English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Conference Paper

Knowledge Discovery on Incompatibility of Medical Concepts

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons137149

Grycner,  Adam
Databases and Information Systems, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

Ernst,  Patrick
Databases and Information Systems, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons45496

Siu,  Amy
Databases and Information Systems, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons45720

Weikum,  Gerhard
Databases and Information Systems, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Grycner, A., Ernst, P., Siu, A., & Weikum, G. (2013). Knowledge Discovery on Incompatibility of Medical Concepts. In A. Gelbukh (Ed.), Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing (pp. 114-125). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-37247-6_10.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0015-1A54-F
Abstract
This work proposes a method for automatically discovering incompatible medical concepts in text corpora. The approach is distantly supervised based on a seed set of incompatible concept pairs like symptoms or conditions that rule each other out. Two concepts are considered incompatible if their definitions match a template, and contain an antonym pair derived from WordNet, VerbOcean, or a hand-crafted lexicon. Our method creates templates from dependency parse trees of definitional texts, using seed pairs. The templates are applied to a text corpus, and the resulting candidate pairs are categorized and ranked by statistical measures. Since experiments show that the results face semantic ambiguity problems, we further cluster the results into different categories. We applied this approach to the concepts in Unified Medical Language System, Human Phenotype Ontology, and Mammalian Phenotype Ontology. Out of 77,496 definitions, 1,958 concept pairs were detected as incompatible with an average precision of 0.80.