MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209668695 · doi:10.23977/jaip.2020.040105

Research on Entity Recognition and Knowledge Graph Construction Based on Tcm Medical Records

2021· article· en· W3209668695 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yanling Yang, Yan Li, Zhong Xinyu, Lina Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceKnowledge extractionAmbiguityInformation retrievalVisualizationGraphConditional random fieldArtificial intelligenceData scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) medical records contain valuable medical information, and are important resources for personalized knowledge analysis, auxiliary diagnosis and treatment, clinical decision support, and drug to use pattern mining of famous TCM doctors. As an effective and novel knowledge management technology, knowledge graph can provide a new way for the inheritance and development of TCM. Constructing medical knowledge graph can potentially help to discover knowledge from clinical data, assist clinical decision-making and personalized treatment recommendation. However, the construction of TCM knowledge graph is still mainly based on structured data, and unstructured texts such as medical records, literature and electronic medical records urgently need to be extracted for mining and analysis. Aiming at the difficulties of word segmentation, entity variety and ambiguity in TCM medical records, this paper proposes a named entity recognition method of deep learning hybrid model based on two-way long-term memory (BILSTM) network and conditional random field (CRF); then by analyzing the process of TCM diagnosis and treatment, the core concepts of TCM are extracted and the ontology layer is constructed; finally, the knowledge graph is constructed by Neo4j, which can provide retrieval, visualization and other functions to help the learning and sharing of TCM knowledge.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence PracticeSame topicBiomedical Text Mining and OntologiesFrench-language works237,207