File size: 102,424 Bytes
6fa4bc9 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 |
{
"paper_id": "2021",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T01:07:32.105513Z"
},
"title": "Measuring the relative importance of full text sections for information retrieval from scientific literature",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Lana",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yeganova",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "National Institutes of Health (NIH)",
"location": {
"country": "USA"
}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Won",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "National Institutes of Health (NIH)",
"location": {
"country": "USA"
}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Donald",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Comeau",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "National Institutes of Health (NIH)",
"location": {
"country": "USA"
}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"John"
],
"last": "Wilbur",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "National Institutes of Health (NIH)",
"location": {
"country": "USA"
}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Zhiyong",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "National Institutes of Health (NIH)",
"location": {
"country": "USA"
}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "With the growing availability of full-text articles, integrating abstracts and full texts of documents into a unified representation is essential for comprehensive search of scientific literature. However, previous studies have shown that na\u00efvely merging abstracts with full texts of articles does not consistently yield better performance. Balancing the contribution of query terms appearing in the abstract and in sections of different importance in full text articles remains a challenge both with traditional bag-of-words IR approaches and for neural retrieval methods. In this work we establish the connection between the BM25 score of a query term appearing in a section of a full text document and the probability of that document being clicked or identified as relevant. Probability is computed using Pool Adjacent Violators (PAV), an isotonic regression algorithm, providing a maximum likelihood estimate based on the observed data. Using this probabilistic transformation of BM25 scores we show an improved performance on the PubMed Click dataset developed and presented in this study, as well as on the 2007 TREC Genomics collection.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "2021",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "With the growing availability of full-text articles, integrating abstracts and full texts of documents into a unified representation is essential for comprehensive search of scientific literature. However, previous studies have shown that na\u00efvely merging abstracts with full texts of articles does not consistently yield better performance. Balancing the contribution of query terms appearing in the abstract and in sections of different importance in full text articles remains a challenge both with traditional bag-of-words IR approaches and for neural retrieval methods. In this work we establish the connection between the BM25 score of a query term appearing in a section of a full text document and the probability of that document being clicked or identified as relevant. Probability is computed using Pool Adjacent Violators (PAV), an isotonic regression algorithm, providing a maximum likelihood estimate based on the observed data. Using this probabilistic transformation of BM25 scores we show an improved performance on the PubMed Click dataset developed and presented in this study, as well as on the 2007 TREC Genomics collection.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "PubMed (https://pubmed.gov) is a search engine providing access to a collection of more than 30 million biomedical abstracts. Of these, about 5 million have full text available in PubMed Central (PMC; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc). Millions of users search PubMed and PMC daily (Fiorini, Canese, et al., 2018) . However, it is not currently possible for a user to simultaneously query the contents of both databases with a single integrated search.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 195,
"end": 200,
"text": "(PMC;",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 282,
"end": 313,
"text": "(Fiorini, Canese, et al., 2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "With the growing availability of full-text articles, integrating these two rich resources to allow a unified retrieval becomes an essential goal, which has potential for improving information retrieval and the user search experience (Fiorini, Leaman, Lipman, & Lu, 2018) . An obvious benefit is improving the handling of queries that produce limited or no retrieval in PubMed. In many instances, incorporating full text information can yield useful retrieval results. For example, the query cd40 fmf retrieves no articles in PubMed, but finds 60 articles in PMC discussing protein cd40 and a computational technique of flow microfluorometry (FMF) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 233,
"end": 270,
"text": "(Fiorini, Leaman, Lipman, & Lu, 2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 641,
"end": 646,
"text": "(FMF)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "A number of studies have pointed out the benefits of full text for a range of text mining tasks (Cejuela et al., 2014; Cohen, Johnson, Verspoor, Roeder, & Hunter, 2010; J. Kim, Kim, Han, & Rebholz-Schuhmann, 2015; Westergaard, Staerfeldt, T\u00f8nsberg, Jensen , & Brunak, 2018) and demonstrated improved performance on named entity recognition, relation extraction, and other natural language processing tasks (Wei, Allot, Leaman, & Lu, 2019) . For information retrieval, however, combining the full text of some papers with only the abstracts of others is not a trivial endeavor. Na\u00efvely merging the body text of articles with abstract data, naturally increases the recall, but at a cost in precision, generally degrading the overall quality of the combined search (W. Kim, Yeganova, Comeau, Wilbur, & Lu, 2018; Jimmy Lin, 2009) . This can be explained by several complexities associated with full texts, such as multiple subtopics often being discussed in a fulllength article or information being mentioned in the form of conjecture or a proposal for future work. In addition, not every record matching the query is focused on the query subject, as query words may be mentioned in passing, which is more common in full text. Another challenge in incorporating full text in retrieval is merging sources of information with different characteristics: the abstract, generally a concise summary on the topic of the study, versus a lengthy detailed description provided in full text. To address that, recent studies have attempted to use full text in a more targeted way -by performing paragraph-level retrieval (Hersh, Cohen, Ruslen, & Roberts, 2007; Jimmy Lin, 2009) , passage-level retrieval (Sarrouti & El Alaoui, 2017) or sentencelevel retrieval (Allot et al., 2019; Blanco & Zaragoza, 2010) . LitSense (Allot et al., 2019) , for example, searches over a half-billion sentences from the combined text of 30+ million PubMed records and \u223c3 million open access full-text articles in PMC.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 96,
"end": 118,
"text": "(Cejuela et al., 2014;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 119,
"end": 168,
"text": "Cohen, Johnson, Verspoor, Roeder, & Hunter, 2010;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 169,
"end": 213,
"text": "J. Kim, Kim, Han, & Rebholz-Schuhmann, 2015;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 214,
"end": 273,
"text": "Westergaard, Staerfeldt, T\u00f8nsberg, Jensen , & Brunak, 2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 406,
"end": 438,
"text": "(Wei, Allot, Leaman, & Lu, 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF22"
},
{
"start": 766,
"end": 808,
"text": "Kim, Yeganova, Comeau, Wilbur, & Lu, 2018;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 809,
"end": 825,
"text": "Jimmy Lin, 2009)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1606,
"end": 1645,
"text": "(Hersh, Cohen, Ruslen, & Roberts, 2007;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
},
{
"start": 1646,
"end": 1662,
"text": "Jimmy Lin, 2009)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1689,
"end": 1717,
"text": "(Sarrouti & El Alaoui, 2017)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
},
{
"start": 1745,
"end": 1765,
"text": "(Allot et al., 2019;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 1766,
"end": 1790,
"text": "Blanco & Zaragoza, 2010)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 1802,
"end": 1822,
"text": "(Allot et al., 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Towards the overarching goal of improving PubMed document retrieval by incorporating the full texts of articles in PMC, in this work we lay the groundwork by studying strategies for integrating full text information with abstract for one query token at a time. We choose to use BM25, a classical term weighting approach, as a base token score. We, however, observe that token BM25 scores are not directly comparable between the sections of a full text article -the same BM25 score may have a different significance depending on the section. To address variable significance of sections, we propose converting BM25 section scores into probabilities of a document being clicked and using these probabilities to compute the overall token score. To summarize, given a single token in a query, we 1) define how to compute section scores, 2) examine the relative importance of different sections in the full text, and 3) study how to combine section scores from a document.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "To examine these questions, we use two evaluation datasets. One is a standard TREC dataset frequently used for evaluating ad-hoc information retrieval. The second is a dataset we created based on PubMed user click information. The dataset is constructed from PubMed queries and clicks under the assumption that a clicked document is relevant to a user issuing a query. The dataset is used for both training and evaluation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Neural retrieval models have been extensively studies in recent years in the context of Information Retrieval (Guo et al., 2020; Jimmy Lin et al., 2021) . However, despite significant advances, they show no consistent improvement over traditional bag of words IR methods (Chen & Hersh, 2020; Zhang et al., 2020) . BM25 remains in the core of most production search systems, including Lucene's search engine and PubMed. In addition, many relevance ranking algorithms rely on BM25 as a preliminary retrieval step, followed by reranking of the top scoring documents (Fiorini, Canese, et al., 2018) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 110,
"end": 128,
"text": "(Guo et al., 2020;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
},
{
"start": 129,
"end": 152,
"text": "Jimmy Lin et al., 2021)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 271,
"end": 291,
"text": "(Chen & Hersh, 2020;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 292,
"end": 311,
"text": "Zhang et al., 2020)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 563,
"end": 594,
"text": "(Fiorini, Canese, et al., 2018)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In the next section, we describe the evaluation datasets, and lay out a retrieval framework for studying the problem at hand. Then, we describe our approach of converting the raw BM25 section score into the probability of document relevance. Such probabilities are comparable across the sections of full text documents, including the abstract. In section 4 we learn how to combine them in a way which accounts for the relative importance of sections. Results are presented in section 5, followed by the Discussion and Conclusions section.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Retrieval methods are generally evaluated based on how the retrieval output compares to a gold standard. A gold standard is a set of records judged for relevance to a query that provides a benchmark against which to measure the quality of search results. This approach is used at the annual Text Retrieval Conference (TREC), run by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (Voorhees, 2001) . NIST develops a list of queries, called topics, and provides large test collections and uniform scoring procedures. The difficulty with this approach is that a gold standard is created by human experts which makes the evaluation expensive, time consuming, and therefore not available for large scale experiments involving thousands of queries. To compare different retrieval approaches without a manually created gold standard we describe semi-automatically created test data based on indirect human judgements that can be utilized in our setting. The PubMed User Click dataset is created based on retrospective analysis of PubMed queries under the assumption that a clicked document is relevant to a user issuing a query. In our study we use both, the TREC 2007 Genomics and PubMed user click datasets.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 390,
"end": 406,
"text": "(Voorhees, 2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "TREC 2007 Genomics dataset. The Genomics dataset (Hersh et al., 2007) consists of 36 queries, called topics, and 162,259 full-text articles from Highwire Press (http:// highwire.stanford.edu/). 160K of these documents were successfully mapped to their corresponding PubMed Identifiers (PMIDs) and are the basis of our experiments. Each document is split into legal spans corresponding to paragraphs in the articles, amounting to over 12 million legal spans. For each of the 36 topics human relevance judgements are provided on the paragraph level. Following previous studies, a document is labeled positive, if it contains at least 1 paragraph judged to be relevant to the query.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 49,
"end": 69,
"text": "(Hersh et al., 2007)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The query topics are presented in the form of biological questions, such as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "What toxicities are associated with etidronate? What signs or symptoms are caused by human parvovirus infection? These question-like topic formulations contain generic words, that are not representative of the specific information need of a user, such as \"what\", \"associated\", etc. We applied a combination of frequency-based techniques and manual validation to filter these stop words out and used the remaining 165 content terms for our analysis.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "PubMed Click Dataset. The dataset is constructed from PubMed queries and clicks, under the general assumption that a clicked document is relevant to a user issuing a query.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The presence of a query token in the title is known to present a strong signal associated with a document being clicked (W. Kim et al., 2018; Resnick, 1961) . Users searching PubMed only see the title of the document on the DocSum page and not the abstract or the full text. If query tokens do not appear in the title, then predictions on the abstract or the full text can only be effective to the extent they predict something about the title that makes the user choose to click. This is a weaker signal and would be obscured by query words appearing in a title. To remove this bias, we only consider documents for which none of the query tokens appear in the title. Note that since the document is retrieved via PubMed, all query tokens must be found in the title, abstract or article citation information. We collect only retrieved documents for which none of the query tokens appear in the title and all of them appear in the abstract.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 124,
"end": 141,
"text": "Kim et al., 2018;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 142,
"end": 156,
"text": "Resnick, 1961)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Clicked documents are assumed to be relevant to the user issuing the query, and we label a clicked document as a positive instance. We further assumed that documents displayed above the clicked document were seen by the user and rejected. These documents are labeled negative. Clicks on the top rank are ignored as a precaution, as those clicks might simply represent a user's urge to click on something indiscriminately. Documents displayed below the lowest clicked document on the document summary page are ignored as the user may not have considered them.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The same query string may be searched multiple times within a period of time and subsequently may result in different articles displayed and different documents clicked. In addition, a query within a single search may receive multiple clicks on the same page. To account for these user search actions, we merge the data for the evaluation dataset as follows. Given a unique query string, we collect all positive and negative data points associated with each click instance, and remove from the negative set those documents that also appear as positives following the reasoning: if a document is thought to be relevant by at least one user we consider it relevant for that query string. Using this dataset, for each query token we wish to compare its score coming from a document's abstract versus the body text. First, to directly measure the benefit of full text, for each query in the PubMed Click Dataset, we perform this comparison on a subset of documents in the dataset that have full text available in PMC. Second, for each query in the dataset, we perform the comparison on all documents available in the PubMed Click dataset. This includes documents that do and do not have the full text available, as in production PubMed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "We randomly sampled 2 million unique queries from the PubMed query log in 2017, which retrieved at least one positive document. On average there are 6.60 documents collected for each query, an average of ~30% of which are labeled positive. Of 6.60 documents available for each query, only 2.65 documents have full text available in PubMed Central (~40%). We separated two thirds of queries for training PAV functions described in the next section, and one third for testing. 634,364 queries along with collected labeled documents comprise the test portion of the PubMed click dataset. A subset of that dataset that includes queries for which all retrieved documents have full text available constitutes 232,636 queries, and will be referred to as Set_FT.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Evaluation Datasets",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Here we examine how to optimally use BM25 scores coming from the abstracts and full text paragraphs to improve retrieval performance. We first define the score of a token within a full-text section, which then we transform into a probability of that document being relevant given the score and the section. We then learn how to combine these section-based token scores into an overall score predicting the probability of a document being relevant.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Methods -Using Full Text to score a query token",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "We obtain full text documents from the PubMed Central full text collection in BioC (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/research/bionlp/A PIs) (Comeau, Wei, Do\u011fan, & Z., 2019) . This collection contains about 5 million full text manuscripts. BioC allows one to obtain full text information by paragraphs.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 136,
"end": 168,
"text": "(Comeau, Wei, Do\u011fan, & Z., 2019)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Obtaining Full Text",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Full-text articles are typically comprised of sections presented in a logical sequence. Sections such as Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion predominantly appear as they represent the logical sequence in scientific writing. Frequently, however, sections carrying similar types of information are referred to differently depending on the journal, the requirements of the publishing entity, and author writing style. For example, Introduction and Background section titles are used interchangeably. Results sections can be also referred to as Results and Experiments, etc. Using BioC provided section type identifiers that are based on the labels and regular expressions found in (Kafkas et al., 2015) . To normalize section titles, we concentrate on the following section types: Abstract, Abbreviation, Caption, Discussion, Case, Keyword, Conclusion, Result, Methods, Introduction, Generic Section Title, Supplement, and Appendix. In what follows, all the sections other than the Abstract text will be referred to as body sections or full text sections.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 703,
"end": 724,
"text": "(Kafkas et al., 2015)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Obtaining Full Text",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Given a token \" we can compute a BM25 score representing relevance of the token to a paragraph of text. The score is a product of the IDF weight and a local weighting factor that is zero if does not occur in the paragraph. Using BM25 scoring of tokens in paragraphs, our goal is to devise a number representing the full text and its contribution to an overall document score that predicts user clicks based on each token in a query.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Defining the score of a token in a section",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Since there are generally multiple paragraphs within each section of a paper, we keep the largest BM25 score for a token in a section paragraph and call it the BM25 score of the section type (stype) in a full text document and denote it Keeping the maximum score is plausible because it is not affected by the size of the section (Jimmy Lin, 2009) . Thus, given a token, for any document we have potentially thirteen different BM25 scores for that token, one from each section type.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 337,
"end": 347,
"text": "Lin, 2009)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Defining the score of a token in a section",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Because of the structure of full text documents, the appearance of a token in different sections makes different contributions to the relevance of the document. The same BM25 score may have a different significance depending on the section. For example, a high score in the Results section would likely be more indicative of importance than if it occurred in the Methods section of a paper. To address the issue of variable significance of sections, we convert these BM25 section scores into probabilities of a document being clicked. The Pool Adjacent Violators (PAV) Algorithm (Ayer, Brunk, Ewing, Reid, & Silverman, 1954; Hardle, 1991; Wilbur, Yeganova, & Kim, 2005 ) is ideal for this purpose.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 579,
"end": 624,
"text": "(Ayer, Brunk, Ewing, Reid, & Silverman, 1954;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 625,
"end": 638,
"text": "Hardle, 1991;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 639,
"end": 668,
"text": "Wilbur, Yeganova, & Kim, 2005",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Defining the score of a token in a section",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Given a set of labeled data points along with their scores with the property that the higher the score the more likely a point is in the positive class, PAV is a simple and efficient algorithm that derives from such data a monotonically non-decreasing estimate of the probability that a point is in the positive class. Among non-decreasing functions that estimate the probability of a point being positive as a function of score, the PAV function assigns the highest likelihood to the actual observed class of the data points. Using training data, we apply PAV to the BM25 scores coming from each section type and obtain a function, , that predicts the probability of relevance. By nature of the monotonically non-decreasing estimate, the probabilities satisfy:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training a PAV Function",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "All scores from single tokens from queries appearing in training documents are distinct data points included for learning these PAV-derived probabilities. The stepwise linear PAV function for each of the thirteen document sections are presented in Figure 1 . Results are presented in four blocks, each block comparing three body section PAV probability functions to the abstract probability function. The figures show that there is a difference between the sections in their relative importance. Given two sections, a higher BM25 token score from one section does not necessarily translate to a higher probability of relevance compared to the other section. If one section is more important for retrieval than the other, the same BM25 score in each section will lead to a higher probability in a more important section. Abrupt jumps may be due to sparseness of data This will have implications for retrieval. The PAV-based probabilistic transformation allows one to directly compare the value of section scores to each other. A clear conclusion here is that the raw BM25 scores do not well reflect the relative importance of different body sections, as expected.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 248,
"end": 256,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training a PAV Function",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "Now we examine how to combine these probability scores coming from different sections into a single document score that predicts the document being relevant. Let us denote the probability of relevance given BM25 section scores as #(%&'|)*25 section scores). Then, the log odds ratio, defined as is monotonically related to the probability of relevance. We apply Bayes' Theorem. The na\u00efve Bayes' assumption will allow us to factor the right side of (2) as log $ %(+,25 section scores|'())%('()) %(+,25 secttion scores|\u00ac'())%(\u00acrel) 9",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "(3) = log = > %(? !\"#$% |'())",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "!\"#$% > %(? !\"#$% |\u00ac'()) !\"#$% @ + log B %('()) %(\u00ac'()) C .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "The second term on the right in equation 3 is a constant and can be disregarded, as it will not affect the ranking. The first term on the right side of equation 3 can be rewritten as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "log = > %(? !\"#$% |'()) !\"#$% > %(? !\"#$% |\u00ac'()) !\"#$% @ (4) = F log $ %('()|? !\"#$% ) 1 \u2212 %('()|? !\"#$% ) %('()) 1 \u2212 %('()) H 9 !\"#$% .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "The right side of equation 4 is monotonically related to the left side of equation 2, and consequently should rank documents in the order of their probability of being relevant. This is the ideal ranking according to the probability ranking principle (Robertson, Walker, Jones, Hancock-Beaulieu, & Gatford, 1994) . Here !(#$%|' !\"#$% ) = ! !\"#$% (' !\"#$% ) is the PAV determined probability estimate for the section type, while !(#$%) is the fraction of positive documents in the training set. Based on these results we define the log odds score of a token in a section as",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 251,
"end": 312,
"text": "(Robertson, Walker, Jones, Hancock-Beaulieu, & Gatford, 1994)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "log &''! !\"#$% (\") = log B $ !\"#$% *! \" !\"#$% + ,-$ !\"#$% *! \" !\"#$% + $ &'()*+ ,-$ &'()*+ H C.",
"eq_num": "(5)"
}
],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "where % ./0'&1 = !(#$%). Such scores for tokens can be added if the naive assumption of independence of the BM25 scores on which they are based is reasonably accurate. Now we test different ways of combining scores of a token from different sections to derive a fulltext score for the token. In (Jimmy Lin, 2009) , the author found that computing the article score as the maximum score over all spans is superior to computing the score for an article as sum of scores over all spans. Spans in that work were paragraphs of full text documents from the TREC genomics collection, which consists of 36 topics (query questions) and manually annotated spans representing 2,477 full-text articles. In contrast, (Hearst & Plaunt, 1993) found that using the sum of scores over all spans in scoring a document produces a superior ranking when evaluated on a data set of 43 queries and 274 full text documents. Spans in (Hearst & Plaunt, 1993) are computed segments correlating with subtopics of a full text paper and are different from paragraphs.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 295,
"end": 312,
"text": "(Jimmy Lin, 2009)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 704,
"end": 727,
"text": "(Hearst & Plaunt, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 909,
"end": 932,
"text": "(Hearst & Plaunt, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "Taking these references into consideration, we study and compare the Sum and Max scoring strategies using BM25 raw scores and log odds of BM25 scores. BM25 on Abstracts is also computed as it is used in the PubMed search system. In these four graphs 12 PAV functions for 12 different body sections are compared to the abstract PAV function. X-axis represents the BM25 score across all four graphs, Y axis represents the Probability of a click based on the section term score.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Combining Scores from Different Sections of the Body Text",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "The score of token t in document d is computed as the sum of log odds scores, as defined in (5), coming from sections within the full text document:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "'+, &'(_*+,-..! (-, /) = 0 log _,--' !\"#$% (/) !\"#$%\u2208.",
"eq_num": "(6)"
}
],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Max LogOdds: The score of token t in document is computed as the maximum log odds score coming from sections within the full text document:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "'+, 012_*+,-..! (-, /) (7) = max {log _,--' !\"#$% (/)|'/<!$ \u2208 -} Abstract BM25: The score of token t in document d is computed as the raw BM25 token score of the abstract '+, 3045_67! (-, /) = 8 ! \"#$",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Sum BM25: The score of token t in document d is computed as the sum of BM25 section token scores within the full text document",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "EQUATION",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [
{
"start": 0,
"end": 8,
"text": "EQUATION",
"ref_id": "EQREF",
"raw_str": "'+, &'(_3045 (-, /) = 0 8 ! $!%&' !\"#$%\u2208.",
"eq_num": "(9)"
}
],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Max BM25: The score of token t in document d is computed as the highest BM25 section token score within the full text document '+, 012_3045 (-, /) = @AB !\"#$%\u2208. C' \" !\"#$% D (10)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "After trying scoring based directly on log odds using formulas (6) and 7, it was evident that we are dealing with two kinds of documents, which behave differently. Those documents that contain the search token only in the abstract receive a single score from the abstract, and Sum and Max really don't play a role. But for those documents having the term in multiple sections, Sum and Max do play a role, and the log odds scores are higher. In order to balance the scores for best results, we found it necessary to create PAV curves for Sum and Max scores just on documents with multiple sections providing scores. We simply use the probabilities based on a PAV curve for each type of document to rank the different types in the same ranking for retrieval. In what follows, we will continue to use the term LogOdds to refer to this scoring.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Sum LogOdds:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Proposed methods are tested on the PubMed Click Dataset and on the TREC Genomics collection (Hersh et al., 2007) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 92,
"end": 112,
"text": "(Hersh et al., 2007)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Results",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "To directly measure the benefit of full text, for each query in the PubMed Click Dataset we first compare the proposed scoring techniques on Set_FT. Set_FT is a subset of the PubMed Click dataset that includes queries for which all labeled documents in the evaluation dataset have full text available. Second, we extend this analysis to the whole test portion of the PubMed Click dataset. It contains queries and labeled documents, which may or may not have full text available. For each query token, we score its corresponding retrieved documents in the evaluation dataset and compute the average Precision using labels in the evaluation dataset. These are averaged over all tokens in a query, and then average over all queries producing the MAP results presented in Figure 2 . Figure 2 demonstrates our findings computed on the complete set of tokens available in the two test sets. We observe that the LogOdds probabilistic scoring approach significantly outperforms the BM25 scoring for both Sum and Max variants for the PubMed click data and Set_FT. A bigger difference is observed on Set_FT, where full text is available for every participating document. Additionally, we observe that LogOdds Sum computed on article full text outperforms the abstract score and the difference although small is statistically significant.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 768,
"end": 776,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
},
{
"start": 779,
"end": 787,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The PubMed Click Dataset",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "We conducted pairwise statistical tests for all methods to verify if the differences in performance for each pair of tests is significant. We used the \"Percentile bootstrap\" test at the 5% significance level which works well for our study because the distribution is symmetric around the MAP value (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootstrapping). Differences between all pairs of methods are statistically significant, except for the Max LogOdds and the Abs BM25 for the Set_FT subset of PubMed Click Dataset.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The PubMed Click Dataset",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Based on these results we believe that log odds scoring is a useful approach for retrieval incorporating body text. The intuition behind it is that BM25 scores have a different meaning depending on the sections from which they are derived as illustrated in Fig 1. For a single query token, results in Figure 2 also suggest that the Sum scoring approach provides a better estimate of token importance than the Max scoring approach when using the log odds scoring for the Click dataset. If sections within a full text document were truly independent from each other, Sum LogOdds would be the ideal method to score a single query token over the multiple sections in a document. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 257,
"end": 263,
"text": "Fig 1.",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 301,
"end": 309,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The PubMed Click Dataset",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "We apply the proposed methods to each query token in the TREC dataset. We score the retrieved documents in the evaluation dataset and compute the Average Precision using gold standard labels. These are then averaged over all query tokens, and the MAP results are presented in Figure 3 . Leaveone-out training strategy was used for each topic. Figure 3 demonstrates our findings computed on non-stop word query tokens in the TREC Genomics Dataset. We observe that the Sum LogOdds probabilistic scoring significantly outperforms Sum BM25 scoring. Similarly, the Max LogOdds probabilistic scoring significantly outperforms Max BM25 scoring. Similar to the PubMed Click Dataset, here we observe that Sum LogOdds has a slight advantage over Max LogOdds, and both are competitive with the abstract BM25 score.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 276,
"end": 284,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF5"
},
{
"start": 343,
"end": 351,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF5"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The TREC Genomics Dataset",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "We conducted Wilcoxon signed rank test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilcoxon_signed-rank_test) at 5% significance level to verify if the differences in performance for each pair of tests is significant. The differences between Max LogOdds and Abs BM25 as well as Sum LogOdds and Abs BM25 are not statistically significant. The differences between all other pairs of methods are statistically significant. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The TREC Genomics Dataset",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "Based on the PubMed Click dataset and the TREC genomics dataset, we studied how to integrate full text and abstract information for scoring a query token. The main contribution of this work is to study the benefits of log odds of BM25 compared to raw BM25 scores. Our experimental results on both datasets support these important conclusions:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "1. PAV based log odds scoring is a useful way to compare the contribution of a token in different sections of a document for predicting clicks. BM25 scores are not directly comparable with each other for making such predictions. The same BM25 score is of different value depending on the section type in which it is found.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "2. We proposed two methods to compute the log odds body score by taking the sum or max of scores. In both cases, PAV based LogOdds scoring is significantly better than ranking based on raw BM25 scores. The difference between Sum and Max scoring is small.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "For the PubMed Click dataset, using the Sum LogOdds score from the whole document for a query token produces better results than using only the abstract score. In the TREC genomics dataset, the performance of full text LogOdds is comparable to abstract only score. This is an important contribution and meaningful building block towards improving full text retrieval in PubMed. Our immediate plan is to extend this single token analysis to full queries.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Based on the PubMed Click dataset and the TREC genomics dataset, we studied how to integrate full text and abstract information for scoring a query token. The main contribution of this work is to study the benefits of log odds of BM25 compared to raw BM25 scores. Our experimental results on both datasets support these important conclusions:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "1. PAV based log odds scoring is a useful way to compare the contribution of a token in different sections of a document for predicting clicks. BM25 scores are not directly comparable with each other for making such predictions. The same BM25 score is of different value depending on the section type in which it is found.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "2. We proposed two methods to compute the log odds body score by taking the sum or max of scores. In both cases, PAV based LogOdds scoring is significantly better than ranking based on raw BM25 scores. The difference between Sum and Max scoring is small. For the PubMed Click dataset, using the Sum LogOdds score from the whole document for a query token produces better results than using only the abstract score. In the TREC genomics dataset, the performance of full text LogOdds is comparable to abstract only score. This is an",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions and Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "important contribution and meaningful building block towards improving full text retrieval in PubMed. Our immediate plan is to extend this single token analysis to full queries.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "acknowledgement",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This work was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "FUNDING",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "LitSense: making sense of biomedical literature at sentence level",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Allot",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Q",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vera Alvarez",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Comeau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Wilbur",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Z",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Nucleic Acids Research",
"volume": "47",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Allot, A., Chen, Q., Kim, S., Vera Alvarez, R., Comeau, D. C., Wilbur, W. J., & Lu, Z. (2019). LitSense: making sense of biomedical literature at sentence level. Nucleic Acids Research, 47(Web Server issue ).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "An empirical distribution function for sampling with incomplete information",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ayer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Brunk",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ewing",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Reid",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Silverman",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1954,
"venue": "Ann Math Stat",
"volume": "26",
"issue": "",
"pages": "641--647",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ayer, M., Brunk, H., Ewing, G., Reid, W., & Silverman, E. (1954). An empirical distribution function for sampling with incomplete information. Ann Math Stat, 26, 641-647.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Finding Support Sentences for Entities",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Blanco",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zaragoza",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2010,
"venue": "SIGIR '10 Proceedings of the 33rd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Blanco, R., & Zaragoza, H. (2010). Finding Support Sentences for Entities. SIGIR '10 Proceedings of the 33rd international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "tagtog: interactive and text-mining-assisted annotation of gene mentions in PLOS full-text articles",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cejuela",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mcquilton",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ponting",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marygold",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Stefancsik",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Millburn",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": ".",
"middle": [
"."
],
"last": "Consortium",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2014,
"venue": "Database (Oxford)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1093/database/bau033"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Cejuela, J., McQuilton, P., Ponting, L., Marygold, S., Stefancsik, R., Millburn, G., . . . Consortium, F. (2014). tagtog: interactive and text-mining-assisted annotation of gene mentions in PLOS full-text articles. Database (Oxford). doi:10.1093/database/bau033. Print 2014.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "A Comparative Analysis of System Features Used in the TREC-COVID Information Retrieval Challenge",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Hersh",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2020,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1101/2020.10.15.20213645)"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chen, J., & Hersh, W. R. (2020). A Comparative Analysis of System Features Used in the TREC- COVID Information Retrieval Challenge (Publication no. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.10.15.20213645).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "The structural and content aspects of abstracts versus bodies of full text journal articles are different",
"authors": [
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [
"B"
],
"last": "Cohen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Verspoor",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Roeder",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hunter",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2010,
"venue": "BMC Bioinformatics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "492",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Cohen, K. B., Johnson, H., Verspoor, K., Roeder, C., & Hunter, L. (2010). The structural and content aspects of abstracts versus bodies of full text journal articles are different. BMC Bioinformatics, 11(492).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "PMC text mining subset in BioC: about 3 million full text articles and growing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Comeau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wei",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"I"
],
"last": "Do\u011fan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "&",
"middle": [
"Z"
],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1093/bioinformatics/btz070"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Comeau, D. C., Wei, C.-H., Do\u011fan, R. I., & Z., L. (2019). PMC text mining subset in BioC: about 3 million full text articles and growing. Bioinformatics, doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz070.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Best Match: New relevance search for PubMed",
"authors": [
{
"first": "N",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fiorini",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Canese",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Starchenko",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kireev",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [],
"last": "Miller",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": ".",
"middle": [
"."
],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "PLOS Biology",
"volume": "",
"issue": "8",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
":10.1371/journal.pbio.2005343"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Fiorini, N., Canese, K., Starchenko, G., Kireev, E., Kim, W., Miller, V., . . . Lu, Z. (2018). Best Match: New relevance search for PubMed. PLOS Biology, 16(8). doi:doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005343",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "How user intelligence is improving PubMed",
"authors": [
{
"first": "N",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fiorini",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Leaman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Lipman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "Nature Biotechnology",
"volume": "36",
"issue": "",
"pages": "937--945",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Fiorini, N., Leaman, R., Lipman, D. J., & Lu, Z. (2018). How user intelligence is improving PubMed. Nature Biotechnology, 36, 937-945.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "A Deep Look into Neural Ranking Models for Information Retrieval",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Guo",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Fan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Q",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ai",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Zamani",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": ".",
"middle": [
"."
],
"last": "Cheng",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "X",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2020,
"venue": "Journal of Information Processing and Management",
"volume": "",
"issue": "6",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Guo, J., Fan, Y., Pang, L., Yang, L., Ai, Q., Zamani, H., . . . Cheng, X. (2020). A Deep Look into Neural Ranking Models for Information Retrieval. Journal of Information Processing and Management, 57(6).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Smoothing techniques: with implementation in S",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hardle",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1991,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hardle, W. (1991). Smoothing techniques: with implementation in S. New York: Springer-Verlag.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Subtopic structuring for full-length document access",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Hearst",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Plaunt",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "SIGIR93: 16th International ACM/SIGIR '93 Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hearst, M. A., & Plaunt, C. (1993). Subtopic structuring for full-length document access. Paper presented at the SIGIR93: 16th International ACM/SIGIR '93 Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Pittsburgh PA USA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Genomics Track Overview Proceedings of the Sixteenth Text REtrieval Conference",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hersh",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cohen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ruslen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Roberts",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2007,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hersh, W., Cohen, A., Ruslen, L., & Roberts, P. (2007). TREC 2007 Genomics Track Overview Proceedings of the Sixteenth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC 2007).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Section level search functionality in Europe PMC",
"authors": [
{
"first": "\u015e",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kafkas",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "X",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pi",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "N",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marinos",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "'",
"middle": [],
"last": "Talo",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [],
"last": "Morrison",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mcentyre",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "Journal of Biomed Semantics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
":10.1186/s13326-015-0003-7"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kafkas, \u015e., Pi, X., Marinos, N., Talo', F., Morrison, A., & McEntyre, J. R. (2015). Section level search functionality in Europe PMC. Journal of Biomed Semantics. doi:doi: 10.1186/s13326-015-0003-7",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "Extending the evaluation of Genia Event task toward knowledge base construction and comparison to Gene Regulation Ontology task",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "X",
"middle": [],
"last": "Han",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Rebholz-Schuhmann",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2015,
"venue": "BMC Bioinformatics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {
"DOI": [
"10.1186/1471-2105-16-S10-S3"
]
},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kim, J., Kim, J., Han, X., & Rebholz-Schuhmann, D. (2015). Extending the evaluation of Genia Event task toward knowledge base construction and comparison to Gene Regulation Ontology task. BMC Bioinformatics. doi:10.1186/1471-2105-16- S10-S3. Epub 2015 Jul 13.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "MeSH-based dataset for measuring the relevance of text retrieval",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yeganova",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Comeau",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Wilbur",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "Proceedings of the BioNLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kim, W., Yeganova, L., Comeau, D. C., Wilbur, W. J., & Lu, Z. (2018). MeSH-based dataset for measuring the relevance of text retrieval. Proceedings of the BioNLP 2018 workshop.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Is searching full text more effective than searching abstracts?",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2009,
"venue": "BMC Bioinformatics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "46",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lin, J. (2009). Is searching full text more effective than searching abstracts? BMC Bioinformatics, 10(46).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Pyserini: An Easy-to-Use Python Toolkit to Support Replicable IR Research with Sparse and Dense Representations",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "X",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ma",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S.-C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pradeep",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nogueira",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2021,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lin, J., Ma, X., Lin, S.-C., Yang, J.-H., Pradeep, R., & Nogueira, R. (2021). Pyserini: An Easy-to-Use Python Toolkit to Support Replicable IR Research with Sparse and Dense Representations.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Relative effectiveness of document titles and abstracts for determining relevance of documents",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Resnick",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1961,
"venue": "Science",
"volume": "134",
"issue": "3484",
"pages": "1004--1006",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Resnick, A. (1961). Relative effectiveness of document titles and abstracts for determining relevance of documents. Science, 134(3484), pp. 1004-1006.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "Okapi at TREC-3",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robertson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Walker",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jones",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hancock-Beaulieu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gatford",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1994,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 3rd Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-3)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robertson, S., Walker, S., Jones, S., Hancock- Beaulieu, M., & Gatford, M. (1994). Okapi at TREC-3. Proceedings of the 3rd Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-3).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "A passage retrieval method based on probabilistic information retrieval model and UMLS concepts in biomedical question answering",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sarrouti",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"O"
],
"last": "El Alaoui",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2017,
"venue": "Journal of Biomedical Informatics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sarrouti, M., & El Alaoui, S. O. (2017). A passage retrieval method based on probabilistic information retrieval model and UMLS concepts in biomedical question answering. . Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 68.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "The philosophy of information retrieval evaluation. CLEF 2001: Evaluation of Cross-Language Information Retrieval Systems",
"authors": [
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Voorhees",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "",
"volume": "2406",
"issue": "",
"pages": "355--370",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Voorhees, E. (2001). The philosophy of information retrieval evaluation. CLEF 2001: Evaluation of Cross-Language Information Retrieval Systems, Volume 2406, pp. 355-370.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "PubTator central: automated concept annotation for biomedical full text articles",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wei",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Allot",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Leaman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Z",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2019,
"venue": "Nucleic Acids Research",
"volume": "",
"issue": "W1",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Wei, C.-H., Allot, A., Leaman, R., & Lu, Z. (2019). PubTator central: automated concept annotation for biomedical full text articles. Nucleic Acids Research, 47(W1).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "A comprehensive and quantitative comparison of textmining in 15 million full-text articles versus their corresponding abstracts",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Westergaard",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H.-H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Staerfeldt",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "T\u00f8nsberg",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Jensen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Brunak",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2018,
"venue": "Plos Computational Biology",
"volume": "",
"issue": "2",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Westergaard, D., Staerfeldt, H.-H., T\u00f8nsberg, C., Jensen , L. J., & Brunak, S. (2018). A comprehensive and quantitative comparison of text- mining in 15 million full-text articles versus their corresponding abstracts. Plos Computational Biology, 14(2).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "The Synergy Between PAV and AdaBoost. Machine Learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Wilbur",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yeganova",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kim",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "",
"volume": "61",
"issue": "",
"pages": "71--103",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Wilbur, W. J., Yeganova, L., & Kim, W. (2005). The Synergy Between PAV and AdaBoost. Machine Learning, 61, 71-103.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "Covidex: Neural Ranking Models and Keyword Search Infrastructure for the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2020,
"venue": "Proceedings of the First Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lin, J. (2020). Covidex: Neural Ranking Models and Keyword Search Infrastructure for the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF2": {
"uris": null,
"text": "25 section scores|'())%('()) %(+,25 section scores|\u00ac'())%(\u00ac'()) 9",
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null
},
"FIGREF3": {
"uris": null,
"text": "Fig 1. In these four graphs 12 PAV functions for 12 different body sections are compared to the abstract PAV function. X-axis represents the BM25 score across all four graphs, Y axis represents the Probability of a click based on the section term score.",
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null
},
"FIGREF4": {
"uris": null,
"text": "Average Precision for all query tokens is computed, averaged for each query and then over all queries for the PubMed Click dataset and its subset Set_FT. For both datasets, LogOdds Sum and LogOdds Max scoring methods demonstrate a significantly improved performance compared to Sum and Max on raw BM25 scores.",
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null
},
"FIGREF5": {
"uris": null,
"text": "Mean Average Precision on TREC Genomics Dataset is computed on single tokens and averaged for all tokens in the experiment. Sum LogOdds and Max LogOdds demonstrate a significantly improved performance compared to those on raw BM25 scores.",
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null
},
"TABREF0": {
"num": null,
"content": "<table><tr><td>i stype t s</td><td>\u00a3</td><td>j stype t s</td><td>\u00de</td><td>p</td><td>stype</td><td>i stype t s</td><td>\u00a3</td><td>p</td><td>stype</td><td>j stype t s</td></tr></table>",
"type_str": "table",
"text": ") .",
"html": null
}
}
}
} |