# Cheap Ways of Extracting Clinical Markers from Texts

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.11227 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.11227/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 28 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Mar 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14314/) (2023)
- [BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.05794/) (2022)
- [How much do language models copy from their training data? Evaluating linguistic novelty in text generation using RAVEN](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.09509/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Integrating Supervised Extractive and Generative Language Models for Suicide Risk Evidence Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.15478/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper describes the work of the UniBuc Archaeology team for CLPsych's 2024 Shared Task, which involved finding evidence within the text supporting the assigned suicide risk level. Two types of evidence were required: highlights (extracting relevant spans within the text) and summaries (aggregating evidence into a synthesis). Our work focuses on evaluating Large Language Models (LLM) as opposed to an alternative method that is much more memory and resource efficient. The first approach employs a good old-fashioned machine learning (GOML) pipeline consisting of a tf-idf vectorizer with a logistic regression classifier, whose representative features are used to extract relevant highlights. The second, more resource intensive, uses an LLM for generating the summaries and is guided by chain-of-thought to provide sequences of text indicating clinical markers.