Data Associated With "A Collaborative Filtering Based Approach To Biomedical Knowledge Discovery"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the data set associated with the publication: "A collaborative filtering based approach to biomedical knowledge discovery" published in Bioinformatics. The data are sets of cooccurrences of biomedical terms extracted from published abstracts and full text articles. The cooccurrences are then represented in sparse matrix form. There are three different splits of this data denoted by the prefix number on the files. 1. All - All cooccurrences combined in a single file 2. Training/Validation - All cooccurrences in publications before 2010 in training, all novel cooccurrences in publication in 2010 go in validation 3. Training+Validation/Test - All cooccurrences in publication upto and including 2010 in training+validation. All novel cooccurrences after 2010 in year by year increments and also all combined together Furthermore there are subset files which are used in some experiments to deal with the computational cost of evaluating the full set. The associated cuids.txt file containing a link between the row/column in the matrix with the UMLS Metathesaurus CUIDs. Hence the first row of cuids.txt matches up to the 0th row/column in the matrix. Note that the matrix is square and symmetric. This work was done with UMLS Metathesaurus 2016AB.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.020 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".