Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2203.06592

Informative Causality Extraction from Medical Literature via Dependency-tree based Patterns

Abstract

Extracting cause-effect entities from medical literature is an important task in medical information retrieval. A solution for solving this task can be used for compilation of various causality relations, such as, causality between disease and symptoms, between medications and side effects, between genes and diseases, etc. Existing solutions for extracting cause-effect entities work well for sentences where the cause and the effect phrases are name entities, single-word nouns, or noun phrases consisting of two to three words. Unfortunately, in medical literature, cause and effect phrases in a sentence are not simply nouns or noun phrases, rather they are complex phrases consisting of several words, and existing methods fail to correctly extract the cause and effect entities in such sentences. Partial extraction of cause and effect entities conveys poor quality, non informative, and often, contradictory facts, comparing to the one intended in the given sentence. In this work, we solve this problem by designing an unsupervised method for cause and effect phrase extraction, PatternCausality, which is specifically suitable for the medical literature. Our proposed approach first uses a collection of cause-effect dependency patterns as template to extract head words of cause and effect phrases and then it uses a novel phrase extraction method to obtain complete and meaningful cause and effect phrases from a sentence. Experiments on a cause-effect dataset built from sentences from PubMed articles show that for extracting cause and effect entities, PatternCausality is substantially better than the existing methods with an order of magnitude improvement in the F-score metric over the best of the existing methods.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Md. Ahsanul Kabir, AlJohara Almulhim, Xiao Luo, Mohammad Al Hasan. 2022-03-13. Informative Causality Extraction from Medical Literature via Dependency-tree based Patterns. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.06592

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Universal Topological Regularity of Syntactic Structures

Despite their widespread use, the principles governing the organisation of syntactic dependency trees remain poorly understood. I analyse dependency trees from 124 typologically, genetically, and geographically diverse languages. Their topology departs systematically from randomness. Relative to uniformly sampled random trees, dependency trees exhibit greater structural robustness and lower branching heterogeneity. I propose that these universal regularities emerge naturally from incremental grammatical encoding. I model this process using sublinear preferential attachment. The model accurately reproduces the observed topology. More generally, the results demonstrate how a universal statistical property of syntax can emerge from a simple, cognitively motivated generative process. They further illustrate a broader principle of efficiency by construction: communicatively efficient syntactic structures can emerge without direct optimisation for communication.

cs.CL

An Incomplete Loop: Deductive, Inductive, and Abductive Reasoning in Language Models

Modern language models (LMs) can learn to perform new tasks in different ways: in instruction following, the target task is described explicitly in natural language; in few-shot prompting, the task is specified implicitly with a small number of examples; in instruction inference, LMs are presented with in-context examples and are then prompted to generate a natural language task description before making predictions. Each of these procedures may be thought of as invoking a different form of reasoning: instruction following involves deductive reasoning, few-shot prompting involves inductive reasoning, and instruction inference involves abductive reasoning. How do these different capabilities relate? Across four LMs (from the gpt and llama families) and two learning problems (involving arithmetic functions and machine translation) we find a strong dissociation between the different types of reasoning: LMs can sometimes learn effectively from few-shot prompts even when they are unable to explain their own prediction rules; conversely, they sometimes infer useful task descriptions while completely failing to learn from human-generated descriptions of the same task. Our results highlight the non-systematic nature of reasoning even in some of today's largest LMs, and underscore the fact that very different learning mechanisms may be invoked by seemingly similar prompting procedures.

cs.CL

Thinking beyond the anthropomorphic paradigm benefits LLM research

Anthropomorphism, or the attribution of human traits to technology, is an automatic and unconscious response that occurs even in those with advanced technical expertise. In this position paper, we analyze hundreds of thousands of research articles to present empirical evidence of the prevalence and growth of anthropomorphic terminology in research on large language models (LLMs). We argue for challenging the deeper assumptions reflected in this terminology -- which, though often useful, may inadvertently constrain LLM development -- and broadening beyond them to open new pathways for understanding and improving LLMs. Specifically, we identify and examine five anthropomorphic assumptions that shape research across the LLM development lifecycle. For each assumption (e.g., that LLMs must use natural language for reasoning, or that they should be evaluated on benchmarks originally meant for humans), we demonstrate empirical, non-anthropomorphic alternatives that remain under-explored yet offer promising directions for LLM research and development.

cs.CL