MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756665674 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx613

A collaborative filtering-based approach to biomedical knowledge discovery

2017· article· en· W2756665674 on OpenAlexafffund
Jake Lever, Sitanshu Gakkhar, Michael C. Gottlieb, Tahereh Rashnavadi, Santina Lin, Celia Siu, Maia P. Smith, Martin Jones, Martin Krzywinski, Steven J.M. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCompute Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceKnowledge extractionStrengths and weaknessesData scienceSingular value decompositionGraphKnowledge graphData miningInformation retrievalMachine learningArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation: The increase in publication rates makes it challenging for an individual researcher to stay abreast of all relevant research in order to find novel research hypotheses. Literature-based discovery methods make use of knowledge graphs built using text mining and can infer future associations between biomedical concepts that will likely occur in new publications. These predictions are a valuable resource for researchers to explore a research topic. Current methods for prediction are based on the local structure of the knowledge graph. A method that uses global knowledge from across the knowledge graph needs to be developed in order to make knowledge discovery a frequently used tool by researchers. Results: We propose an approach based on the singular value decomposition (SVD) that is able to combine data from across the knowledge graph through a reduced representation. Using cooccurrence data extracted from published literature, we show that SVD performs better than the leading methods for scoring discoveries. We also show the diminishing predictive power of knowledge discovery as we compare our predictions with real associations that appear further into the future. Finally, we examine the strengths and weaknesses of the SVD approach against another well-performing system using several predicted associations. Availability and implementation: All code and results files for this analysis can be accessed at https://github.com/jakelever/knowledgediscovery. Contact: sjones@bcgsc.ca. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations30
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207