the shared task concerns from a general semantic composition scheme, that is based on the notion of embedding. We apply our methodology to core bio-event extraction and speculation/negation detection tasks in three main tracks. Our results demonstrate that such a general approach is viable and pinpoint some of its shortcomings. 1
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it