Re: types for hybrid relations

[Steven Bethard]

I agree. I think intermediate types in this case would only have been
useful if UIMA supported type parameters (generics) in the type
system.

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Miller, Timothy
 wrote:
> OK, I'm fine with CollectionTextRelationIdentifiedAnnotationRelation,
> but that probably doesn't inherit from either BinaryTextRelation or
> ElementRelation, and just from Relation itself. But that gets me back to
> the question of whether there is some conceptual benefit to having an
> intermediate "RelationMentionRelation" type, and now I'm thinking
> probably not, because Relation has all the fields it needs anyways. If
> we basically agree on this point then I'll just go ahead and make the type.
> Thanks
> Tim
>
>
>
> On 02/10/2015 11:42 PM, Masanz, James J. wrote:
>> I like either B or Steve's suggestion of 
>> CollectionTextRelationEntityMentionRelation
>> If B, I agree with Steve about making the arguments Element and 
>> IdentifiedAnnotation.
>>
>> I like CollectionTextRelationEntityMentionRelation so that we can link a 
>> single Element with all the mentions that were (will be) merged to create 
>> that Element.
>>
>> -- James
>>
>> 
>> From: Steven Bethard [steven.beth...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 10:59 AM
>> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: types for hybrid relations
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 6:36 AM, Miller, Timothy
>>  wrote:
>>> Any votes for one or more of the following:
>>>
>>> A) Generalize BinaryTextRelation
>>> B) Create ElementMentionRelation (and then map coref chains to Elements)
>> I'd be okay with this one. Though Please just make the arguments
>> Element and IdentifiedAnnotation. The indirection through
>> RelationArgument is painful and unhelpful as far as I can tell.
>>
>>> C) Create RelationMentionRelation
>>> D) I'm not doing anything until I clear this mountain of snow off of my car
>> Another possibility would be to create a relation type that exactly
>> matches what you need:
>>
>> CollectionTextRelationEntityMentionRelation
>>
>> Where the arguments are a CollectionTextRelation and a EntityMention.
>> That would have the advantage of removing all need for casting, since
>> the two arguments would have exactly the right types.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>

Hello cTAKES Mailing List

[Raymond Li]

Hello, my name is is Raymond Li and I am currently working on a team
project involving cTAKES. The goal of our project would be to use cTAKES to
analyze posts on social media (such as tweets, forum posts, public
available data) in order to catch in real-time any adverse effects of
prescribed drugs and do a public service of protecting people from harmful
drugs.

Aside from this introduction, I do have only one question to ask to proceed
with this project: Is cTAKES capable of understanding slang words as
symptoms. An example is if I were to say "I took Crestor and feeling bad"
is there a way for cTAKES to recognize that Crestor had a negative effect?
My team has not been able to isolate 'bad' as a negative effect as it is
not a defined medical symptom, but it would be nice to figure out if such a
solution exists, or if we would need to develop our own solution and how we
could go around doing it.

My team and I would appreciate any comments or assistance regarding our
project and this current issue. Thank you and have a nice day!

-- 
Sincerely,

Raymond Li