Comparison of biomedical relationship extraction methods and models for knowledge graph creation

AI-generated keywords: Biomedical Research Knowledge Graphs Machine Learning Transformers Drug Discovery

AI-generated Key Points

  • Biomedical research is expanding rapidly
  • Knowledge graphs offer a framework for organizing and validating biomedical knowledge from literature
  • Rule-based and machine learning-based methods are compared for relationship extraction from biomedical literature
  • Transformer-based models perform well on small and unbalanced datasets
  • PubMedBERT-based model achieves the highest F1-score of 0.92, followed closely by DistilBERT with an F1-score of 0.89
  • BERT-based models outperform T5-based generative models in this context
  • Researchers struggle to cope with the volume of biomedical literature and need tools to find relevant articles and validate claims
  • Information retrieval approaches like PubMed and Quertle provide a list of relevant articles but do not validate hypotheses or claims
  • Extracting named relationships from biomedical literature can contribute to building a large knowledge graph connecting entities through various relationships
  • Future work involves creating a comprehensive biomedical knowledge graph for target identification, indication expansion, and drug discovery.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Nikola Milosevic, Wolfgang Thielemann

Nikola Milosevic, Wolfgang Thielemann, Comparison of biomedical relationship extraction methods and models for knowledge graph creation, Journal of Web Semantics, 2022, 100756, ISSN 1570-8268,
Paper submitted to Journal of Semantic Web
License: CC BY-SA 4.0

Abstract: Biomedical research is growing at such an exponential pace that scientists, researchers, and practitioners are no more able to cope with the amount of published literature in the domain. The knowledge presented in the literature needs to be systematized in such a way that claims and hypotheses can be easily found, accessed, and validated. Knowledge graphs can provide such a framework for semantic knowledge representation from literature. However, in order to build a knowledge graph, it is necessary to extract knowledge as relationships between biomedical entities and normalize both entities and relationship types. In this paper, we present and compare few rule-based and machine learning-based (Naive Bayes, Random Forests as examples of traditional machine learning methods and DistilBERT, PubMedBERT, T5 and SciFive-based models as examples of modern deep learning transformers) methods for scalable relationship extraction from biomedical literature, and for the integration into the knowledge graphs. We examine how resilient are these various methods to unbalanced and fairly small datasets. Our experiments show that transformer-based models handle well both small (due to pre-training on a large dataset) and unbalanced datasets. The best performing model was the PubMedBERT-based model fine-tuned on balanced data, with a reported F1-score of 0.92. DistilBERT-based model followed with F1-score of 0.89, performing faster and with lower resource requirements. BERT-based models performed better then T5-based generative models.

Submitted to arXiv on 05 Jan. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2201.01647v4

Biomedical research is expanding rapidly, leading to an overwhelming amount of published literature. To effectively utilize this knowledge, it needs to be organized and validated. Knowledge graphs offer a framework for representing semantic knowledge from literature by extracting relationships between biomedical entities and normalizing them. This paper compares rule-based and machine learning-based methods for scalable relationship extraction from biomedical literature, including traditional machine learning methods (Naive Bayes, Random Forests) and modern deep learning transformers (DistilBERT, PubMedBERT, T5, SciFive). The study examines the resilience of these methods to unbalanced and small datasets. Experimental results show that transformer-based models perform well on both small and unbalanced datasets. The PubMedBERT-based model fine-tuned on balanced data achieves the highest F1-score of 0.92, while the DistilBERT-based model follows closely with an F1-score of 0.89. BERT-based models outperform T5-based generative models in this context. The introduction highlights the exponential growth of biomedical literature, with over 950,000 articles added to Medline in 2020 alone. Researchers struggle to cope with this volume of information and require tools to find relevant articles and validate claims and hypotheses. Information retrieval approaches have been developed for bio-medicine such as PubMed and Quertle but they only provide a list of relevant articles without validating hypotheses or claims. To validate hypotheses or claims researchers need to read through significant amounts of literature manually; however these hypotheses can often be summarized as relationships between concepts in simple sentences (e.g., "Aspirin treats pain"). Extracting these named relationships from biomedical literature can contribute to building a large knowledge graph where entities are connected through various relationships. The future work section discusses the long term task of creating a comprehensive biomedical knowledge graph for target identification indication expansion and drug discovery.
Created on 10 Sep. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.