Neural sentence embedding models for semantic similarity estimation in the biomedical domain
This work addresses the problem of automating semantic similarity assessment for biomedical researchers, though it is incremental as it builds on existing neural embedding techniques.
The study tackled semantic similarity estimation in biomedical sentences by training neural embedding models on PubMed data, achieving a Pearson correlation of 0.819 with an unsupervised model and 0.871 with a supervised model, outperforming previous state-of-the-art methods on a benchmark set.
BACKGROUND: In this study, we investigated the efficacy of current state-of-the-art neural sentence embedding models for semantic similarity estimation of sentences from biomedical literature. We trained different neural embedding models on 1.7 million articles from the PubMed Open Access dataset, and evaluated them based on a biomedical benchmark set containing 100 sentence pairs annotated by human experts and a smaller contradiction subset derived from the original benchmark set. RESULTS: With a Pearson correlation of 0.819, our best unsupervised model based on the Paragraph Vector Distributed Memory algorithm outperforms previous state-of-the-art results achieved on the BIOSSES biomedical benchmark set. Moreover, our proposed supervised model that combines different string-based similarity metrics with a neural embedding model surpasses previous ontology-dependent supervised state-of-the-art approaches in terms of Pearson's r (r=0.871) on the biomedical benchmark set. In contrast to the promising results for the original benchmark, we found our best models' performance on the smaller contradiction subset to be poor. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we highlighted the value of neural network-based models for semantic similarity estimation in the biomedical domain by showing that they can keep up with and even surpass previous state-of-the-art approaches for semantic similarity estimation that depend on the availability of laboriously curated ontologies when evaluated on a biomedical benchmark set. Capturing contradictions and negations in biomedical sentences, however, emerged as an essential area for further work.