Overview of BioCreative II gene mention recognition

Nineteen teams presented results for the Gene Mention Task at the BioCreative II Workshop. In this task participants designed systems to identify substrings in sentences corresponding to gene name mentions. A variety of different methods were used and the results varied with a highest achieved F₁ score of 0.8721. Here we present brief descriptions of all the methods used and a statistical analysis of the results. We also demonstrate that, by combining the results from all submissions, an F score of 0.9066 is feasible, and furthermore that the best result makes use of the lowest scoring submissions.

Automating curation using a natural language processing pipeline

Background:

The tasks in BioCreative II were designed to approximate some of the laborious work involved in curating biomedical research papers. The approach to these tasks taken by the University of Edinburgh team was to adapt and extend the existing natural language processing (NLP) system that we have developed as part of a commercial curation assistant. Although this paper concentrates on using NLP to assist with curation, the system can be equally employed to extract types of information from the literature that is immediately relevant to biologists in general.

Results:

Our system was among the highest performing on the interaction subtasks, and competitive performance on the gene mention task was achieved with minimal development effort. For the gene normalization task, a string matching technique that can be quickly applied to new domains was shown to perform close to average.

Conclusion:

The technologies being developed were shown to be readily adapted to the BioCreative II tasks. Although high performance may be obtained on individual tasks such as gene mention recognition and normalization, and document classification, tasks in which a number of components must be combined, such as detection and normalization of interacting protein pairs, are still challenging for NLP systems.

Assisted curation: does text mining really help?

Although text mining shows considerable promise as a tool for supporting the curation of biomedical text, there is little concrete evidence as to its effectiveness. We report on three experiments measuring the extent to which curation can be speeded up with assistance from Natural Language Processing (NLP), together with subjective feedback from curators on the usability of a curation tool that integrates NLP hypotheses for protein-protein interactions (PPIs). In our curation scenario, we found that a maximum speed-up of 1/3 in curation time can be expected if NLP output is perfectly accurate. The preference of one curator for consistent NLP output and output with high recall needs to be confirmed in a larger study with several curators.