MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377093262 · doi:10.3233/shti230243

Building a Disease Knowledge Graph

2023· article· en· W4377093262 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in health technology and informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityCape Breton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKnowledge graphComputer scienceGraphGraph databaseConstruct (python library)Information retrievalKnowledge baseMedical knowledgeDiseaseData scienceKnowledge managementTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedicineProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge graphs have proven themselves as a robust tool in clinical applications to aid patient care and help identify treatments for new diseases. They have impacted many information retrieval systems in healthcare. In this study, we construct a disease knowledge graph using Neo4j (a knowledge graph tool) for a disease database to answer complex questions that are time-consuming and labour-intensive to be answered in the previous system. We demonstrate that new information can be inferred in a knowledge graph based on existing semantic relationships between the medical concepts and the ability to perform reasoning in the knowledge graph.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.333 · 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