PaperMaker: validation of biomedical scientific publications

Motivation: The automatic analysis of scientific literature can support authors in writing their manuscripts

A Semantic Model for Federated Queries Over a Normalized Corpus

We present here a model implemented in OWL which improves information retrieval and data integration of the corpus. The model is populated with entities from CALBC and some simple queries over it are presented.
&#xa

MedEvi: Retrieving textual evidence of relations between biomedical concepts from Medline

Summary: Search engines running on MEDLINE abstracts have been widely used by biologists to find publications that are related to their research. The existing search engines such as PubMed, however, have limitations when applied for the task of seeking textual evidence of relations between given concepts. The limitations are mainly due to the problem that the search engines do not effectively deal with multi-term queries which may imply semantic relations between the terms. To address this problem, we present MedEvi, a novel search engine that imposes positional restriction on occurrences matching multi-term queries, based on the observation that terms with semantic relations which are explicitly stated in text are not found too far from each other. MedEvi further identifies additional keywords of biological and statistical significance from local context of matching occurrences in order to help users reformulate their queries for better results

Improving the extraction of complex regulatory events from scientific text by using ontology-based inference

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The extraction of complex events from biomedical text is a challenging task and requires in-depth semantic analysis. Previous approaches associate lexical and syntactic resources with ontologies for the semantic analysis, but fall short in testing the benefits from the use of domain knowledge.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We developed a system that deduces implicit events from explicitly expressed events by using inference rules that encode domain knowledge. We evaluated the system with the inference module on three tasks: First, when tested against a corpus with manually annotated events, the inference module of our system contributes 53.2% of correct extractions, but does not cause any incorrect results. Second, the system overall reproduces 33.1% of the transcription regulatory events contained in RegulonDB (up to 85.0% precision) and the inference module is required for 93.8% of the reproduced events. Third, we applied the system with minimum adaptations to the identification of cell activity regulation events, confirming that the inference improves the performance of the system also on this task.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our research shows that the inference based on domain knowledge plays a significant role in extracting complex events from text. This approach has great potential in recognizing the complex concepts of such biomedical ontologies as Gene Ontology in the literature.</p

Facts from Text—Is Text Mining Ready to Deliver?

The mining of information from scientific literature using computational tools has tremendous potential for knowledge discovery, but how close are we to realizing this potential

Measuring prediction capacity of individual verbs for the identification of protein interactions

AbstractMotivation: The identification of events such as protein–protein interactions (PPIs) from the scientific literature is a complex task. One of the reasons is that there is no formal syntax to denote such relations in the scientific literature. Nonetheless, it is important to understand such relational event representations to improve information extraction solutions (e.g., for gene regulatory events).In this study, we analyze publicly available protein interaction corpora (AIMed, BioInfer, BioCreAtIve II) to determine the scope of verbs used to denote protein interactions and to measure their predictive capacity for the identification of PPI events. Our analysis is based on syntactical language patterns. This restriction has the advantage that the verb mention is used as the independent variable in the experiments enabling comparability of results in the usage of the verbs. The initial selection of verbs has been generated from a systematic analysis of the scientific literature and existing corpora for PPIs.We distinguish modifying interactions (MIs) such as posttranslational modifications (PTMs) from non-modifying interactions (NMIs) and assumed that MIs have a higher predictive capacity due to stronger scientific evidence proving the interaction. We found that MIs are less frequent in the corpus but can be extracted at the same precision levels as PPIs. A significant portion of correct PPI reportings in the BioCreAtIve II corpus use the verb “associate”, which semantically does not prove a relation.The performance of every monitored verb is listed and allows the selection of specific verbs to improve the performance of PPI extraction solutions. Programmatic access to the text processing modules is available online (www.ebi.ac.uk/webservices/whatizit/info.jsf) and the full analysis of Medline abstracts will be made through the Web pages of the Rebholz group

Improving Disease Gene Prioritization by Comparing the Semantic Similarity of Phenotypes in Mice with Those of Human Diseases

Despite considerable progress in understanding the molecular origins of hereditary human diseases, the molecular basis of several thousand genetic diseases still remains unknown. High-throughput phenotype studies are underway to systematically assess the phenotype outcome of targeted mutations in model organisms. Thus, comparing the similarity between experimentally identified phenotypes and the phenotypes associated with human diseases can be used to suggest causal genes underlying a disease. In this manuscript, we present a method for disease gene prioritization based on comparing phenotypes of mouse models with those of human diseases. For this purpose, either human disease phenotypes are “translated” into a mouse-based representation (using the Mammalian Phenotype Ontology), or mouse phenotypes are “translated” into a human-based representation (using the Human Phenotype Ontology). We apply a measure of semantic similarity and rank experimentally identified phenotypes in mice with respect to their phenotypic similarity to human diseases. Our method is evaluated on manually curated and experimentally verified gene–disease associations for human and for mouse. We evaluate our approach using a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis and obtain an area under the ROC curve of up to . Furthermore, we are able to confirm previous results that the Vax1 gene is involved in Septo-Optic Dysplasia and suggest Gdf6 and Marcks as further potential candidates. Our method significantly outperforms previous phenotype-based approaches of prioritizing gene–disease associations. To enable the adaption of our method to the analysis of other phenotype data, our software and prioritization results are freely available under a BSD licence at http://code.google.com/p/phenomeblast/wiki/CAMP. Furthermore, our method has been integrated in PhenomeNET and the results can be explored using the PhenomeBrowser at http://phenomebrowser.net

Quantitative comparison of mapping methods between Human and Mammalian Phenotype Ontology

Researchers use animal studies to better understand human diseases. In recent years, large-scale phenotype studies such as Phenoscape and EuroPhenome have been initiated to identify genetic causes of a species' phenome. Species-specific phenotype ontologies are required to capture and report about all findings and to automatically infer results relevant to human diseases. The integration of the different phenotype ontologies into a coherent framework is necessary to achieve interoperability for cross-species research. Here, we investigate the quality and completeness of two different methods to align the Human Phenotype Ontology and the Mammalian Phenotype Ontology. The first method combines lexical matching with inference over the ontologies' taxonomic structures, while the second method uses a mapping algorithm based on the formal definitions of the ontologies. Neither method could map all concepts. Despite the formal definitions method provides mappings for more concepts than does the lexical matching method, it does not outperform the lexical matching in a biological use case. Our results suggest that combining both approaches will yield a better mappings in terms of completeness, specificity and application purposes