{"title":"Conditional Random Fields and Support Vector Machines for Disorder Named Entity Recognition in Clinical Texts","authors":"Dingcheng Li, G. Savova, K. Schuler","doi":"10.3115/1572306.1572326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We present a comparative study between two machine learning methods, Conditional Random Fields and Support Vector Machines for clinical named entity recognition. We explore their applicability to clinical domain. Evaluation against a set of gold standard named entities shows that CRFs outperform SVMs. The best F-score with CRFs is 0.86 and for the SVMs is 0.64 as compared to a baseline of 0.60.","PeriodicalId":200974,"journal":{"name":"Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"106","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3115/1572306.1572326","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 106
Abstract
We present a comparative study between two machine learning methods, Conditional Random Fields and Support Vector Machines for clinical named entity recognition. We explore their applicability to clinical domain. Evaluation against a set of gold standard named entities shows that CRFs outperform SVMs. The best F-score with CRFs is 0.86 and for the SVMs is 0.64 as compared to a baseline of 0.60.