ctakes-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Dligach <dmitriy.dlig...@childrens.harvard.edu>
Subject Re: implementation of << affects>> relation
Date Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:30:42 GMT
Hi Samir,

Before we talk any further, I'd like to mention that the relation 
extractor is a machine learning system. You can read more about it here:

http://jamia.bmj.com/content/early/2013/10/03/amiajnl-2013-001766.full

So if you want to extend it, you'll need some data that annotates the 
"affects" relation. Do you have this kind of data?

Dima

On 10/07/2013 05:38 PM, samir chabou wrote:
> Hi Pei, Dimitry and any other that may help on
> this …
> Currently I’m using cTAKES to semantically   analyze
> a medical question and then try to map it to PICO structure based on different
> medical type (relations, NE) identified in the question. I’m interested in extending
> the ctakes-relation-extractor project in order to handle the << affects>>
relation of the UMLS
> semantic network.
> First of all is that possible?
> If yes,
> what is the involvement?  My plan is:
> 1)      To proceed with the implementation locally and
> then check it in to be validated and deployed later (if it’s approved).
> 2)      How ever I’m not very familiar with the subject
> matter on how UMLS semantic relations are implemented in cTAKES. Is the << affects>>
> relation will follow the same logic than LocationOfRelation  and DegreeOfLocation?  Which
kind of IdentifiedAnnotation that the <<
> affects>> relation will relates?  It
> would be very appreciated if some one guides me on this matter.
>   
> Thanks Samir

-- 
Dmitriy Dligach, PhD
Research Fellow
Children's Hospital Informatics Program
Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School
(617) 919-3596


Mime
View raw message