A Machine Learning Approach for Identifying Disease-Treatment Relations in Short Texts
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 Machine Learning (ML) field has gained its momentum in almost any domain of research and just recently has become a reliable tool in the medical domain. The empirical domain of automatic learning is used in tasks such as medical decision support, medical imaging, protein-protein interaction, extraction of medical knowledge, and for overall patient management care. ML is envisioned as a tool by which computer-based systems can be integrated in the healthcare field in order to get a better, more efficient medical care. This paper describes a ML-based methodology for building an application that is capable of identifying and disseminating healthcare information. It extracts sentences from published medical papers that mention diseases and treatments, and identifies semantic relations that exist between diseases and treatments. Our evaluation results for these tasks show that the proposed methodology obtains reliable outcomes that could be integrated in an application to be used in the medical care domain. The potential value of this paper stands in the ML settings that we propose and in the fact that we outperform previous results on the same data set.
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