Development and tuning of an original search engine for patent libraries in medicinal chemistry

BMC Bioinformatics

Volumn 15, Issue , 2014, Pages 1-9

  Pasche, Emilie ^a,b,c   Gobeill, Julien ^b,c   Kreim, Olivier ^d   Oezdemir Zaech, Fatma ^d   Vachon, Therese ^d   Lovis, Christian ^a   Ruch, Patrick ^b,c  

^a GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^b University of Applied Sciences   (Switzerland)

^c SWISS INSTITUTE OF BIOINFORMATICS   (Switzerland)

^d NOVARTIS PHARMA AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; COMPETITIVE INTELLIGENCE; LIBRARIES; PATENTS AND INVENTIONS; SURVEYS;

BIOMEDICAL FIELDS; KNOWN ITEM SEARCHES; MEDICAL CHEMISTRY; MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY; RETRIEVAL EFFECTIVENESS; SEARCH BEHAVIOURS; SEARCH INFORMATION; SEARCH STRATEGIES;

SEARCH ENGINES;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERNET; MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR LIBRARY; PATENT; SEARCH ENGINE;

ALGORITHMS; CHEMISTRY, PHARMACEUTICAL; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; INTERNET; PATENTS AS TOPIC; SEARCH ENGINE; SMALL MOLECULE LIBRARIES;

EID: 84925881338     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-15-S1-S15     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bonino D, Ciaramella A, Como F: Review of the state-of-the-art in patent information and forthcoming evolutions in intelligent patent informatics. World Patent Information 2010, 32(1):30-38.
2. Grivell L: Mining the bibliome: searching for a needle in a haystack? New computing tools are needed to effectively scan the growing amount of scientific literature for useful information. EMBO Rep 2002, 3(3):200-203.
3. Shingal A: Modern information retrieval: A brief overview. IEEE Data Eng Bull 2001, 24:35-43.
4. Fujii A, Iwayama M, Kando N: Overview of patent retrieval task at NTCIR-4. Proceedings of NTCIR-4 2004, 232-241.
5. Piroi F, Lupu M, Hanbury A, Zenz V: CLEF-IP 2011: Retrieval in the intellectual property domain. Proceedings of CLEF 2011 2011.
6. Voorhees E, Harman DK: TREC: Experiments and evaluation in information retrieval Cambridge: MIT press; 2005.
7. Lupu M, Piroi F, Huang XJ, Zhu J, Tait J: Overview of the TREC 2009 Chemical IR track. Proceedings of TREC 2009 2009, 2.
8. Cetintas S, Si L: Strategies for effective chemical information retrieval. Proceedings of TREC 2009 2009, 35.
9. Gobeill J, Teodoro D, Pasche E, Ruch P: Report on the TREC 2009 experiments: Chemical IR track. Proceedings of TREC 2009 2009, 39.
10. Zhao J, Huang X, Yel Z, Zhu J: York University at TREC 2009: Chemical track. Proceedings of TREC 2009 2009, 69.
11. Gurulingappa H, Müller B, Klinger R, Mevissen HT, Hofmann-Apitius M, Friedriech CM, Fluck J: Prior art search in chemistry patents based on semantic concepts and co-citation analysis. Proceedings of TREC 2010 2010, 15.
12. Jimeno-Yepes A, Berlanga-Llavori R, Rebholz-Schuhmann D: Ontology refinement for improved information retrieval. Information Processing & Management 2010, 46(4):426-35.
13. Ruch P, Müller H, Abdou S, Cohen G, Savoy J: Report on the TREC 2005 experiment: Genomics track. Proceedings of TREC 2005 2005, e102.
14. Hersch W, Cohen A, Yang J, Bhupatiraju RT, Roberts P, Hearst M: TREC 2005 Genomics track overview. Proceedings of TREC 2005 2005, 3.
15. Mottaz A, Yip YL, Ruch P, AL Veuthey AL: Mapping proteins to disease terminologies: from UniProt to MeSH. BMC Bioinformatics 2008, 9(Suppl 5):S3[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18460185].
16. Baud RH, Rassinoux AM, Ruch P, Lovis C, Scherrer JR: The power and limits of a rule-based morpho-semantic parser. Proceedings of the AMIA symposium 1999 2009, 22-26[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10566313].
17. Mejova Y, Thuc VH, Foster S, Harris C, Arens B, Srinivasan P: TREC Blog and TREC Chem: A view from the corn fields. Proceedings of TREC 2009 2009-57.
18. Fujii A: Enhancing patent retrieval by citation analysis. Proceedings of SIGIR 2007 2007, 793-794.
19. Sternitzke C: Reducing uncertainty in the patent application procedure - Insights from invalidating prior art in European patent applications. World Patent Information 2009, 31(1):48-53.
20. Criscuolo P, Verspagen B: Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor versus examiner citations in European patents. Research Policy 2008, 37:1892-1908.
21. Gobeill J, Gaudinat A, Pasche E, Teodoro D, Vishnyakova D, Ruch P: BiTeM site report for TREC Chemistry 2010: Impact of citations feedback for patent prior art search and chemical compounds expansion for ad hoc retrieval. Proceedings of TREC 2010 2010, 40.
22. Zimmerman M: Chemical structure reconstruction with chemoCR. Proceedings of TREC 2011 2011, 31.
23. Park J, Li Y, Rosania GR, Saitou K: Image-to-structure task by ChemReader. Proceedings of TREC 2011 2011, 107.
24. Gobeill J, Gaudinat A, Pasche E, Teodoro D, Vishnyakova D, Ruch P: BiTeM group report for TREC Chemical IR track 2011. Proceedings of TREC 2011 2011, 9.
25. Pasche E, Gobeill J, Vachon T, Lovis C, Ruch P: Development of a text search engine for medicinal chemistry patents. EMBnet. journal 2012, 18(Suppl B):44-46.
26. Lupu M, Tait J, Huang J, Zhu J: TREC-CHEM 2010: Notebook report. Proceedings of TREC 2010 2010, 2.
27. Lupu M, Gurulingappa H, Filippov I, Jiashu Z, Fluck J, Zimmerman M, Huang J, Tait J: Overview of the TREC 2011 Chemical IR track. Proceedings of TREC 2011 2011.
28. Allen B: Recall cues in known-item retrieval. J Am Soc Inf Sci 1989, 40(4):246-252.
29. Duek PD, Gleizes A, Zwahlen C, Mottaz A, Bairoch A, Lane L: CALOHA: A new human anatomical ontology as a support for complex queries and tissue expression display in neXtProt. Bio-Ontologies 2011 [http://bioontologies.knowledgeblog.org/196].
30. Leveling J, Goeuriot L, Kelly L, Jones G: DCU@TRECMed 2012: Using ad hoc baselines for domain-specific retrieval. Proceedings of TREC 2012 2012, 22.
31. Robertson SE, Walker S, Beaulieu M: Experimentation as a way of life: Okapi at TREC. Information Processing & Management 2000, 36(1):95-108.
32. Amati G, Van Rijsbergen CJ: Probabilistic models of information retrieval based on measuring the divergence from randomness. ACM Trans Inf Syst 2002, 20(4):357-389.
33. Ruch P, Tbahriti I, Gobeill J, Aronson AR: Argumentative feedback: A linguistically-motivated term expansion for information retrieval. Proceedings of the COLING/ACL 2006 2006, 675-682.
34. Gobeill J, Ruch P: BiTeM site report for the claims to passage task in CLEF-IP 2012. Proceedings of CLEF 2012 2012.
35. Teodoro D, Gobeill J, Pasche E, Ruch P, Vishnyakova D, Lovis C: Automatic IPC encoding and novelty tracking for effective patent mining. Proceedings of NTCIR-8 Workshop Meeting 2010, 309-317.
36. Fall CJ, Törcsvari A, Benzineb K, Karetka G: Automated categorization in the international patent classification. ACM SIGIR Forum 2003, 37(1):10-25.
37. Demner-Fushman D, Humphrey SM, Ide NC, Loane RF, Ruch P, Ruiz ME, Smith LH, Tanabe LK, Wilbur WJ, Aronson AR: Finding relevant passages in scientific articles: Fusion of automatic approaches vs. an interactive team effort. Proceedings of TREC 2006 2006, 569-76.
38. Fox EA, Shaw JA: Combination of multiple searches. Proceedings of TREC 1994 1994, 243-249.