Thanks Sean By "following engine", you mean a second instance of the history engine that uses only the event spans, or you modified the current one to traverse the event-span within the context window? I see you made some source changes in that area and will check tomorrow.
Peter On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 2:26 PM Finan, Sean <sean.fi...@childrens.harvard.edu> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > I have noticed this and just added a following engine that recognized text > within event spans. It is a lazy solution, but it fit my needs and > available time. > > Sean > ________________________________________ > From: Peter Abramowitsch <pabramowit...@gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 5:03 PM > To: dev@ctakes.apache.org > Subject: Performance of the cleartk history module [EXTERNAL] > > * External Email - Caution * > > > Hi All > > I've noticed that the HistoryCleartkAnalysisEngine misses many common forms > of subject history including the obvious "h/o" prefix. Looking into the > distribution, there's a model.jar and what appears to be a weights file > containing trigger words: > resources/org/apache/ctakes/assertion/models/history.txt where h, o, / > are all given their own weights. But I'm not sure that they're actually > used in this way: see below. However, there's also a tiny file: > /org/apache/ctakes/assertion/semantic_classes/history.txt > which does contain a few entries including "h/o" which I assume is used for > training but is never referred to anywhere. > > Here's the behavior I'm seeing: > example input condition term found history feature marked range text > history of pregnancies "history of" included in the cu_term and prefterm > yes > no history of pregnancies > history of adenopathy "history of" not included in the cu_term or prefterm > yes yes adenopathy > H/O postpartum psychosis "h/o" not included in the prefterm or cu_term yes > yes postpartum psychosis > H/O: postpartum psychosis "h/o" not included in the prefterm or cu_term yes > no postpartum psychosis > H/O pregnancies "h/o" included in the cu_term yes no h/o pregnancies > > You can see that it is quite perverse - there is a pattern suggesting that > if the concept definition occupies the history words, then they cannot be > seen by the history annotation engine. > > Has anyone else noticed this - and have they done anything about it? > > Peter >
