MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277827306 · doi:10.4236/jbise.2016.91002

Application of Word Embedding to Drug Repositioning

2016· article· en· W2277827306 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Duc Luu Ngo, Naoki Yamamoto, Tran Anh Vu, Ngoc Giang Nguyen, Dau Phan, Favorisen Rosyking Lumbanraja, Mamoru Kubo, Kenji Satou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Science and Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceInstitute of GeneticsUniversity of TokyoInstitute of Medical Science, University of TokyoResearch Organization of Information and Systems
KeywordsDrug repositioningWord embeddingWord (group theory)Computer scienceRelation (database)Cluster analysisDrugFeature (linguistics)EmbeddingArtificial intelligenceKey (lock)Drug developmentMachine learningNatural language processingData miningMedicineMathematicsPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a key technology of rapid and low-cost drug development, drug repositioning is getting popular. In this study, a text mining approach to the discovery of unknown drug-disease relation was tested. Using a word embedding algorithm, senses of over 1.7 million words were well represented in sufficiently short feature vectors. Through various analysis including clustering and classification, feasibility of our approach was tested. Finally, our trained classification model achieved 87.6% accuracy in the prediction of drug-disease relation in cancer treatment and succeeded in discovering novel drug-disease relations that were actually reported in recent studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Science and EngineeringSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207