MeSH2Matrix: combining MeSH keywords and machine learning for biomedical relation classification based on PubMed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomedical relation classification has been significantly improved by the application of advanced machine learning techniques on the raw texts of scholarly publications. Despite this improvement, the reliance on large chunks of raw text makes these algorithms suffer in terms of generalization, precision, and reliability. The use of the distinctive characteristics of bibliographic metadata can prove effective in achieving better performance for this challenging task. In this research paper, we introduce an approach for biomedical relation classification using the qualifiers of co-occurring Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). First of all, we introduce MeSH2Matrix, our dataset consisting of 46,469 biomedical relations curated from PubMed publications using our approach. Our dataset includes a matrix that maps associations between the qualifiers of subject MeSH keywords and those of object MeSH keywords. It also specifies the corresponding Wikidata relation type and the superclass of semantic relations for each relation. Using MeSH2Matrix, we build and train three machine learning models (Support Vector Machine [SVM], a dense model [D-Model], and a convolutional neural network [C-Net]) to evaluate the efficiency of our approach for biomedical relation classification. Our best model achieves an accuracy of 70.78% for 195 classes and 83.09% for five superclasses. Finally, we provide confusion matrix and extensive feature analyses to better examine the relationship between the MeSH qualifiers and the biomedical relations being classified. Our results will hopefully shed light on developing better algorithms for biomedical ontology classification based on the MeSH keywords of PubMed publications. For reproducibility purposes, MeSH2Matrix, as well as all our source codes, are made publicly accessible at https://github.com/SisonkeBiotik-Africa/MeSH2Matrix .
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".