MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116946603 · doi:10.2196/22795

Adapting Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) to Assess Clinical Semantic Textual Similarity: Algorithm Development and Validation Study

2020· article· en· W3116946603 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Klaus Kades, Jan Sellner, Gregor Koehler, Peter M. Full, T Y Emmy Lai, Jens Kleesiek, Klaus Maier‐Hein

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutschen Konsortium für Translationale KrebsforschungDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
KeywordsComputer scienceEncoderPearson product-moment correlation coefficientLeverage (statistics)Artificial intelligenceSemantic similarityNatural language processingRelationship extractionSentenceTest setGround truthMachine learningInformation extractionStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Natural Language Understanding enables automatic extraction of relevant information from clinical text data, which are acquired every day in hospitals. In 2018, the language model Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) was introduced, generating new state-of-the-art results on several downstream tasks. The National NLP Clinical Challenges (n2c2) is an initiative that strives to tackle such downstream tasks on domain-specific clinical data. In this paper, we present the results of our participation in the 2019 n2c2 and related work completed thereafter. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to optimally leverage BERT for the task of assessing the semantic textual similarity of clinical text data. METHODS: We used BERT as an initial baseline and analyzed the results, which we used as a starting point to develop 3 different approaches where we (1) added additional, handcrafted sentence similarity features to the classifier token of BERT and combined the results with more features in multiple regression estimators, (2) incorporated a built-in ensembling method, M-Heads, into BERT by duplicating the regression head and applying an adapted training strategy to facilitate the focus of the heads on different input patterns of the medical sentences, and (3) developed a graph-based similarity approach for medications, which allows extrapolating similarities across known entities from the training set. The approaches were evaluated with the Pearson correlation coefficient between the predicted scores and ground truth of the official training and test dataset. RESULTS: We improved the performance of BERT on the test dataset from a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.859 to 0.883 using a combination of the M-Heads method and the graph-based similarity approach. We also show differences between the test and training dataset and how the two datasets influenced the results. CONCLUSIONS: We found that using a graph-based similarity approach has the potential to extrapolate domain specific knowledge to unseen sentences. We observed that it is easily possible to obtain deceptive results from the test dataset, especially when the distribution of the data samples is different between training and test datasets.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207