Abstract
Background: Propositional representations of biomedical knowledge are a critical component of most aspects of semantic mining in biomedicine. However, the proper set of propositions has yet to be determined. Recently, the PASBio project proposed a set of propositions and argument structures for biomedical verbs. This initial set of representations presents an opportunity for evaluating the suitability of predicate-argument structures as a scheme for representing verbal semantics in the biomedical domain. Here, we quantitatively evaluate several dimensions of the initial PASBio propositional structure repository. Results: We propose a number of metrics and heuristics related to arity, role labelling, argument realization, and corpus coverage for evaluating large-scale predicate-argument structure proposals. We evaluate the metrics and heuristics by applying them to PASBio 1.0. Conclusion: PASBio demonstrates the suitability of predicate-argument structures for representing aspects of the semantics of biomedical verbs. Metrics related to theta-criterion violations and to the distribution of arguments are able to detect flaws in semantic representations, given a set of predicate-argument structures and a relatively small corpus annotated with them. © 2006 Cohen and Hunter; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Cohen, K. B., & Hunter, L. (2006). A critical review of PASBio’s argument structures for biomedical verbs. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings (Vol. 177). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-7-S3-S5
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.