Multi-objective Representation for Numbers in Clinical Narratives: A CamemBERT-Bio-Based Alternative to Large-Scale LLMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The processing of numerical values is a rapidly developing area in the field of Language Models (LLMs). Despite numerous advancements achieved by previous research, significant challenges persist, particularly within the healthcare domain. This paper investigates the limitations of Transformer models in understanding numerical values. \textit{Objective:} this research aims to categorize numerical values extracted from medical documents into eight specific physiological categories using CamemBERT-bio. \textit{Methods:} In a context where scalable methods and Large Language Models (LLMs) are emphasized, we explore lifting the limitations of transformer-based models. We examine two strategies: fine-tuning CamemBERT-bio on a small medical dataset, integrating Label Embedding for Self-Attention (LESA), and combining LESA with additional enhancement techniques such as Xval. Given that CamemBERT-bio is already pre-trained on a large medical dataset, the first approach aims to update its encoder with the newly added label embeddings technique. In contrast, the second approach seeks to develop multiple representations of numbers (contextual and magnitude-based) to achieve more robust number embeddings. \textit{Results:} As anticipated, fine-tuning the standard CamemBERT-bio on our small medical dataset did not improve F1 scores. However, significant improvements were observed with CamemBERT-bio + LESA, resulting in an over 13\% increase. Similar enhancements were noted when combining LESA with Xval, outperforming conventional methods and giving comparable results to GPT-4 \textit{Conclusions and Novelty:} This study introduces two innovative techniques for handling numerical data, which are also applicable to other modalities. We illustrate how these techniques can improve the performance of Transformer-based models, achieving more reliable classification results even with small 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".