Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 35 references

Distilling Closed-Source LLM's Knowledge for Locally Stable and Economic Biomedical Entity Linking

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A small open-source model, trained on a closed-source LLM's rankings, can beat that teacher's Acc@1 on biomedical entity linking.

desk verdict A sensible distillation pipeline whose headline accuracy gains are within sampling noise; the framework is worth reviewing, but the central claim needs significance testing and fair baselines. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19722 v1 pith:SQV5SEN3 submitted 2025-05-26 cs.CL cs.AI

Yihao Ai , Zhiyuan Ning , Weiwei Dai , Pengfei Wang , Yi Du , Wenjuan Cui , Kunpeng Liu , Yuanchun Zhou This is my paper
classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords biomedicalentitylinkingknowledgedistillationcandidatere-rankingLLMpromptinglow-resourcelearningLoRAfine-tuningclosed-sourcemedicalconceptnormalization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Biomedical entity linking maps a nonstandard mention in clinical text to its standard knowledge-base entry. The paper proposes RPDR, a three-step framework in which a retriever proposes six candidate entities, a closed-source LLM is prompted to rank them, and those rankings are used to fine-tune a small open-source LLM that performs the same re-ranking locally. The distilled model improves Acc@1 over the raw closed-source teacher on both tested datasets (0.740 vs 0.731 on Aier, 0.734 vs 0.724 on Ask A Patient), using only a small amount of generated training data. The appeal is practical: a locally deployed open-source model avoids API costs, rate limits, and the risk that a vendor discontinues or changes the service, while still getting much of the teacher's cross-language transfer ability.

What carries the argument

The engine is a distillation loop. A fixed prompt template asks a closed-source LLM to understand the mention and output the six retrieved candidates in likelihood order; the output, generated at temperature 0, becomes training data. A small open-source LLM is fine-tuned with LoRA, a low-rank adaptation that trains only a small parameter increment on top of the pretrained weights, to reproduce that ordering. The retriever is the supporting equipment: a bi-encoder initialized from a BERT-based model (SapBERT on English, a Chinese RoBERTa on the Aier set) whose top-six list bounds what re-ranking can fix.

What would settle it

Compute recall@6 of the retriever on the Aier and Ask A Patient test sets; if the golden entity is missing from the candidate list for a substantial fraction of mentions, the reported Acc@1 improvements are bounded by that fraction, and the distillation claim could be tested by comparing re-ranker behavior only on mentions where recall succeeds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that RPDR, which reformulates entity linking from two steps into three (retrieval, prompting-based training-data generation, and distillation for re-ranking), lets a locally deployable open-source LLM reproduce and slightly exceed a closed-source LLM's re-ranking quality. On the Chinese Aier dataset, the distilled model reaches 0.740 Acc@1 versus 0.731 for the raw teacher, and on the English Ask A Patient dataset it reaches 0.734 versus 0.724. The paper reads these results as evidence that the teacher's knowledge has been transferred into a model that can run without the teacher, and that the transfer generalizes across a private Chinese clinical corpus and a public English consumer-health corpus.

Load-bearing premise

The re-ranking step can only help when the retriever has already placed the golden entity among the six candidates, and the paper never reports that retrieval recall.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A provider can run re-ranking entirely on local hardware; the paper's cost table puts local Llama-2 inference at $0.038 versus $0.294 for GPT-3.5 Turbo on the Ask A Patient evaluation set.
  • The pipeline stops depending on a vendor's uptime or version changes at inference time, because the closed-source model is called once to create labels and never per query.
  • The framework transfers across English and Chinese and across private and public data, so unannotated mentions plus teacher-generated labels can substitute for extensive human annotation.
  • Teacher-generated data can outperform human-labeled data at the same size; the Aier ablation reports 0.740 Acc@1 with generated data versus 0.712 with human labels.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The reported gains sit on top of retrieval, so a natural next experiment is to swap in a stronger retriever and test whether the distilled re-ranker's advantage grows with retrieval recall.
  • The same teacher-label-plus-LoRA-distillation recipe should transfer to other ranking-heavy tasks, such as passage retrieval or product search, where a strong closed model can rank but cannot be called at scale.
  • The peak-and-decline curve in Fig. 4 suggests teacher-generated labels contain noise, so a confidence filter or agreement-based selection on teacher outputs could raise the usable data ceiling.
  • Because the student copies the teacher's rankings rather than verified answers, systematic teacher errors will be inherited; combining the local model with cheap lexical or rule signals could catch cases where the teacher is biased.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes RPDR, a framework for low-resource biomedical entity linking. It first retrieves k candidate entities with a bi-encoder (SapBERT or a fine-tuned Chinese encoder), then prompts a closed-source LLM (GPT-3.5 Turbo or DeepSeek V3) to re-rank the candidates for unlabeled mentions, and finally fine-tunes an open-source LLM (BenTsao or Llama2-7B) with LoRA on the generated re-rankings. The resulting local model is evaluated on the private Aier Chinese dataset and the public Ask A Patient English dataset, reporting Acc@1/Acc@5 improvements over baselines and a cost comparison in Table 6. The core claim is that the distilled open-source model slightly outperforms the raw closed-source LLM (0.740 vs 0.731 on Aier; 0.734 vs 0.724 on Ask A Patient) while avoiding per-query API costs.

Significance. If the central empirical claim were established, RPDR would be a useful practical recipe: it replaces repeated closed-source API calls with a locally deployable model and shows cross-lingual applicability. The paper is clearly written, the prompt design is sensible, and the evaluation against held-out human labels avoids the circularity that would arise from evaluating on teacher-generated labels. The cost numbers in Table 6 are a concrete practical contribution. However, the headline gains are small relative to test-set sizes, and the comparison against baselines on Ask A Patient is not fully controlled. The framework itself is not fundamentally new—it combines candidate retrieval, LLM-generated training data, and LoRA distillation—but the combination and the biomedical application are useful. The lack of released code or checkpoints limits reproducibility.

major comments (4)
  1. [Table 2, §4.5] The central claim that RPDR improves Acc@1 over the raw LLM and baselines is not supported by statistical evidence. On Aier (n=104), the reported 0.740 vs 0.731 vs 0.721 differences correspond to one or two changed predictions; the standard error of a proportion near 0.73 is about 0.044. On Ask A Patient (n=867), the 0.734 vs 0.724 gap is 9 instances. The paper reports no confidence intervals, no paired significance test (e.g., McNemar or bootstrap), and no repeated runs. Because this improvement claim is the main contribution, the authors should either provide significance evidence or substantially weaken the 'superiority' language.
  2. [Table 4, §4.6] The comparison between human-labeled and GPT-3.5-generated training data is confounded by dataset size and composition: the Aier training set has only 309 human-labeled instances (Table 1), while the generated-data condition uses 1,000 mention-candidate pairs. The 0.740 vs 0.712 gap may reflect the larger training set or the selection of unlabeled mentions rather than the teacher's labels. The authors should equalize the number of training instances or provide a learning-curve comparison before claiming that generated data is superior to human labels.
  3. [Section 4.3, Table 2] On Ask A Patient, the supervised baselines (BioSyn, BioCEI) are evaluated with zero-shot checkpoints trained on NCBI-Disease, while the proposed method is fine-tuned on 2,000 generated samples. This is not an apples-to-apples comparison for the claim that RPDR is superior in low-resource settings. The relevant comparison against Raw LLM is more controlled, but that gap is small and statistically unquantified. The authors should either fine-tune baselines on comparable in-domain data or explicitly frame the comparison as zero-shot adaptation.
  4. [Sections 3.1 and 4.4] The paper never reports recall@k of the candidate retrieval stage, even though the re-ranking step can only succeed when the golden entity is among the k retrieved candidates. Without recall@k, the reader cannot tell whether the observed Acc@1 gains are bounded by retrieval failures, and the framework's contribution to re-ranking is hard to isolate. Reporting recall@k for both datasets would make the headroom explicit and strengthen the interpretation of Table 2.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.1] There is a typo: 'representationss' should be 'representations'.
  2. [Sections 3.2 and 3.3] The section headings contain a stray space: 'T raining' should be 'Training'.
  3. [Table 2] The caption should identify which LLM is 'Raw LLM' for each dataset, since Section 4.4 indicates GPT-3.5 Turbo for Aier and DeepSeek V3 for Ask A Patient.
  4. [Section 1] The claim that the authors are 'the first to apply knowledge distillation in biomedical entity linking' is too strong without a more thorough related-work search; several earlier works use distillation for biomedical NLP, so this novelty claim should be softened or supported.
  5. [Sections 1 and 4.4] DeepSeek V3 is described as a 'closed-source' LLM, but the model weights are openly released; this characterization should be corrected or qualified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No material circularity: teacher-generated labels define the training signal, but Acc@k is scored against held-out human annotations.

full rationale

I traced the claimed derivation chain: candidate retrieval uses the external retriever of Xu et al. [32] or SapBERT; training data for re-ranking are generated by prompting GPT-3.5 Turbo / DeepSeek V3; an open-source LLM (BenTsao or Llama-2) is fine-tuned with LoRA on those generated labels; and final Acc@1/Acc@5 are computed against human-annotated test sets (Aier and Ask A Patient). There is no equation or procedure in which the reported test metric is defined in terms of the teacher model's own outputs: the teacher provides the training signal, but the evaluation labels are independent gold standards. Consequently, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. The paper does contain several self-citations in the introduction and related work, but they are background references (e.g., for LLM transferability and biomedical-text motivation) and are not load-bearing for the central distillation claim. The absence of statistical significance tests and the unreported retrieval recall@k are legitimate empirical-validity concerns, but they are not circularity: they do not make the reported Acc@k equivalent to the training labels by construction. The central improvement claim is therefore self-contained against external, held-out annotations, and no specific circular reduction can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim is empirical and depends on several unmeasured premises: the quality of teacher-generated labels, the retrieval recall at k=6, and hand-tuned training sizes and LoRA settings. The free parameters above are all selected rather than derived. No new physical or ontological entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • number of generated training samples = 1000 (Aier), 2000 (Ask A Patient)
    The ablation in Fig. 4 shows accuracy rises then falls as generated data increases, so the chosen sample counts are tuned per dataset and act as free parameters in the reported results.
  • number of candidates k = 6
    The retriever always returns six candidates; this cap determines the upper bound on re-ranking performance and follows the configuration in Xu et al. [32].
  • number of few-shot examples in the teacher prompt = 4 (Aier), 5 (Ask A Patient)
    The prompt includes a small number of examples chosen by the authors; the teacher's output quality depends on this.
  • LoRA hyperparameters = rank=8, alpha=16, dropout=0.05; lr=3e-4 / 3e-5, epochs=10 / 5
    LoRA rank, alpha, learning rate, and epoch counts are chosen per model and not subjected to a sensitivity analysis; the student's re-ranking quality depends on them.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The closed-source LLM's re-ranked outputs are accurate enough to serve as training labels
    The entire distillation step assumes GPT-3.5 Turbo and DeepSeek V3 produce correct enough orderings on unannotated mentions to supervise the student; label accuracy is never measured.
  • domain assumption The retriever returns the golden entity within the top six candidates for most test mentions
    Final Acc@1 cannot exceed the retriever's recall at k=6, but recall@k is never reported in Sections 3.1 or 4.4.
  • domain assumption SapBERT and Chinese-roberta-wwm-ext-large representations transfer adequately across languages and domains
    The English retriever is used unfine-tuned and the Chinese retriever is a substitute backbone; no retrieval-specific evaluation is reported.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Distilling Closed-Source LLM's Knowledge for Locally Stable and Economic Biomedical Entity Linking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SQV5SEN3

@misc{pith2026250519722,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Distilling Closed-Source LLM's Knowledge for Locally Stable and Economic Biomedical Entity Linking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SQV5SEN3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19722}
}
read the original abstract

Biomedical entity linking aims to map nonstandard entities to standard entities in a knowledge base. Traditional supervised methods perform well but require extensive annotated data to transfer, limiting their usage in low-resource scenarios. Large language models (LLMs), especially closed-source LLMs, can address these but risk stability issues and high economic costs: using these models is restricted by commercial companies and brings significant economic costs when dealing with large amounts of data. To address this, we propose ``RPDR'', a framework combining closed-source LLMs and open-source LLMs for re-ranking candidates retrieved by a retriever fine-tuned with a small amount of data. By prompting a closed-source LLM to generate training data from unannotated data and fine-tuning an open-source LLM for re-ranking, we effectively distill the knowledge to the open-source LLM that can be deployed locally, thus avoiding the stability issues and the problem of high economic costs. We evaluate RPDR on two datasets, including one real-world dataset and one publicly available dataset involving two languages: Chinese and English. RPDR achieves 0.019 Acc@1 improvement and 0.036 Acc@1 improvement on the Aier dataset and the Ask A Patient dataset when the amount of training data is not enough. The results demonstrate the superiority and generalizability of the proposed framework.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.19722 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overall framework of our method. Candidates are generated by a bi-encoder. In the training step, the candidates are re-ranked by closed-source LLMs and used for training open-source LLMs. When inferencing, the candidates are re-ranked by the fine-tuned specialized LLMs. by mimicking the teacher model’s output [8]. West et al. [28] distilled causal commonsense from GPT-3 to a small model, resulting in a compact commo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the designed prompt. rec = LLM(prompt, query), (3) where query consists of the mention, the candidates, and the context of the mention. And rec is the output of the LLM, consisting of k re-ranked candidates. With closed-source LLMs, we obtain a batch of mentions paired with re-ranked candidates, along with corresponding candidates and contexts, these are then used to fine-tune the open-source LLMs. 3… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of the designed instruction used for fine-tuning BenTsao [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The performances of the fine-tuned LLM with different numbers of training data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

    Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F.L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., Anadkat, S., et al.: Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    In: 2023 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW)

    Cai, X., Xiao, M., Ning, Z., Zhou, Y.: Resolving the imbalance issue in hierarchical disciplinary topic inference via llm-based data augmentation. In: 2023 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW). pp. 1424–1429. IEEE (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.08177 (2023), https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2304.08177

    Cui, Y., Yang, Z., Yao, X.: Efficient and effective text encoding for chinese llama and alpaca. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.08177 (2023), https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2304.08177

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.12604 (2023)

    Dong, H., Ning, Z., Wang, P., Qiao, Z., Wang, P., Zhou, Y., Fu, Y.: Adaptive path-memory network for temporal knowledge graph reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.12604 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Disentangled Multi-span Evolutionary Network against Temporal Knowledge Graph Reasoning

    Dong, H., Qiao, Z., Ning, Z., Hao, Q., Du, Y., Wang, P., Zhou, Y.: Disentan- gled multi-span evolutionary network against temporal knowledge graph reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.14020 (2025)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Artificial Intelligence 329, 104085 (2024)

    Dong, H., Wang, P., Xiao, M., Ning, Z., Wang, P., Zhou, Y.: Temporal inductive path neural network for temporal knowledge graph reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 329, 104085 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    D’Souza, J., Ng, V.: Sieve-based entity linking for the biomedical domain. In: Pro- ceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguis- tics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 2: Short Papers). pp. 297–302 (2015)

    2015

  8. [8]

    Inter- national Journal of Computer Vision129(6), 1789–1819 (2021)

    Gou, J., Yu, B., Maybank, S.J., Tao, D.: Knowledge distillation: A survey. Inter- national Journal of Computer Vision129(6), 1789–1819 (2021)

    2021

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    In: International Conference on Learning Representations (2021)

    Hu, E.J., Wallis, P., Allen-Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Wang, S., Wang, L., Chen, W., et al.: Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. In: International Conference on Learning Representations (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    In: The 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (2023)

    Hung, C.Y., Hu, Z., Hu, Y., Lee, R.K.W.: Who wrote it and why? prompting large- language models for authorship verification. In: The 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    AMIA Summits on Translational Science Proceedings2020, 269 (2020)

    Ji, Z., Wei, Q., Xu, H.: Bert-based ranking for biomedical entity normalization. AMIA Summits on Translational Science Proceedings2020, 269 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    BMC bioinformatics18, 79–86 (2017)

    Li, H., Chen, Q., Tang, B., Wang, X., Xu, H., Wang, B., Huang, D.: Cnn-based ranking for biomedical entity normalization. BMC bioinformatics18, 79–86 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    Bioinformatics 37(20), 3610–3617 (2021)

    Liang, M., Xue, K., Ye, Q., Ruan, T.: A combined recall and rank framework with online negative sampling for chinese procedure terminology normalization. Bioinformatics 37(20), 3610–3617 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (volume 1: long papers)

    Limsopatham, N., Collier, N.: Normalising medical concepts in social media texts by learning semantic representation. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (volume 1: long papers). pp. 1014– 1023 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    In: Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies

    Liu, F., Shareghi, E., Meng, Z., Basaldella, M., Collier, N.: Self-alignment pretrain- ing for biomedical entity representations. In: Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies....

    2021

  8. [16]

    In: Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining

    Ning, Z., Qiao, Z., Dong, H., Du, Y., Zhou, Y.: Lightcake: A lightweight frame- work for context-aware knowledge graph embedding. In: Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. pp. 181–193. Springer (2021) Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 13

    2021

  9. [17]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.06312 (2024)

    Ning, Z., Tian, C., Xiao, M., Fan, W., Wang, P., Li, L., Wang, P., Zhou, Y.: Fedgcs: A generative framework for efficient client selection in federated learning via gradient-based optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.06312 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.05533 (2025)

    Ning, Z., Wang, P., Qiao, Z., Wang, P., Zhou, Y.: Rethinking graph contrastive learning through relative similarity preservation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.05533 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  11. [19]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.13964 (2022)

    Ning, Z., Wang, P., Wang, P., Qiao, Z., Fan, W., Zhang, D., Du, Y., Zhou, Y.: Graph soft-contrastive learning via neighborhood ranking. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.13964 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.06635 (2025)

    Ning, Z., Wang, Z., Zhang, R., Xu, P., Liu, K., Wang, P., Ju, W., Wang, P., Zhou, Y., Cambria, E., et al.: Deep cut-informed graph embedding and clustering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.06635 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.07011 (2020)

    Qiao, Z., Ning, Z., Du, Y., Zhou, Y.: Context-enhanced entity and relation embed- ding for knowledge graph completion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.07011 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    In: ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)

    Sui, X., Song, K., Zhou, B., Zhang, Y., Yuan, X.: A multi-task learning framework for chinese medical procedure entity normalization. In: ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). pp. 8337–8341. IEEE (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Associ- ation for Computational Linguistics

    Sung, M., Jeon, H., Lee, J., Kang, J.: Biomedical entity representations with syn- onym marginalization. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Associ- ation for Computational Linguistics. pp. 3641–3650 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971 (2023)

    Touvron, H., Lavril, T., Izacard, G., Martinet, X., Lachaux, M.A., Lacroix, T., Rozière, B., Goyal, N., Hambro, E., Azhar, F., et al.: Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06975 (2023)

    Wang, H., Liu, C., Xi, N., Qiang, Z., Zhao, S., Qin, B., Liu, T.: Huatuo: Tun- ing llama model with chinese medical knowledge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06975 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

    Wang, Y., Kordi, Y., Mishra, S., Liu, A., Smith, N.A., Khashabi, D., Hajishirzi, H.: Self-instruct: Aligning language models with self-generated instructions. In: Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). p...

    2023

  19. [27]

    Advances in neural information processing systems35, 24824–24837 (2022)

    Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q.V., Zhou, D., et al.: Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in neural information processing systems35, 24824–24837 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    In: Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Lan- guage Technologies

    West, P., Bhagavatula, C., Hessel, J., Hwang, J., Jiang, L., Le Bras, R., Lu, X., Welleck, S., Choi, Y.: Symbolic knowledge distillation: from general language mod- els to commonsense models. In: Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Associati...

    2022

  21. [29]

    In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

    Xu, D., Zhang, Z., Bethard, S.: A generate-and-rank framework with semantic type regularization for biomedical concept normalization. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. pp. 8452–8464 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.12626 (2025)

    Xu, P., Ning, Z., Li, P., Liu, W., Wang, P., Cui, J., Zhou, Y., Wang, P.: scsiamese- clu:Asiameseclusteringframeworkforinterpretingsingle-cellrnasequencingdata. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.12626 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    In: International Conference on Database Systems for Advanced Ap- plications

    Xu, P., Ning, Z., Xiao, M., Feng, G., Li, X., Zhou, Y., Wang, P.: sccdcg: Effi- cient deep structural clustering for single-cell rna-seq via deep cut-informed graph embedding. In: International Conference on Database Systems for Advanced Ap- plications. pp. 172–187. Springer (...

    2024

  24. [32]

    13869–13877 (2023)

    Xu, Z., Chen, Y., Hu, B.: Improving biomedical entity linking with cross-entity in- teraction.In:ProceedingsoftheAAAIConferenceonArtificialIntelligence.vol.37, pp. 13869–13877 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36 (2024)

    Yao, S., Yu, D., Zhao, J., Shafran, I., Griffiths, T., Cao, Y., Narasimhan, K.: Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Ye, X., Xiao, M., Ning, Z., Dai, W., Cui, W., Du, Y., Zhou, Y.: Needed: Introducing hierarchicaltransformertoeyediseasesdiagnosis.In:Proceedingsofthe2023SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM). pp. 667–675. SIAM (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    In: The 22nd Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing and BioNLP Shared Tasks

    Yuan, C., Xie, Q., Ananiadou, S.: Zero-shot temporal relation extraction with chatgpt. In: The 22nd Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing and BioNLP Shared Tasks. pp. 92–102 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.