Exploring the measurement of markedness and its relationship with other linguistic variables

Antonym pair members can be differentiated by each word's markedness-that distinction attributable to the presence or absence of features at morphological or semantic levels. Morphologically marked words incorporate their unmarked counterpart with additional morphs (e.g., "unlucky" vs. "lucky"); properties used to determine semantically marked words (e.g., "short" vs. "long") are less clearly defined. Despite extensive theoretical scrutiny, the lexical properties of markedness have received scant empirical study. The current paper employs an antonym sequencing approach to measure markedness: establishing markedness probabilities for individual words and evaluating their relationship with other lexical properties (e.g., length, frequency, valence). Regression analyses reveal that markedness probability is, as predicted, related to affixation and also strongly related to valence. Our results support the suggestion that antonym sequence is reflected in discourse, and further analysis demonstrates that markedness probabilities, derived from the antonym sequencing task, reflect the ordering of antonyms within natural language. In line with the Pollyanna Hypothesis, we argue that markedness is closely related to valence; language users demonstrate a tendency to present words evaluated positively ahead of those evaluated negatively if given the choice. Future research should consider the relationship of markedness and valence, and the influence of contextual information in determining which member of an antonym pair is marked or unmarked within discourse

Gene and protein nomenclature in public databases

BACKGROUND: Frequently, several alternative names are in use for biological objects such as genes and proteins. Applications like manual literature search, automated text-mining, named entity identification, gene/protein annotation, and linking of knowledge from different information sources require the knowledge of all used names referring to a given gene or protein. Various organism-specific or general public databases aim at organizing knowledge about genes and proteins. These databases can be used for deriving gene and protein name dictionaries. So far, little is known about the differences between databases in terms of size, ambiguities and overlap. RESULTS: We compiled five gene and protein name dictionaries for each of the five model organisms (yeast, fly, mouse, rat, and human) from different organism-specific and general public databases. We analyzed the degree of ambiguity of gene and protein names within and between dictionaries, to a lexicon of common English words and domain-related non-gene terms, and we compared different data sources in terms of size of extracted dictionaries and overlap of synonyms between those. The study shows that the number of genes/proteins and synonyms covered in individual databases varies significantly for a given organism, and that the degree of ambiguity of synonyms varies significantly between different organisms. Furthermore, it shows that, despite considerable efforts of co-curation, the overlap of synonyms in different data sources is rather moderate and that the degree of ambiguity of gene names with common English words and domain-related non-gene terms varies depending on the considered organism. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, these results indicate that the combination of data contained in different databases allows the generation of gene and protein name dictionaries that contain significantly more used names than dictionaries obtained from individual data sources. Furthermore, curation of combined dictionaries considerably increases size and decreases ambiguity. The entries of the curated synonym dictionary are available for manual querying, editing, and PubMed- or Google-search via the ProThesaurus-wiki. For automated querying via custom software, we offer a web service and an exemplary client application

Investigating heterogeneous protein annotations toward cross-corpora utilization

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The number of corpora, collections of structured texts, has been increasing, as a result of the growing interest in the application of natural language processing methods to biological texts. Many named entity recognition (NER) systems have been developed based on these corpora. However, in the biomedical community, there is yet no general consensus regarding named entity annotation; thus, the resources are largely incompatible, and it is difficult to compare the performance of systems developed on resources that were divergently annotated. On the other hand, from a practical application perspective, it is desirable to utilize as many existing annotated resources as possible, because annotation is costly. Thus, it becomes a task of interest to integrate the heterogeneous annotations in these resources.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We explore the potential sources of incompatibility among gene and protein annotations that were made for three common corpora: GENIA, GENETAG and AIMed. To show the inconsistency in the corpora annotations, we first tackle the incompatibility problem caused by corpus integration, and we quantitatively measure the effect of this incompatibility on protein mention recognition. We find that the F-score performance declines tremendously when training with integrated data, instead of training with pure data; in some cases, the performance drops nearly 12%. This degradation may be caused by the newly added heterogeneous annotations, and cannot be fixed without an understanding of the heterogeneities that exist among the corpora. Motivated by the result of this preliminary experiment, we further qualitatively analyze a number of possible sources for these differences, and investigate the factors that would explain the inconsistencies, by performing a series of well-designed experiments. Our analyses indicate that incompatibilities in the gene/protein annotations exist mainly in the following four areas: the boundary annotation conventions, the scope of the entities of interest, the distribution of annotated entities, and the ratio of overlap between annotated entities. We further suggest that almost all of the incompatibilities can be prevented by properly considering the four aspects aforementioned.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our analysis covers the key similarities and dissimilarities that exist among the diverse gene/protein corpora. This paper serves to improve our understanding of the differences in the three studied corpora, which can then lead to a better understanding of the performance of protein recognizers that are based on the corpora.</p

A new benchmark dataset with production methodology for short text semantic similarity algorithms

This research presents a new benchmark dataset for evaluating Short Text Semantic Similarity (STSS) measurement algorithms and the methodology used for its creation. The power of the dataset is evaluated by using it to compare two established algorithms, STASIS and Latent Semantic Analysis. This dataset focuses on measures for use in Conversational Agents; other potential applications include email processing and data mining of social networks. Such applications involve integrating the STSS algorithm in a complex system, but STSS algorithms must be evaluated in their own right and compared with others for their effectiveness before systems integration. Semantic similarity is an artifact of human perception; therefore its evaluation is inherently empirical and requires benchmark datasets derived from human similarity ratings. The new dataset of 64 sentence pairs, STSS-131, has been designed to meet these requirements drawing on a range of resources from traditional grammar to cognitive neuroscience. The human ratings are obtained from a set of trials using new and improved experimental methods, with validated measures and statistics. The results illustrate the increased challenge and the potential longevity of the STSS-131 dataset as the Gold Standard for future STSS algorithm evaluation. © 2013 ACM 1550-4875/2013/12-ART17 15.00

Of truth and pathways: chasing bits of information through myriads of articles

Knowledge on interactions between molecules in living cells is indispensable for theoretical analysis and practical applications in modern genomics and molecular biology. Building such networks relies on the assumption that the correct molecular interactions are known or can be identified by reading a few research articles. However, this assumption does not necessarily hold, as truth is rather an emerging property based on many potentially conflicting facts. This paper explores the processes of knowledge generation and publishing in the molecular biology literature using modelling and analysis of real molecular interaction data. The data analysed in this article were automatically extracted from 50000 research articles in molecular biology using a computer system called GeneWays containing a natural language processing module. The paper indicates that truthfulness of statements is associated in the minds of scientists with the relative importance (connectedness) of substances under study, revealing a potential selection bias in the reporting of research results. Aiming at understanding the statistical properties of the life cycle of biological facts reported in research articles, we formulate a stochastic model describing generation and propagation of knowledge about molecular interactions through scientific publications. We hope that in the future such a model can be useful for automatically producing consensus views of molecular interaction data

Probabilistic inference of molecular networks from noisy data sources

Information on molecular networks, such as networks of interacting proteins, comes from diverse sources that contain remarkable differences in distribution and quantity of errors. Here, we introduce a probabilistic model useful for predicting protein interactions from heterogeneous data sources. The model describes stochastic generation of protein-protein interaction networks with real-world properties, as well as generation of two heterogeneous sources of protein-interaction information: research results automatically extracted from the literature and yeast two-hybrid experiments. Based on the domain composition of proteins, we use the model to predict protein interactions for pairs of proteins for which no experimental data are available. We further explore the prediction limits, given experimental data that cover only part of the underlying protein networks. This approach can be extended naturally to include other types of biological data sources