Proceedings of ACL 2017, System Demonstrations 2017
DOI: 10.18653/v1/p17-4010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Life-iNet: A Structured Network-Based Knowledge Exploration and Analytics System for Life Sciences

Abstract: Search engines running on scientific literature have been widely used by life scientists to find publications related to their research. However, existing search engines in the life-science domain, such as PubMed, have limitations when applied to exploring and analyzing factual knowledge (e.g., disease-gene associations) in massive text corpora. These limitations are mainly due to the problems that factual information exists as an unstructured form in text, and also keyword and MeSH term-based queries cannot e… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While there have been many algorithms proposed around the concept of co-occurrence counting, we found only three tools comparable to KinderMiner available: FACTA+ 14 , Polysearch2 15 , and BEST 16 . There are other similar sounding tools like DeepLife 17 and Life-iNet 18 , but DeepLife serves more as a general biomedical web search than a term ranking tool and Life-iNet does not appear to have any code or application available for use. All three of FACTA+, Polysearch2, and BEST allow the user to rank a list of biomedical entities (analogous to the KinderMiner target terms) by their association with a query entity (analogous to the KinderMiner key phrase), and all allow general text entry for the query entity.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While there have been many algorithms proposed around the concept of co-occurrence counting, we found only three tools comparable to KinderMiner available: FACTA+ 14 , Polysearch2 15 , and BEST 16 . There are other similar sounding tools like DeepLife 17 and Life-iNet 18 , but DeepLife serves more as a general biomedical web search than a term ranking tool and Life-iNet does not appear to have any code or application available for use. All three of FACTA+, Polysearch2, and BEST allow the user to rank a list of biomedical entities (analogous to the KinderMiner target terms) by their association with a query entity (analogous to the KinderMiner key phrase), and all allow general text entry for the query entity.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To extend this pipeline to other domains, we need to use an extractor that can effectively recognize entities and relations tailored for those domains. For example, to work on the life science domain, we should use an extractor that recognizes concepts of drugs and diseases rather than tasks and methods (Ren et al, 2017).…”
Section: Knowledge Graph Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides the mentioned platforms, in the biomedical domain, there are many efforts to integrate knowledge bases into literature analysis systems. Similar to our fact list feature, Life-iNet (Ren et al, 2017) and BioTextQuest+ (Papanikolaou et al, 2014) are platforms that focus on exploring factual knowledge of a queried entity in the knowledge base and providing a list of supported documents. DeepLife (Ernst et al, 2016) and SetSearch+ (Shen et al, 2018) are entity-aware literature search engines that broaden results by expanding the query with related entities in the knowledge base.…”
Section: Scientific Literature Discovery Platformsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, researchers may choose other academic search platforms, such as CiteSeerX [34], AMiner [31], PubMed [21], Microsoft Academic Search [30] and Semantic Scholar [39]. Research efforts of many such systems focus on the analytical tasks of scholar data such as author name disambiguation [31], paper importance modeling [29], and entity-based distinctive summarization [27]. However, this work focuses on ad-hoc document retrieval and ranking in academic search.…”
Section: Academic Searchmentioning
confidence: 99%