149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19141332)
1. Porting a lexicalized-grammar parser to the biomedical domain.
Rimell L; Clark S
J Biomed Inform; 2009 Oct; 42(5):852-65. PubMed ID: 19141332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Domain adaption of parsing for operative notes.
Wang Y; Pakhomov S; Ryan JO; Melton GB
J Biomed Inform; 2015 Apr; 54():1-9. PubMed ID: 25661593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Parsing clinical text: how good are the state-of-the-art parsers?
Jiang M; Huang Y; Fan JW; Tang B; Denny J; Xu H
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2015; 15 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S2. PubMed ID: 26045009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Developing a corpus of clinical notes manually annotated for part-of-speech.
Pakhomov SV; Coden A; Chute CG
Int J Med Inform; 2006 Jun; 75(6):418-29. PubMed ID: 16169769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Bidirectional incremental parsing for automatic pathway identification with combinatory categorial grammar.
Park JC; Kim HS; Kim JJ
Pac Symp Biocomput; 2001; ():396-407. PubMed ID: 11262958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Towards automated processing of clinical Finnish: sublanguage analysis and a rule-based parser.
Laippala V; Ginter F; Pyysalo S; Salakoski T
Int J Med Inform; 2009 Dec; 78(12):e7-12. PubMed ID: 19299195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of two dependency parsers on biomedical corpus targeted at protein-protein interactions.
Pyysalo S; Ginter F; Pahikkala T; Boberg J; Järvinen J; Salakoski T
Int J Med Inform; 2006 Jun; 75(6):430-42. PubMed ID: 16099201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Lexical adaptation of link grammar to the biomedical sublanguage: a comparative evaluation of three approaches.
Pyysalo S; Salakoski T; Aubin S; Nazarenko A
BMC Bioinformatics; 2006 Nov; 7 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):S2. PubMed ID: 17134475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A token centric part-of-speech tagger for biomedical text.
Barrett N; Weber-Jahnke J
Artif Intell Med; 2014 May; 61(1):11-20. PubMed ID: 24811994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Feature generation and representations for protein-protein interaction classification.
Lan M; Tan CL; Su J
J Biomed Inform; 2009 Oct; 42(5):866-72. PubMed ID: 19616641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of character-level and part of speech features for name recognition in biomedical texts.
Collier N; Takeuchi K
J Biomed Inform; 2004 Dec; 37(6):423-35. PubMed ID: 15542016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Semantic Role Labeling of Clinical Text: Comparing Syntactic Parsers and Features.
Zhang Y; Jiang M; Wang J; Xu H
AMIA Annu Symp Proc; 2016; 2016():1283-1292. PubMed ID: 28269926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A method for indexing biomedical resources over the internet.
de la Calle G; Garcia-Remesal M; Maojo V
Stud Health Technol Inform; 2008; 136():163-8. PubMed ID: 18487725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Measures of semantic similarity and relatedness in the biomedical domain.
Pedersen T; Pakhomov SV; Patwardhan S; Chute CG
J Biomed Inform; 2007 Jun; 40(3):288-99. PubMed ID: 16875881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Really, is medical sublanguage that different? Experimental counter-evidence from tagging medical and newspaper corpora.
Wermter J; Hahn U
Stud Health Technol Inform; 2004; 107(Pt 1):560-4. PubMed ID: 15360875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Acquiring meaning for French medical terminology: contribution of morphosemantics.
Namer F; Zweigenbaum P
Stud Health Technol Inform; 2004; 107(Pt 1):535-9. PubMed ID: 15360870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Dependency parsing of biomedical text with BERT.
Kanerva J; Ginter F; Pyysalo S
BMC Bioinformatics; 2020 Dec; 21(Suppl 23):580. PubMed ID: 33372589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Feature selection techniques for maximum entropy based biomedical named entity recognition.
Saha SK; Sarkar S; Mitra P
J Biomed Inform; 2009 Oct; 42(5):905-11. PubMed ID: 19535010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Hindi CCGbank: A CCG treebank from the Hindi dependency treebank.
Ambati BR; Deoskar T; Steedman M
Lang Resour Eval; 2018; 52(1):67-100. PubMed ID: 31983909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The interaction of domain knowledge and linguistic structure in natural language processing: interpreting hypernymic propositions in biomedical text.
Rindflesch TC; Fiszman M
J Biomed Inform; 2003 Dec; 36(6):462-77. PubMed ID: 14759819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
