Information extraction from chemical patents by David M. Jessop.
Abstract:
The automated extraction of semantic chemical data from the existing literature is demonstrated. For reasons of copyright, the work is focused on the patent literature, though the methods are expected to apply equally to other areas of the chemical literature. Hearst Patterns are applied to the patent literature in order to discover hyponymic relations describing chemical species. The acquired relations are manually validated to determine the precision of the determined hypernyms (85.0%) and of the asserted hyponymic relations (94.3%). It is demonstrated that the system acquires relations that are not present in the ChEBI ontology, suggesting that it could function as a valuable aid to the ChEBI curators. The relations discovered by this process are formalised using the Web Ontology Language (OWL) to enable re-use. PatentEye – an automated system for the extraction of reactions from chemical patents and their conversion to Chemical Markup Language (CML) – is presented. Chemical patents published by the European Patent Office over a ten-week period are used to demonstrate the capability of PatentEye – 4444 reactions are extracted with a precision of 78% and recall of 64% with regards to determining the identity and amount of reactants employed and an accuracy of 92% with regards to product identification. NMR spectra are extracted from the text using OSCAR3, which is developed to greatly increase recall. The resulting system is presented as a significant advancement towards the large-scale and automated extraction of high-quality reaction information. Extended Polymer Markup Language (EPML), a CML dialect for the description of Markush structures as they are presented in the literature, is developed. Software to exemplify and to enable substructure searching of EPML documents is presented. Further work is recommended to refine the language and code to publication-quality before they are presented to the community.
Curious to see how the system would perform against U.S. Patent office literature?
Perhaps more to the point, how would it compared to commercial chemical indexing services?
Always possible to duplicate what has already been done.
Curious what current systems, commercial or otherwise, are lacking that could be a value-add proposition?
How would you poll users? In what journals? What survey instruments or practices would you use?