1. PaperMaker: Validation of biomedical scientific
publications
January 19th, 2011
Workshop: „BeyondThePdf“
Dietrich Rebholz-Schuhmann, MD, PhD
Group Leader Rebholz Group
European Bioinformatics Institute
2. Publishing is about …
• ... Agreeing / disagreeing about current science
• Only peer review can judge current science
• ... Bringing new results
• Conceptual results are more difficult than new data
• ... Gaining new knowledge
• New data and new results can imply new knowledge where even
the author is still unaware of
• ... Rewarding the scientist
• Count whatever you can count that could have an impact.
• Validating the scientist’s claim is the key reward.
• Any scientist can fool any system, but (hopefully) only short-term
2 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
3. Future of biomedical text mining
Working towards ...
• ... Literature integration
• to have it full fledged as part of bioinformatics data resources
• ... Cross-domain support
• to deliver the content to different scientific communities.
• ... Provenance
• to carry credit of findings into analytical biomedical research
• ... Inference & Reasoning
• to make use of the full semantic support in the scientific literature
3 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
5. Terminologies vs. Ontologies
Ontological resources
Database type Resource building
Explicit semantics
Terminologies, collection of terms
Manual generation
Automatic generation
Consistency, inference, reasoning
Exploitation of terminological features
Interoperability with all semantic
Standardisation of TM solutions resources
Interoperability with database Working towards a reasoning
resources infrastructure
5 Literature and Text Mining
6. Efforts in the Rebholz group towards
interoperability of literature with bioinformatics
• Whatizit infrastructure
• Biomedical NER as a public, large-scale service
• LexEBI / BioLexicon (collab. w. NaCTeM, Pisa-U)
• Biomedical terminological resource, standardisation of semantics
• IeXML (BioLink SIG 2006, Brasil)
• Put the annotations into the document (inline annotations)
• CALBC project
• Collaborative annotation of a large-scale biomedical corpus
• UKPMC: U.K. Pubmed Central (collab. w. NaCTeM, BL)
• Use of Whatizit, BioLexicon, IeXML, CALBC alignments for the delivery of quality
annotation services to the public
• SESL project
• Joint project with pharma & publishers, literature content in a triple store
• PaperMaker
• Validation of the scientific literature against the above
6 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
7. 1
Whatizit
7 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
8. Integrating biomedical literature and data
Rebholz-Schuhmann, D., et
al. Text Processing through
Web Services: Calling
Whatizit. Bioinformatics 24,
no. 2 (2008): 296-98.
8 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
9. 2
BioLexicon
LexEBI
9 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
11. 3
IeXML
11 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
12. IeXML: Annotating entities in text
• Inline annotations to any part of the document with the
annotations
• No hassle with character or byte counts or layout
modifications to the document
• “Alignment” of annotated documtents to
• Compare annotations
• Validate annotations
• Harmonise annotations (SESL project)
12 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
13. 4
CALBC
13 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
14. The challenge
150,000 documents
or more ...
Test set for all systems
Assessment, benchmarking
14 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
15. CALBC Challenge II
(1) 75,000 documents training data
(2) 175,000 testing data
(3) Additional 700,000 testing data
• September 13th 2010:
Second harmonized corpus available for CALBC
Challenge II
• December 15th, 2010: Challenge II closes
• March 2011: CALBC Workshop II
• June 30th, 2011:
Final harmonized corpus available
Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
16. 5
Ukpmc/Elixir
16 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
17. 17 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
18. UKPMC
~ 10 % the size of PubMed
18 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
19. 6
sesl
19 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
20. SESL Project: from publisher to pharma
Multiple
Consumers
Disease Knowledge
Dossier Applications
Service Layer (RDF, Web 2.0) Std Public
Open Common
Assertions, SPARQL, Triple Store Vocabularies
Stan- Service
Integration, Inference, Reasoning Business
dards Broker
Sharing of data Rules
Content
Suppliers
20 20.01.2011 Literature20
and Text Mining
22. 7
Papermaker
22 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
23. PaperMaker - Overview
• Inte
• PaperMaker - a tool to support authors writing biomedical
papers:
• Interactive feedback on the contents of papers (related
work and concept annotations)
• Formal consistency criteria checking (spelling,
terminology, acronyms, references)
30.03.2009 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
24. Consistency parameters
Domain-independent
• General spelling and grammar
• General readability
• Appropriate use of references
• Finding and acknowledging related work
30.03.2009 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
25. Consistence parameters
Domain-specific
• The use of terminology:
• Should be consistent with naming domain-specific guidelines
• Should not be ambiguous
• Should conform to the conventional usage (possible clashes
between naming guidelines and common-sense convention)
• Useful to resolve terminology to reference databases (e. g.
UniProt for protein names, ChEBI chemical entities, etc.)
• The special case of acronyms
30.03.2009 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
26. Content feedback
• Resolving the contents to literature repositories
• Finding related work (document retrieval)
• Finding related ideas (passage retrieval)
• Resolving the contents to ontological reference
databases
• MeSH descriptors have been demonstrated to improve
biomedical information retrieval. Can we suggest MeSH terms
directly to the authors?
• Gene Ontology (GO) terms are increasingly used in information
extraction systems.
30.03.2009 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
32. Conclusions
• PaperMaker can help the author conform to the formal
requirements of paper writing with special emphasis on
the domain
• It also provides feedback on the contents by relating it to
reference resources and literature repositories
• It may improve the indexing of a paper in literature
repositories (less ambiguous terminology)
• http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Rebholz-srv/PaperMaker
Work in progress
30.03.2009 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
33. 8
Summary
33 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
34. Efforts in the Rebholz group towards
interoperability of literature with bioinformatics
• Whatizit infrastructure
• Biomedical NER as a public, large-scale service
• LexEBI / BioLexicon (collab. w. NaCTeM, Pisa-U)
• Biomedical terminological resource, standardisation of semantics
• IeXML (BioLink SIG 2006, Brasil)
• Put the annotations into the document (inline annotations)
• CALBC project
• Collaborative annotation of a large-scale biomedical corpus
• UKPMC: U.K. Pubmed Central (collab. w. NaCTeM, BL)
• Use of Whatizit, BioLexicon, IeXML, CALBC alignments for the delivery of quality
annotation services to the public
• SESL project
• Joint project with pharma & publishers, literature content in a triple store
• PaperMaker
• Validation of the scientific literature against the above
34 20.01.2011 Literature and Text Mining
BioCreative III, Rebholz
