-
Ling, X.; Jiang, J.; He, X.; Mei, Q.; Zhai, C.; Schatz, B.: Generating gene summaries from biomedical literature : a study of semi-structured summarization (2007)
0.01
0.0065351077 = product of:
0.026140431 = sum of:
0.026140431 = product of:
0.052280862 = sum of:
0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052280862 = score(doc=946,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 946, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=946)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Most knowledge accumulated through scientific discoveries in genomics and related biomedical disciplines is buried in the vast amount of biomedical literature. Since understanding gene regulations is fundamental to biomedical research, summarizing all the existing knowledge about a gene based on literature is highly desirable to help biologists digest the literature. In this paper, we present a study of methods for automatically generating gene summaries from biomedical literature. Unlike most existing work on automatic text summarization, in which the generated summary is often a list of extracted sentences, we propose to generate a semi-structured summary which consists of sentences covering specific semantic aspects of a gene. Such a semi-structured summary is more appropriate for describing genes and poses special challenges for automatic text summarization. We propose a two-stage approach to generate such a summary for a given gene - first retrieving articles about a gene and then extracting sentences for each specified semantic aspect. We address the issue of gene name variation in the first stage and propose several different methods for sentence extraction in the second stage. We evaluate the proposed methods using a test set with 20 genes. Experiment results show that the proposed methods can generate useful semi-structured gene summaries automatically from biomedical literature, and our proposed methods outperform general purpose summarization methods. Among all the proposed methods for sentence extraction, a probabilistic language modeling approach that models gene context performs the best.
-
Wei, F.; Li, W.; Lu, Q.; He, Y.: Applying two-level reinforcement ranking in query-oriented multidocument summarization (2009)
0.01
0.0065351077 = product of:
0.026140431 = sum of:
0.026140431 = product of:
0.052280862 = sum of:
0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 3120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052280862 = score(doc=3120,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 3120, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3120)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Sentence ranking is the issue of most concern in document summarization today. While traditional feature-based approaches evaluate sentence significance and rank the sentences relying on the features that are particularly designed to characterize the different aspects of the individual sentences, the newly emerging graph-based ranking algorithms (such as the PageRank-like algorithms) recursively compute sentence significance using the global information in a text graph that links sentences together. In general, the existing PageRank-like algorithms can model well the phenomena that a sentence is important if it is linked by many other important sentences. Or they are capable of modeling the mutual reinforcement among the sentences in the text graph. However, when dealing with multidocument summarization these algorithms often assemble a set of documents into one large file. The document dimension is totally ignored. In this article we present a framework to model the two-level mutual reinforcement among sentences as well as documents. Under this framework we design and develop a novel ranking algorithm such that the document reinforcement is taken into account in the process of sentence ranking. The convergence issue is examined. We also explore an interesting and important property of the proposed algorithm. When evaluated on the DUC 2005 and 2006 query-oriented multidocument summarization datasets, significant results are achieved.
-
Vanderwende, L.; Suzuki, H.; Brockett, J.M.; Nenkova, A.: Beyond SumBasic : task-focused summarization with sentence simplification and lexical expansion (2007)
0.00
0.004707306 = product of:
0.018829225 = sum of:
0.018829225 = product of:
0.03765845 = sum of:
0.03765845 = weight(_text_:22 in 948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03765845 = score(doc=948,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 948, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=948)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- In recent years, there has been increased interest in topic-focused multi-document summarization. In this task, automatic summaries are produced in response to a specific information request, or topic, stated by the user. The system we have designed to accomplish this task comprises four main components: a generic extractive summarization system, a topic-focusing component, sentence simplification, and lexical expansion of topic words. This paper details each of these components, together with experiments designed to quantify their individual contributions. We include an analysis of our results on two large datasets commonly used to evaluate task-focused summarization, the DUC2005 and DUC2006 datasets, using automatic metrics. Additionally, we include an analysis of our results on the DUC2006 task according to human evaluation metrics. In the human evaluation of system summaries compared to human summaries, i.e., the Pyramid method, our system ranked first out of 22 systems in terms of overall mean Pyramid score; and in the human evaluation of summary responsiveness to the topic, our system ranked third out of 35 systems.
-
Wu, Y.-f.B.; Li, Q.; Bot, R.S.; Chen, X.: Finding nuggets in documents : a machine learning approach (2006)
0.00
0.0039227554 = product of:
0.015691021 = sum of:
0.015691021 = product of:
0.031382043 = sum of:
0.031382043 = weight(_text_:22 in 5290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031382043 = score(doc=5290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046325076 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5290, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5290)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 17:25:48
