Paper detail

Evaluating Sparse Interpretable Word Embeddings for Biomedical Domain

Word embeddings have found their way into a wide range of natural language processing tasks including those in the biomedical domain. While these vector representations successfully capture semantic and syntactic word relations, hidden patterns and trends in the data, they fail to offer interpretability. Interpretability is a key means to justification which is an integral part when it comes to biomedical applications. We present an inclusive study on interpretability of word embeddings in the medical domain, focusing on the role of sparse methods. Qualitative and quantitative measurements and metrics for interpretability of word vector representations are provided. For the quantitative evaluation, we introduce an extensive categorized dataset that can be used to quantify interpretability based on category theory. Intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation of the studied methods are also presented. As for the latter, we propose datasets which can be utilized for effective extrinsic evaluation of word vectors in the biomedical domain. Based on our experiments, it is seen that sparse word vectors show far more interpretability while preserving the performance of their original vectors in downstream tasks.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.