Biocomputing 2001 2000
DOI: 10.1142/9789814447362_0047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detecting Gene Relations From Medline Abstracts

Abstract: Research in bioinformatics in the past decade has generated a large volume of textual biological data stored in databases such as MEDLINE. It takes a copious amount of effort and time, even for expert users, to manually extract useful information embedded in such a large volume of retrieved data and automated intelligent text analysis tools are increasingly becoming essential. In this article, we present a simple analysis and knowledge discovery method that can identify related genes as well as their shared fu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
72
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
(1 reference statement)
0
72
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Each domain has its own special types of semantic relations. For example, Stephens et al (2001) provide a classification scheme for relationships between genes, including classes such as "NP 0 phosphorylates NP 1 ". However, it is plausible that a general-purpose scheme like Table 11 can capture the majority of semantic relations in general text at a reasonable level of granularity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each domain has its own special types of semantic relations. For example, Stephens et al (2001) provide a classification scheme for relationships between genes, including classes such as "NP 0 phosphorylates NP 1 ". However, it is plausible that a general-purpose scheme like Table 11 can capture the majority of semantic relations in general text at a reasonable level of granularity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Four replicates were performed for each condition. All MEDLINE abstracts referred to in SGD's literature database were considered as acceptable, noise-free, domain-specific source of information for the yeast genes being considered (Stephens, Palakal et al 2001). A restricted vocabulary is suggested in several recent papers (Stephens, Palakal et al 2001;Chiang and Yu 2003;Glenisson, Antal et al 2003).…”
Section: Expression and Literature Data Setsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, automated literature mining offers a yet untapped opportunity to induce and integrate many fragments of information gathered by researchers from multiple fields of expertise, into a complete picture exposing the interrelated relationships of various genes, proteins and chemical reactions in cells, and pathological, mental and intellective states in organisms. Many researches [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] have focused on the gene or protein name extraction, protein-protein interaction and gene-disease relationship extraction from biomedical literature (e.g. MEDLINE).…”
Section: Built By Informationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, the extraction of terminological entities and relationships from biomedical literature is the main research efforts in biomedical literature mining. The research instances include words/phrases disambiguation [1], gene-gene relationships [1][8], protein-protein [3,4,5,7,9], and gene-protein interactions or specific relationships between molecular entities such as cellular localization of proteins, molecular binding relationships [18], and interactions between genes or proteins and drugs [19]. Bunescu et al [20] have a comparative study on the methods such as relational learning, Naïve Bayes, SVM etc.…”
Section: Related Work On Biomedical Literature Miningmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation