bioRxivBioinformaticsPreprint
Validating the representation of distance between infarctdiseases using Word2Vec word embedding
Daiki YokokawaiD, Kazutaka NodaiD, Yasutaka YanagitaiD, Takanori UeharaiD, Yoshiyuki OhiraiD, Kiyoshi ShikinoiD, Tomoko TsukamotoiD, Masatomi IkusakaiD
Abstract
ObjectiveTo determine if inter-disease distances between word embedding vectors using the picot-and-cluster strategy (PCS) are a valid quantitative representation of similar disease groups in a limited domain. Materials and MethodsAbstracts were extracted from the Ichushi-Web database and subjected to morphological analysis and training using the Word2Vec. From this, word embedding vectors were obtained. For words including "infarction", we calculated the cophenetic correlation coefficient (CCC) as an internal validity measure and the adjusted rand index (ARI), normalized mutual information (NMI), and adjusted mutual information (AMI) with ICD-10 codes as the external validity measures. This was performed for each combination of metric and hierarchical clustering method. ResultsSeventy-one words included "infarction", of which 38 diseases matched the ICD-10 standard with the appearance of 21 unique ICD-10 codes. The CCC was most significant at 0.8690 (metric and method: euclidean and centroid), while the AMI was maximal at 0.4109 (metric and method: cosine and correlation, and average and weighted). The NMI and ARI were maximal at 0.8463 and 0.3593, respectively (metric and method: cosine and complete). DiscussionThe metric and method that maximized the internal validity measure were different from those that maximized the external validity measures; both produced different results. The Cosine distance should be used when considering ICD-10, and the Euclidean distance when considering the frequency of word occurrence. ConclusionThe distributed representation, when trained by Word2Vec on the "infarction" domain from a Japanese academic corpus, provides an objective inter-disease distance used in PCS.
- research focus: benchmarking
- research focus: clustering
- research focus: differential expression
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Replacing non-biomedical concepts improves embedding of biomedical concepts
Enock Niyonkuru, Mauricio Soto Gomez, … Peter N. Robinson·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·May 5, 2025
- Pairwise Relative Distance (PRED) is an intuitive and robust metric for assessing vector similarity and class separability
Aarush Mohit Mittal, Andrew C. Lin, Nitin Gupta·bioRxiv·Aug 13, 2021
- BioWiC: An Evaluation Benchmark for Biomedical Concept Representation
Hossein Rouhizadeh, Irina Nikishina, … Douglas Teodoro·bioRxiv·Nov 8, 2023
- Developing and Evaluating Mappings of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM Codes to PheCodes
Patrick Wu, Aliya Gifford, … Wei‐Qi Wei·JMIR Medical InformaticsPeer-reviewed·Nov 29, 2019
- Metrics for Graph Comparison: A Practitioner’s Guide
Peter Wills, François G. Meyer·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Feb 12, 2020
- Temporal coding of conceptual distances in the human language area
Yasuki Noguchi·bioRxiv·Oct 20, 2025