Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Few-shot learning (FSL) is a class of machine learning methods that require small numbers of labeled instances for training. With many medical topics having limited annotated text-based data in practical settings, FSL-based natural language processing (NLP) holds substantial promise. We aimed to conduct a review to explore the current state of FSL methods for medical NLP.
Methods: We searched for articles published between January 2016 and October 2022 using PubMed/Medline, Embase, ACL Anthology, and IEEE Xplore Digital Library. We also searched the preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, medRxiv, and bioRxiv) via Google Scholar to identify the latest relevant methods. We included all articles that involved FSL and any form of medical text. We abstracted articles based on the data source, target task, training set size, primary method(s)/approach(es), and evaluation metric(s).
Results: Fifty-one articles met our inclusion criteria-all published after 2018, and most since 2020 (42/51; 82%). Concept extraction/named entity recognition was the most frequently addressed task (21/51; 41%), followed by text classification (16/51; 31%). Thirty-two (61%) articles reconstructed existing datasets to fit few-shot scenarios, and MIMIC-III was the most frequently used dataset (10/51; 20%). 77% of the articles attempted to incorporate prior knowledge to augment the small datasets available for training. Common methods included FSL with attention mechanisms (20/51; 39%), prototypical networks (11/51; 22%), meta-learning (7/51; 14%), and prompt-based learning methods, the latter being particularly popular since 2021. Benchmarking experiments demonstrated relative underperformance of FSL methods on biomedical NLP tasks.
Conclusion: Despite the potential for FSL in biomedical NLP, progress has been limited. This may be attributed to the rarity of specialized data, lack of standardized evaluation criteria, and the underperformance of FSL methods on biomedical topics. The creation of publicly-available specialized datasets for biomedical FSL may aid method development by facilitating comparative analyses.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10940971 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104458 | DOI Listing |