Domain adaption of parsing for operative notes

Journal of Biomedical Informatics

Volumn 54, Issue , 2015, Pages 1-9

  Wang, Yan ^a   Pakhomov, Serguei ^a,b   Ryan, James O ^a,d   Melton, Genevieve B ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d University of California Santa Cruz   (United States)

Author keywords

Natural language processing; Operative reports; Parser adaption; Probabilistic context free grammar (PCFG); SPECIALIST; Unlexicalized parser

Indexed keywords

CONTEXT FREE GRAMMARS; CONTEXT FREE LANGUAGES; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; STATISTICS;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; OPERATIVE REPORTS; PARSER ADAPTION; PROBABILISTIC CONTEXT FREE GRAMMARS; SPECIALIST; UNLEXICALIZED PARSER;

SYNTACTICS;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BOOK; BRONCHOSCOPY; CURRENT PROCEDURAL TERMINOLOGY; GRAMMAR; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HUMAN; MALE; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; TRANSURETHRAL RESECTION; CONTROLLED VOCABULARY; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

DATA CURATION; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; HUMANS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; SOFTWARE; VOCABULARY, CONTROLLED;

EID: 84927917797     PISSN: 15320464     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2015.01.016     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Kilicoglu H, Bergler S. Syntactic dependency based heuristics for biological event extraction. In: Proceedings of the workshop on current trends in biomedical natural language processing: Shared Task; Boulder, Colorado; 2009. p. 119-27.
2. Rinaldi F., Schneider G., Kaljurand K., Hess M., Romacker M. An environment for relation mining over richly annotated corpora: the case of GENIA. BMC Bioinformatics 2006, 7(Suppl. 3):S3.
3. Rinaldi F., Schneider G., Kaljurand K., Hess M., Andronis C., Konstandi O., et al. Mining of relations between proteins over biomedical scientific literature using a deep-linguistic approach. Artif Intell Med 2007 February, 39(2):127-136.
4. Song M., Yu H., Han W.S. Combining active learning and semi-supervised learning techniques to extract protein interaction sentences. BMC Bioinformatics 2011, 12(Suppl. 12):S4.
5. Daraselia N., Yuryev A., Egorov S., Novichkova S., Nikitin A., Mazo I. Extracting human protein interactions from MEDLINE using a full-sentence parser. Bioinformatics 2004, 20(5):604-611. March 22.
6. Bui Q.-C., Nuallain B., Boucher C., Sloot P. Extracting causal relations on HIV drug resistance from literature. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11(1):101.
7. Rinaldi F., Schneider G., Clematide S. Relation mining experiments in the pharmacogenomics domain. J Biomed Inform 2012, 45(5):851-861. October.
8. Charniak E. A maximum-entropy-inspired parser. In: Proceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics conference; Seattle, Washington; 2000. p. 132-39.
9. Klein D, Manning C. Accurate unlexicalized parsing. In: Proceedings of the 41st annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: 7-12 July 2003; Sapporo; 2003. p. 423-30.
10. Marcus M.P., Marcinkiewicz M.A., Santorini B. Building a large annotated corpus of English: the Penn treebank. Comput Linguist 1993, 19(2):313-330.
11. Friedman C., Kra P., Rzhetsky A. Two biomedical sublanguages: a description based on the theories of Zellig Harris. J Biomed Inform 2002, 35(4):222-235. August.
12. Rimell L., Clark S. Porting a lexicalized-grammar parser to the biomedical domain. J Biomed Inform 2009, 42(5):852-865. October.
13. Szolovits P. Adding a medical lexicon to an English Parser. In: AMIA annu symp proc; 2003. p. 639-43.
14. Pyysalo S., Salakoski T., Aubin S., Nazarenko A. Lexical adaptation of link grammar to the biomedical sublanguage: a comparative evaluation of three approaches. BMC Bioinformatics 2006, 7(Suppl. 3):S2.
15. Lease M, Charniak E. Parsing biomedical literature. In: The Second international joint conference on natural language processing (IJCNLP-05); 2005. p. 58-69.
16. Clegg A., Shepherd A. Benchmarking natural-language parsers for biological applications using dependency graphs. BMC Bioinformatics 2007, 8(1):24.
17. McClosky D, Charniak E. Self-training for biomedical parsing. In: Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics on human language technologies: short papers; Columbus, Ohio; 2008. p. 101-4.
18. Clegg AB, Shepherd AJ. Evaluating and Integrating Treebank Parsers on a Biomedical Corpus. In: Proceedings of the ACL workshop on software; 2005. p. 14-33.
19. Hara T, Miyao Y, Tsujii Jun'ichi. Adapting a probabilistic disambiguation model of an HPSG Parser to a New Domain. In: Natural language processing - IJCNLP 2005. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2005. p. 199-210.
20. Daumé III H. Frustratingly easy domain adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics; 2007. p. 256-63.
21. McClosky D, Charniak E, Johnson M. Effective self-training for parsing. In: HLT-NAACL '06 Proceedings of the main conference on Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics; 2006. p. 152-59.
22. Daumé III H, Kumar A, Saha A. Frustratingly easy semi-supervised domain adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 2010 workshop on domain adaptation for natural language processing; Uppsala, Sweden. 1870534: Association for Computational Linguistics; 2010. p. 53-9.
23. Huang Y., Lowe H.J., Klein D., Cucina R.J. Improved identification of noun phrases in clinical radiology reports using a high-performance statistical natural language parser augmented with the UMLS specialist lexicon. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2005, 12(3):275-285.
24. Swift M, Blaylock N, Allen J, Beaumont Wd, Galescu L, Jung H. Augmenting a Deep Natural Language Processing System with UMLS. In: Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on semantic mining in biomedicine (SMBM 2010); Hinxton, UK; October 2010.
25. Oostdijk N, Verberne S, Koster CHA. Constructing a Broad-coverage Lexicon for Text Mining in the Patent Domain. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC'10); Valletta, Malta; 2010.
26. McClosky D, Charniak E, Johnson M. Reranking and self-training for parser adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on computational linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics; Sydney, Australia; 2006. p. 337-44.
27. SPECIALIST Lexicon. Available from: [accessed 14.01.15]. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/factsheets/umlslex.html.
28. Sipser M. Introduction to the theory of computation 1996, International Thomson Publishing.
29. Chomsky N. Syntactic structures 2002, Mouton de Gruyter.
30. Collins M. Head-driven statistical models for natural language parsing. Comput Linguist 2003, 29(4):589-637.
31. Collins M., Koo T. Discriminative reranking for natural language parsing. Comput Linguist 2005, 31(1):25-70.
32. Charniak E, Johnson M. Coarse-to-fine n-best parsing and MaxEnt discriminative reranking. In: ACL'05 Proceedings of the 43rd annual meeting on association for computational linguistics; 2005. p. 173-80.
33. Hua X, AbdelRahman S, Min J, Jung-wei F, Yang H. An initial study of full parsing of clinical text using the Stanford Parser. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE international conference on bioinformatics and biomedicine workshops, 2011 12-15 November; 2011. p. 607-14.
34. Bacchiani M., Riley M., Roark B., Sproat R. MAP adaptation of stochastic grammars. Comput Speech Lang 2006, 20(1):41-68.
35. Genia treebank. Available from: [accessed 14.01.15]. http://www.nactem.ac.uk/genia/genia-corpus/treebank.
36. Wang Y, Pakhomov S, Burkart NE, Ryan JO, Melton GB. A study of actions in operative notes. AMIA Annu Symp Proc, 2012; 2012. p. 1431-40.
37. Gildea D, Palmer M. The necessity of parsing for predicate argument recognition. In: Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting on association for computational linguistics; 2002. p. 239-46.
38. Penn Treebank II Bracketing Guide; 1995. Available from: [accessed 14.01.15].
39. Abney S, Flickenger S, Gdaniec C, Grishman C, Harrison P, Hindle D, et al. Procedure for quantitatively comparing the syntactic coverage of English grammars. In: Proceedings of the workshop on Speech and Natural Language 1991. p. 306-11.
40. Rush AM, Reichart R, Collins M, Globerson A. Improved parsing and POS tagging using inter-sentence consistency constraints. In: Proceedings of the 2012 joint conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and computational natural language learning; 2012. p. 1434-44.
41. Miller JE, Torii M, Vijay-Shanker K, editors. Subdomain adaptation of a POS tagger with a small corpus. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on BioNLP 2007: Biological, Translational, and Clinical Language Processing; 2006.
42. BioMedICUS. Available from: [accessed 14.01.15]. https://bitbucket.org/nlpie/biomedicus.
43. McClosky D. Any domain parsing: automatic domain adaptation for natural language parsing. Brown University; 2010.
44. Cairns BL, Nielsen RD, Masanz JJ, Martin JH, Palmer MS, Ward WH, et al. The MiPACQ clinical question answering system. AMIA Annu Symp Proc, 2011; 2011. p. 171-80.