<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Relevance Detection and Argumentation Mining in Medical Domain</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Vijayasaradhi Indurthi IIIT Hyderabad</string-name>
          <email>oota.subba@students.iiit.ac.in</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>India vijaya.saradhi@students.iiit.ac.in</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Subba Reddy Oota IIIT Hyderabad</institution>
          ,
          <country country="IN">India</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>In this paper we describe a method to determine the relevancy of a query with a sentence in the document in the field of medical domain. We also describe a method to determine if the given statement supports the query, opposes the query or is neutral with respect to the query. This is a part of CHIS shared task at FIRE 2016.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Information retrieval</kwd>
        <kwd>argument mining</kwd>
        <kwd>relevancy detection</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>World Wide Web is increasingly being used by consumers as an
aid for health decision making and for self-management of
chronic illnesses as evidenced by the fact that one in every 20
searches on google is about health. Information access
mechanisms for factual health information retrieval have matured
considerably, with search engines providing Fact checked Health
Knowledge Graph search results to factual health queries. It is
pretty straightforward to get an answer to the query “what are the
symptoms of Diabetes” from the search engines. However
retrieval of relevant multiple perspectives for complex health
search queries which do not have a single definitive answer still
remains elusive with most of the general purpose search engines.
The presence of multiple perspectives with different grades of
supporting evidence (which is dynamically changing over time
due to the arrival of new research and practice evidence) makes it
all the more challenging for a lay searcher.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. SHARED TASKS</title>
      <p>We use the term “Consumer Health Information Search”
(CHIS) to denote such information retrieval search tasks, for
which there is “No Single Best Correct Answer”; Instead multiple
and diverse perspectives/points of view (which very often are
contradictory in nature) are available on the web regarding the
queried information. The goal of CHIS track is to research and
develop techniques to support users in complex multi-perspective
health information queries.</p>
      <p>
        Given a CHIS query, and a document/set of documents
associated with that query, the FIRST task is to classify the
sentences in the document as relevant to the query or not [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. The
relevant sentences are those from that document, which are useful
in providing the answer to the query. The SECOND task is to
classify these relevant sentences as supporting the claim made in
the query, or opposing the claim made in the query [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ].
Example query: Does daily aspirin therapy prevent heart attack?
Sentence 1: “Many medical experts recommend daily aspirin
therapy for preventing heart attacks in people of age fifty and
above.” [Affirmative/Support]
Sentence 2: “While aspirin has some role in preventing blood
clots, daily aspirin therapy is not for everyone as a primary heart
attack prevention method”. [Disagreement/Oppose]
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3. DESCRIPTION</title>
      <p>
        For the shared tasks described above, we adopt a deep learning
approach for solving them. Deep learning is a method which
allows computers to learn from experience and understand the
world in terms of a hierarchy of concepts, with each concept
defined in terms of its relation to simpler concepts. By gathering
knowledge from experience, this approach avoids the need for
human operators to formally specify all of the knowledge that the
computer needs. The hierarchy of concepts allows the computer to
learn complicated concepts by building them out of simpler ones.
We use a deep neural network to train the sentences.
The problems described above are modeled as a supervised
learning task [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. For a given query, we have been given a
document consisting of a set of sentences. For each sentence we
have been provided with the ground truths, i.e. if the sentence is
relevant to the query, and if the sentence supports, opposes or is
neutral to the query. We have trained a deep neural network [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ]
for this supervised learning task.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. FEATURES</title>
      <p>
        We have selected binary bag-of-phrases [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ] representation of the
document. Since all words in the sentence are not relevant, we
have identified the most important features manually and used
these phrases to create the feature matrix. Some of the features
included the presence of supporting words like ‘evidence’,
‘cause’, ‘exhibit’, ‘abnormal’, ‘nonetheless’. Opposing words like
‘oppose’, ‘does not’, ‘least’, ‘less’, ‘nothing’, ‘harmless’ were
also used as features as these words contribute in determining that
the sentence opposes the given query. If a feature phrase is present
in the given text, the value for that feature would be 1. Otherwise,
the value of the feature is 0. All our features are binary. In the
preprocessing phase, all text in the upper case was converted to
lower case and all numbers were deleted. Some of the feature
words and phrases are documented in the table 1.
      </p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>However</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Nonetheless</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>Nonetheless</title>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>5. ARCHITECTURE</title>
      <p>
        We use a deep neural network for training for both the tasks. The
input layer had as many neurons as the input features. Task 1 is a
binary classification problem, indicating if the sentence was
relevant to the query or not. Task 2 is a multi-class classification
problem, which indicates if the sentence supports, opposes or is
neutral to the query. Table 3 shows the architecture of the neural
network for both of the CHIS tasks [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ][
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>For task 1, the classification is a binary classification problem
with a binary cross entropy layer at the output. For task 2, it is a
multi-class classification problem, and hence a softmax layer is
used at the output layer. For training the deep neural network, we
used keras. Keras is an open source neural network library written
in Python. It is capable of running on top of either Tensorflow or
Theano. Designed to enable fast experimentation with deep neural
networks, it focuses on being minimal, modular and extensible.
We train both the neural networks for 150 epochs for
convergence.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>6. RESULTS</title>
      <p>The following are the results obtained on the test set. Table 4
shows the average precision, recall and F1 score of the classifier
for task 1. Table 5 shows the average precision, recall and F1
score of the classifier for task 2.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>7. OBSERVATIONS</title>
      <p>Predicting the relevance and determining if a sentence supports
the given query is not a trivial problem and needs knowledge of
Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval
techniques. In this paper we proposed a fast deep learning method
to predict the same using a deep neural network. We observe that
the average precision for task 1 is 77.03% and for task 2 is
54.86%. Task 2 is a multi-class problem and is more difficult than
task1.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>8. FUTURE WORK</title>
      <p>
        In this paper, we have used a select set of phrases as features.
Since the sentences and the query, both are short text segments,
features using Natural Langauge Processing like POS tagging etc
can be used as features augmented with the existing features to
improve the precision and recall [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]. Although we have identified
the features manually, the features could have been figured out by
selecting the adjectives and adverbs using any of the existing NLP
toolkits. This would make the solution scalable and generic and
can be applied for other similar datasets.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>9. CODE</title>
      <p>All the code is available at https://github.com/saradhix/chis for
research and academic purpose.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Robert</given-names>
            <surname>Gaizauskas</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Mark</given-names>
            <surname>Hepple</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Mark</given-names>
            <surname>Greenwood</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
          <article-title>Information retrieval for question answering a SIGIR 2004 workshop</article-title>
          . SIGIR Forum
          <volume>38</volume>
          ,
          <issue>2</issue>
          (
          <year>December 2004</year>
          ),
          <fpage>41</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>44</lpage>
          . DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1041394.1041403.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Yoshua</given-names>
            <surname>Bengio</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2009</year>
          .
          <article-title>Learning Deep Architectures for AI</article-title>
          .
          <source>Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 2</source>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          (
          <year>January 2009</year>
          ),
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>127</lpage>
          . DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/2200000006.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Maria</given-names>
            <surname>Fernanda</surname>
          </string-name>
          Caropreso and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Stan</given-names>
            <surname>Matwin</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2006</year>
          .
          <article-title>Beyond the bag of words: a text representation for sentence selection</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Advances in Artificial Intelligence: Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence (AI</source>
          '
          <volume>06</volume>
          ),
          <source>Luc Lamontagne and Mario Marchand (Eds.)</source>
          . Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg,
          <fpage>324</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>335</lpage>
          . DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11766247_
          <fpage>28</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Andrenucci</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          .
          <article-title>Automated Question-Answering Techniques and the Medical Domain</article-title>
          .
          <source>In HEALTHINF (2)</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>207</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>212</lpage>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Andreas</given-names>
            <surname>Buja</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Werner</given-names>
            <surname>Stuetzle</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Yi</given-names>
            <surname>Shen</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
          <article-title>Loss Functions for Binary Cross Probability Estimation and Classification: Structure and Applications</article-title>
          .
          <source>Doctoral Thesis</source>
          . University of Pennsylvania.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Veselin</given-names>
            <surname>Stoyanov</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Claire</given-names>
            <surname>Cardie</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Janyce</given-names>
            <surname>Wiebe</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
          <article-title>Multi-perspective question answering using the OpQA corpus</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT '05)</source>
          .
          <article-title>Association for Computational Linguistics</article-title>
          , Stroudsburg, PA, USA,
          <fpage>923</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>930</lpage>
          . DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1220575.1220691.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>