Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Claim Extraction in Biomedical Publications using Deep Discourse Model and Transfer Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1907.00962 v2 pith:UCXNZT6G submitted 2019-07-01 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords claimscientificextractionlearningmodelbiomedicaldiscoursetransfer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Claims are a fundamental unit of scientific discourse. The exponential growth in the number of scientific publications makes automatic claim extraction an important problem for researchers who are overwhelmed by this information overload. Such an automated claim extraction system is useful for both manual and programmatic exploration of scientific knowledge. In this paper, we introduce a new dataset of 1,500 scientific abstracts from the biomedical domain with expert annotations for each sentence indicating whether the sentence presents a scientific claim. We introduce a new model for claim extraction and compare it to several baseline models including rule-based and deep learning techniques. Moreover, we show that using a transfer learning approach with a fine-tuning step allows us to improve performance from a large discourse-annotated dataset. Our final model increases F1-score by over 14 percent points compared to a baseline model without transfer learning. We release a publicly accessible tool for discourse and claims prediction along with an annotation tool. We discuss further applications beyond biomedical literature.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. What Are Research Hypotheses?

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A position paper documenting inconsistent and often implicit definitions of 'hypothesis' across NLP hypothesis mining tasks and calling for standardization.

Pith tools