↓ Skip to main content

The effect of word sense disambiguation accuracy on literature based discovery

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of word sense disambiguation accuracy on literature based discovery
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12911-016-0296-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Judita Preiss, Mark Stevenson

Abstract

The volume of research published in the biomedical domain has increasingly lead to researchers focussing on specific areas of interest and connections between findings being missed. Literature based discovery (LBD) attempts to address this problem by searching for previously unnoticed connections between published information (also known as "hidden knowledge"). A common approach is to identify hidden knowledge via shared linking terms. However, biomedical documents are highly ambiguous which can lead LBD systems to over generate hidden knowledge by hypothesising connections through different meanings of linking terms. Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) aims to resolve ambiguities in text by identifying the meaning of ambiguous terms. This study explores the effect of WSD accuracy on LBD performance. An existing LBD system is employed and four approaches to WSD of biomedical documents integrated with it. The accuracy of each WSD approach is determined by comparing its output against a standard benchmark. Evaluation of the LBD output is carried out using timeslicing approach, where hidden knowledge is generated from articles published prior to a certain cutoff date and a gold standard extracted from publications after the cutoff date. WSD accuracy varies depending on the approach used. The connection between the performance of the LBD and WSD systems are analysed to reveal a correlation between WSD accuracy and LBD performance. This study reveals that LBD performance is sensitive to WSD accuracy. It is therefore concluded that WSD has the potential to improve the output of LBD systems by reducing the amount of spurious hidden knowledge that is generated. It is also suggested that further improvements in WSD accuracy have the potential to improve LBD accuracy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ukraine 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 30%
Student > Master 5 15%
Researcher 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 15 45%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 5 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,731,085
of 23,500,709 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#789
of 2,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,038
of 365,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#22
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,500,709 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,026 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.