Hi Jeff,

This looks pretty nice.  Thank you for the reference - I gave it a skim but 
will be more thorough in a second run through whenever I get the time.

Sean
________________________________
From: Jeffery Painter <j...@jivecast.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2024 9:02 AM
To: dev@ctakes.apache.org <dev@ctakes.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Build issues today [EXTERNAL]

* External Email - Caution *


Thanks Sean - it is working again with the 5.0.0 models. I'm actually
glad you did not roll in my updates yet, as I found another subtle bug
in the creation of the concept graphs and I have implemented 4 more of
the kernel metrics which we are investigating based on the paper from
Sanchez and Batet:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046411000645__;!!NZvER7FxgEiBAiR_!s3995wdWcA05lOS5icNAI7H_mffo2rfYVluIJXerr1bCMEAvc8bYwNToVmeLxyWqHUBW3AC6KWehvAgdRIUcSeoiYg$


I am adding in the Dice, Ochiai, Simpson and Braun-Blanquet methods
shown in Table 3. I discovered some of the path metrics were being
inflated due to invalid max-depth calculations in the original concept
graph creation due to the root concept not being set to a depth of zero
which I have fixed and now all appears to be working. I will cancel
those PR's and update later today.


Thanks,

Jeff



On 1/26/24 15:30, Finan, Sean wrote:
> This is open for other responses, but I would probably use:
>
>
> Savova, G. K. et al. Mayo clinical Text Analysis and Knowledge Extraction 
> System (cTAKES): architecture, component evaluation and applications. J. Am. 
> Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA 17, 507–513 (2010).
>
>
> You can also point to the github repo if appropriate.
>
>
> Sean
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jeffery Painter <j...@jivecast.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 1:19 PM
> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org <dev@ctakes.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Build issues today [EXTERNAL]
>
> * External Email - Caution *
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> We are preparing an abstract to submit to ICPE in a couple of weeks - is
> there a preferred way to reference cTakes in publications?
>
>
> -
>
> Jeffery
>
>
> On 1/26/24 12:29, Finan, Sean wrote:
>> Hi Jeff,
>>
>> I updated the poms in 5.0.0-SNAPSHOT to use the correct models.  There 
>> shouldn't be any problem building.
>>
>> Sean
>> ________________________________
>> From: Jeffery Painter <j...@jivecast.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2024 11:55 AM
>> To: dev@ctakes.apache.org <dev@ctakes.apache.org>
>> Subject: Build issues today [EXTERNAL]
>>
>> * External Email - Caution *
>>
>>
>> Just a heads up, getting several build issues due to the fact that the
>> 5.0.0-SNAPSHOT jars for most of the ctakes-??-models.jar seem to have
>> disappeared from the snapshot repository.
>>
>> Manually adjusting those to 5.0.1-SNAPSHOT is working for now, but
>> thought I would let whoever controls the build process know that a fresh
>> checkout from github is currently broken.
>>
>> Example:
>>
>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project ctakes-ytex-uima: Could not
>> resolve dependencies for project
>> org.apache.ctakes:ctakes-ytex-uima:jar:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT: The following
>> artifacts could not be resolved:
>> org.apache.ctakes:ctakes-dependency-parser-models:jar:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT
>> (absent):
>> org.apache.ctakes:ctakes-dependency-parser-models:jar:5.0.0-SNAPSHOT was
>> not found in 
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/__;!!NZvER7FxgEiBAiR_!rib8DHyV18yZjtkkuXnrMN2QW0rSURWoyL5_Smr6rhyFqr3JaSzUbSIpnLP1QfUSfCeKAE5VksX-Ls64kzyp0Ej7uw$
>> during a previous attempt. This failure was cached in the local
>> repository and resolution is not reattempted until the update interval
>> of apache.snapshots has elapsed or updates are forced -> [Help 1]
>>
>>
>> Verified that core models have disappeared:
>>
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/ctakes/ctakes-core-models/5.0.0-SNAPSHOT/__;!!NZvER7FxgEiBAiR_!rib8DHyV18yZjtkkuXnrMN2QW0rSURWoyL5_Smr6rhyFqr3JaSzUbSIpnLP1QfUSfCeKAE5VksX-Ls64kzxgwSJHlg$
>>
>> contains no jars
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to