Yang, Hui; Nenadic, Goran and Keane, John A.
PDF (Version of Record)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
Linking gene and protein names mentioned in the literature to unique identifiers in referent genomic databases is an essential step in accessing and integrating knowledge in the biomedical domain. However, it remains a challenging task due to lexical and terminological variation, and ambiguity of gene name mentions in documents. We present a generic and effective rule-based approach to link gene mentions in the literature to referent genomic databases, where pre-processing of both gene synonyms in the databases and gene mentions in text are first applied. The mapping method employs a cascaded approach, which combines exact, exact-like and token-based approximate matching by using flexible representations of a gene synonym dictionary and gene mentions generated during the pre-processing phase. We also consider multi-gene name mentions and permutation of components in gene names. A systematic evaluation of the suggested methods has identified steps that are beneficial for improving either precision or recall in gene name identification. The results of the experiments on the BioCreAtIvE2 data sets (identification of human gene names) demonstrated that our methods achieved highly encouraging results with F-measure of up to 81.20%.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Copyright Holders:||2007 Biomedical Informatics Publishing Group|
|Keywords:||gene name normalisation; gene name mapping; lexical variability; text mining|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Mathematics, Computing and Technology > Computing & Communications
Mathematics, Computing and Technology
|Interdisciplinary Research Centre:||Centre for Research in Computing (CRC)|
|Depositing User:||Hui Yang|
|Date Deposited:||30 Jan 2009 01:41|
|Last Modified:||23 Feb 2016 20:38|
|Share this page:|
► Automated document suggestions from open access sources
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.