Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1186/s13321-016-0172-0

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1186/s13321-016-0172-0
suck pdf from google scholar
C5086069!5086069!27843493
unlimited free pdf from europmc27843493    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

suck abstract from ncbi


Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
pmid27843493      J+Cheminform 2016 ; 8 (ä): ä
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Recognizing chemicals in patents: a comparative analysis #MMPMID27843493
  • Habibi M; Wiegandt DL; Schmedding F; Leser U
  • J Cheminform 2016[]; 8 (ä): ä PMID27843493show ga
  • Recently, methods for Chemical Named Entity Recognition (NER) have gained substantial interest, driven by the need for automatically analyzing todays ever growing collections of biomedical text. Chemical NER for patents is particularly essential due to the high economic importance of pharmaceutical findings. However, NER on patents has essentially been neglected by the research community for long, mostly because of the lack of enough annotated corpora. A recent international competition specifically targeted this task, but evaluated tools only on gold standard patent abstracts instead of full patents; furthermore, results from such competitions are often difficult to extrapolate to real-life settings due to the relatively high homogeneity of training and test data. Here, we evaluate the two state-of-the-art chemical NER tools, tmChem and ChemSpot, on four different annotated patent corpora, two of which consist of full texts. We study the overall performance of the tools, compare their results at the instance level, report on high-recall and high-precision ensembles, and perform cross-corpus and intra-corpus evaluations. Our findings indicate that full patents are considerably harder to analyze than patent abstracts and clearly confirm the common wisdom that using the same text genre (patent vs. scientific) and text type (abstract vs. full text) for training and testing is a pre-requisite for achieving high quality text mining results.
  • ä


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box