PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9865029

Alternative ways for knowledge collection, indexing and robust language retrieval.

R H Baud·C Lovis·A M Rassinoux·J R Scherrer
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Definitions are provided of the key entities in knowledge representation for Natural Language Processing (NLP). Starting from the words, which are the natural components of any sentence, both the role of expressions and the decomposition of words into their parts are emphasized. This leads to the notion of concepts, which are either primitive or composite depending on the model where they are created. The problem of finding the most adequate degree of granularity for a concept is studied. From this reflection on basic Natural Language Processing components, four categories of linguistic knowledge are recognized, that are considered to be the building blocks of a Medical Linguistic Knowledge Base (MLKB). Following on the tracks of a recent experience in building a natural language-based patient encoding browser, a robust method for conceptual indexing and query of medical texts is presented with particular attention to the scheme of knowledge representation.

Explore related subjects

Abstracting and IndexingArtificial IntelligenceHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalMedical Records Systems, ComputerizedNatural Language ProcessingTerminology as TopicVocabulary, ControlledJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R H Baud, C Lovis, A M Rassinoux, J R Scherrer. 1998. Alternative ways for knowledge collection, indexing and robust language retrieval.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9865029/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

A comparative evaluation of full-text, concept-based, and context-sensitive search.

OBJECTIVES: Study comparatively (1) concept-based search, using documents pre-indexed by a conceptual hierarchy; (2) context-sensitive search, using structured, labeled documents; and (3) traditional full-text search. Hypotheses were: (1) more contexts lead to better retrieval accuracy; and (2) adding concept-based search to the other searches would improve upon their baseline performances. DESIGN: Use our Vaidurya architecture, for search and retrieval evaluation, of structured documents classified by a conceptual hierarchy, on a clinical guidelines test collection. MEASUREMENTS: Precision computed at different levels of recall to assess the contribution of the retrieval methods. Comparisons of precisions done with recall set at 0.5, using t-tests. RESULTS: Performance increased monotonically with the number of query context elements. Adding context-sensitive elements, mean improvement was 11.1% at recall 0.5. With three contexts, mean query precision was 42% +/- 17% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31% to 53%); with two contexts, 32% +/- 13% (95% CI, 27% to 38%); and one context, 20% +/- 9% (95% CI, 15% to 24%). Adding context-based queries to full-text queries monotonically improved precision beyond the 0.4 level of recall. Mean improvement was 4.5% at recall 0.5. Adding concept-based search to full-text search improved precision to 19.4% at recall 0.5. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated usefulness of concept-based and context-sensitive queries for enhancing the precision of retrieval from a digital library of semi-structured clinical guideline documents. Concept-based searches outperformed free-text queries, especially when baseline precision was low. In general, the more ontological elements used in the query, the greater the resulting precision.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed2007

Improvements to the Red List Index.

The Red List Index uses information from the IUCN Red List to track trends in the projected overall extinction risk of sets of species. It has been widely recognised as an important component of the suite of indicators needed to measure progress towards the international target of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. However, further application of the RLI (to non-avian taxa in particular) has revealed some shortcomings in the original formula and approach: It performs inappropriately when a value of zero is reached; RLI values are affected by the frequency of assessments; and newly evaluated species may introduce bias. Here we propose a revision to the formula, and recommend how it should be applied in order to overcome these shortcomings. Two additional advantages of the revisions are that assessment errors are not propagated through time, and the overall level extinction risk can be determined as well as trends in this over time.

Abstracting and Indexing↗