skip to main content
research-article

Combination of Loss-based Active Learning and Semi-supervised Learning for Recognizing Entities in Chinese Electronic Medical Records

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 May 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The recognition of entities in an electronic medical record (EMR) is especially important to downstream tasks, such as clinical entity normalization and medical dialogue understanding. However, in the medical professional field, training a high-quality named entity recognition system always requires large-scale annotated datasets, which are highly expensive to obtain. In this article, to lower the cost of data annotation and maximizing the use of unlabeled data, we propose a hybrid approach to recognizing the entities in Chinese electronic medical record, which is in combination of loss-based active learning and semi-supervised learning. Specifically, we adopted a dynamic balance strategy to dynamically balance the minimum loss predicted by a named entity recognition decoder and a loss prediction module at different stages in the process. Experimental results demonstrated our proposed framework’s effectiveness and efficiency, achieving higher performances than existing approaches on Chinese EMR entity recognition datasets under limited labeling resources.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Carlson Andrew, Betteridge Justin, Kisiel Bryan, Settles Burr, Hruschka Estevam R., and Mitchell Tom M.. 2010. Toward an architecture for never-ending language learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 13061313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. [2] Chiu Jason P. C. and Nichols Eric. 2016. Named entity recognition with bidirectional LSTM-CNNs. Trans. Assoc. Comput. Ling. 4 (2016), 357370.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. [3] Cohn David A., Ghahramani Zoubin, and Jordan Michael I.. 1996. Active learning with statistical models. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 4 (1996), 129145.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. [4] Collins Michael and Singer Yoram. 1999. Unsupervised models for named entity classification. In Proceedings of the 1999 Joing SIGDAT Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Very Large Corpora (EMNLP/VLC-99). 100110.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. [5] Collobert Ronan, Weston Jason, Bottou Léon, Karlen Michael, Kavukcuoglu Koray, and Kuksa Pavel. 2011. Natural language processing (almost) from scratch. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, (2011), 24932537.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Cowie Martin R., Blomster Juuso I., Curtis Lesley H., Duclaux Sylvie, Ford Ian, Fritz Fleur, Goldman Samantha, Janmohamed Salim, Kreuzer Jörg, Leenay Mark, et al. 2017. Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research. Clin. Res. Cardiol. 106, 1 (2017), 19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. [7] Denaxas Spiros C. and Morley Katherine I.. 2015. Big biomedical data and cardiovascular disease research: Opportunities and challenges. Eur. Heart J. Qual. Care Clin. Outcomes 1, 1 (2015), 916.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. [8] Dong Chuanhai, Zhang Jiajun, Zong Chengqing, Hattori Masanori, and Di Hui. 2016. Character-based LSTM-CRF with radical-level features for Chinese named entity recognition. In Natural Language Understanding and Intelligent Applications. Springer, 239250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. [9] Gal Yarin, Islam Riashat, and Ghahramani Zoubin. 2017. Deep bayesian active learning with image data. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML’17). PMLR, 11831192.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. [10] Gunter Tracy D. and Terry Nicolas P.. 2005. The emergence of national electronic health record architectures in the United States and Australia: Models, costs, and questions. J. Med. Internet Res. 7, 1 (2005), e383.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. [11] Guo Yuhong. 2010. Active instance sampling via matrix partition. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 802810.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. [12] Gupta Sonal and Manning Christopher D.. 2015. Distributed representations of words to guide bootstrapped entity classifiers. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 12151220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. [13] Hakala Kai and Pyysalo Sampo. 2019. Biomedical named entity recognition with multilingual BERT. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on BioNLP Open Shared Tasks. 5661.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. [14] Holub Alex, Perona Pietro, and Burl Michael C.. 2008. Entropy-based active learning for object recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops. IEEE, 18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. [15] Huang Siyu, Wang Tianyang, Xiong Haoyi, Huan Jun, and Dou Dejing. 2021. Semi-supervised active learning with temporal output discrepancy. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 34473456.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. [16] Huang Zhiheng, Xu Wei, and Yu Kai. 2015. Bidirectional LSTM-CRF models for sequence tagging. arXiv:1508.01991. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.01991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. [17] Isozaki Hideki and Kazawa Hideto. 2002. Efficient support vector classifiers for named entity recognition. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. 17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. [18] Ju Zhenfei, Wang Jian, and Zhu Fei. 2011. Named entity recognition from biomedical text using SVM. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering. IEEE, 14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Kingma Diederik P. and Ba Jimmy. 2015. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. [20] Lample Guillaume, Ballesteros Miguel, Subramanian Sandeep, Kawakami Kazuya, and Dyer Chris. 2016. Neural architectures for named entity recognition. In Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 260270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. [21] Lee Ki-Joong, Hwang Young-Sook, Kim Seonho, and Rim Hae-Chang. 2004. Biomedical named entity recognition using two-phase model based on SVMs. J. Biomed. Inf. 37, 6 (2004), 436447.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. [22] Lewis David D. and Gale William A.. 1994. A sequential algorithm for training text classifiers. In Proceedings of the International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR’94). Springer, 312.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. [23] Li Irene, Pan Jessica, Goldwasser Jeremy, Verma Neha, Wong Wai Pan, Nuzumlalı Muhammed Yavuz, Rosand Benjamin, Li Yixin, Zhang Matthew, Chang David, et al. 2021. Neural natural language processing for unstructured data in electronic health records: A review. arXiv:2107.02975. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.02975.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. [24] Li Muqun, Scaiano Martin, Emam Khaled El, and Malin Bradley A.. 2019. Efficient active learning for electronic medical record de-identification. In AMIA Summits on Translational Science Proceedings, 462.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. [25] Li Mei, Xiang Lu, Kang Xiaomian, Zhao Yang, Zhou Yu, and Zong Chengqing. 2021. Medical term and status generation from chinese clinical dialogue with multi-granularity transformer. IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 29 (2021), 33623374.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Li Xiaonan, Yan Hang, Qiu Xipeng, and Huang Xuan-Jing. 2020. FLAT: Chinese NER using flat-lattice transformer. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 68366842.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. [27] Ma Qunsheng, Cen Xingxing, Yuan Junyi, and Hou Xumin. 2021. Word embedding bootstrapped deep active learning method to information extraction on Chinese electronic medical record. J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Sci.) 26, 4 (2021), 494502.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. [28] McCallum Andrew and Li Wei. 2003. Early results for named entity recognition with conditional random fields, feature induction and web-enhanced lexicons. In Proceedings of the 7th conference on Natural language learning at HLT-NAACL. 188–191.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. [29] Nguyen Hieu T. and Smeulders Arnold. 2004. Active learning using pre-clustering. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning. 79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. [30] Nguyen Minh-Tien, Zuccon Guido, Demartini Gianluca, et al. 2021. Loss-based active learning for named entity recognition. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN’21). IEEE, 18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. [31] Pan Qiao, Huang Chen, and Chen Dehua. 2021. A method based on multi-standard active learning to recognize entities in electronic medical record. Math. Biosci. Eng. 18 (2021), 10001021.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. [32] Platanios Emmanouil Antonios, Stretcu Otilia, Neubig Graham, Póczos Barnabás, and Mitchell Tom. 2019. Competence-based curriculum learning for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers). 11621172.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. [33] Qiu Zhicong, Miller David J., and Kesidis George. 2016. A maximum entropy framework for semisupervised and active learning with unknown and label-scarce classes. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 28, 4 (2016), 917933.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. [34] Rasmus Antti, Berglund Mathias, Honkala Mikko, Valpola Harri, and Raiko Tapani. 2015. Semi-supervised learning with ladder networks. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 3546–3554.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. [35] Samuli Laine and Timo Aila. 2017. Temporal ensembling for semi-supervised learning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR’17), Vol. 4. 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. [36] Scheffer Tobias, Decomain Christian, and Wrobel Stefan. 2001. Active hidden Markov models for information extraction. In In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Advances in Intelligent Data Analysis. 309–318..Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. [37] Sener Ozan and Savarese Silvio. 2018. Active learning for convolutional neural networks: A core-set approach. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Representations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. [38] Settles Burr. 2004. Biomedical named entity recognition using conditional random fields and rich feature sets. In Proceedings of the International Joint Workshop on Natural Language Processing in Biomedicine and its Applications (NLPBA/BioNLP’14). 107110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. [39] Settles Burr and Craven Mark. 2008. An analysis of active learning strategies for sequence labeling tasks. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 10701079.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. [40] Sheikhshab Golnar, Birol Inanc, and Sarkar Anoop. 2018. In-domain context-aware token embeddings improve biomedical named entity recognition. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Health Text Mining and Information Analysis. 160164.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. [41] Sinha Samarth, Ebrahimi Sayna, and Darrell Trevor. 2019. Variational adversarial active learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 59725981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. [42] Su Jianlin, Murtadha Ahmed, Pan Shengfeng, Hou Jing, Sun Jun, Huang Wanwei, Wen Bo, and Liu Yunfeng. 2022. Global pointer: Novel efficient span-based approach for named entity recognition. arXiv:2208.03054. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.03054.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. [43] Tarvainen Antti and Valpola Harri. 2017. Mean teachers are better role models: Weight-averaged consistency targets improve semi-supervised deep learning results. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 30 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. [44] Wu Xing, Chen Cheng, Zhong Mingyu, Wang Jianjia, and Shi Jun. 2021. COVID-AL: The diagnosis of COVID-19 with deep active learning. Med. Image Anal. 68 (2021), 101913.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. [45] Xiao Cao, Choi Edward, and Sun Jimeng. 2018. Opportunities and challenges in developing deep learning models using electronic health records data: A systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 25, 10 (2018), 14191428.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. [46] Yan Jinghui, Wang Yining, Xiang Lu, Zhou Yu, and Zong Chengqing. 2020. A knowledge-driven generative model for multi-implication chinese medical procedure entity normalization. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’20). 14901499.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. [47] Yarowsky David. 1995. Unsupervised word sense disambiguation rivaling supervised methods. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 189196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Yin Tianxiang, Liu Ningzhong, and Sun Han. 2021. Self-paced active learning for deep CNNs via effective loss function. Neurocomputing 424 (2021), 18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. [49] Yoo Donggeun and Kweon In So. 2019. Learning loss for active learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 93102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. [50] Zhang Jie, Shen Dan, Zhou Guodong, Su Jian, and Tan Chew-Lim. 2004. Enhancing HMM-based biomedical named entity recognition by studying special phenomena. J. Biomed. Inf. 37, 6 (2004), 411422.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. [51] Zhang Ningyu, Jia Qianghuai, Yin Kangping, Dong Liang, Gao Feng, and Hua Nengwei. 2020. Conceptualized representation learning for chinese biomedical text mining. arXiv:2008.10813. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.10813.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. [52] Zhao Shaojun. 2004. Named entity recognition in biomedical texts using an HMM model. In Proceedings of the International Joint Workshop on Natural Language Processing in Biomedicine and its Applications (NLPBA/BioNLP’04). 8790.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. [53] Zhou GuoDong and Su Jian. 2002. Named entity recognition using an HMM-based chunk tagger. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 473480.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Combination of Loss-based Active Learning and Semi-supervised Learning for Recognizing Entities in Chinese Electronic Medical Records

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing
      ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing  Volume 22, Issue 5
      May 2023
      653 pages
      ISSN:2375-4699
      EISSN:2375-4702
      DOI:10.1145/3596451
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 5 May 2023
      • Online AM: 20 March 2023
      • Accepted: 13 March 2023
      • Revised: 9 March 2023
      • Received: 30 November 2022
      Published in tallip Volume 22, Issue 5

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)131
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)14

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    View Full Text