预测UMLS语义组分配的两个互补的AI方法:启发式推理和深度学习
Yuqing Mao1, Randolph A Miller1, Olivier Bodenreider1
1National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
概括
人工智能 (AI) 方法,包括启发式,深度学习和混合方法,用于预测新的统一医疗语言系统 (UMLS) Metathesaurus原子的语义组 (SG) 任务. 混合人工智能方法实现了最高准确率的96.5%.
科学领域:
- 医疗信息学 医疗信息学
- 人工智能的人工智能
- 自然语言处理自然语言处理.
背景情况:
- 统一医疗语言系统 (UMLS) 元词库是整合生物医学词汇的重要资源.
- 将新的原子分配给语义组 (SG) 是一个耗时的手动过程.
- 准确的SG预测可以简化将新术语集成到UMLS中.
研究的目的:
- 开发和评估启发式,深度学习 (DL) 和混合AI方法,用于预测新的UMLS Metathesaurus原子的语义组 (SG) 赋值.
- 为了实现SG预测的≥95%的目标准确性.
- 评估人工智能驱动的SG预测作为UMLS概念分配中的中间步骤的潜在实用性.
主要方法:
- 使用一系列7种预测方法实施了启发式"布"方法.
- 一个DL方法利用了BioWordVec和SapBERT嵌入式,被输入到一个多层神经网络中.
- 混合方法是通过结合启发式方法和DL方法来开发的,并将概率估计纳入准确度.
主要成果:
- 启发式布方法在1,563,692个新的看不见的原子上获得了94.3%的准确性.
- 在相同的数据集上,DL方法也达到了94.3%的准确性.
- 混合人工智能方法表现出卓越的性能,平均准确率为96.5%.
结论:
- 人工智能方法,特别是混合方法,可以准确地预测新的UMLS原子的SG分配.
- 人工智能驱动的SG预测显示了作为加快手动分配新原子到UMLS概念的中间步骤的承诺.
- 结合启发式和DL方法,可以比单独使用这两种方法获得更好的SG预测结果.
更多相关视频
09:47Author Spotlight: Advancing Alzheimer's Research – Exploring Early Detection and Multi-Omics Approaches
Published on: December 15, 2023
1.1K
09:34A Virtual Machine Platform for Non-Computer Professionals for Using Deep Learning to Classify Biological Sequences of Metagenomic Data
Published on: September 25, 2021
4.0K
相关概念视频
Heuristics
111
Heuristics are problem-solving strategies that use mental shortcuts to simplify decision-making. Unlike algorithms, which must be followed precisely to achieve a correct result, heuristics offer a general problem-solving framework. They save time and energy but can sometimes lead to less rational decisions.
People often rely on heuristics when faced with an overload of information, limited time, low importance of the decision, limited information, or when a heuristic readily comes to mind. For...
People often rely on heuristics when faced with an overload of information, limited time, low importance of the decision, limited information, or when a heuristic readily comes to mind. For...
111
Inductive Reasoning
60.6K
Inductive reasoning is a form of logical thinking that uses related observations to arrive at a general conclusion. It is uncertain and operates in degrees to which the conclusions are credible. As such, inductive arguments can be weak or strong, rather than valid or invalid, and conclusions can be used to formulate testable, falsifiable hypotheses.
Inductive reasoning is common in descriptive science. A life scientist makes observations and records them. This data can be qualitative or...
Inductive reasoning is common in descriptive science. A life scientist makes observations and records them. This data can be qualitative or...
60.6K
