# Survey: Understand the challenges of MachineLearning Experts using Named EntityRecognition Tools

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.16112 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16112/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 53 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Jan 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Deep contextualized word representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.05365/) (2018)
- [A Survey on Deep Learning for Named Entity Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.09449/) (2018)
- [FinGPT: Open-Source Financial Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.06031/) (2023)
- [Neural Natural Language Processing for Unstructured Data in Electronic Health Records: a Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.02975/) (2021)
- [Comparing Open Arabic Named Entity Recognition Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.05857/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper presents a survey based on Kasunic's survey research methodology to identify the criteria used by Machine Learning (ML) experts to evaluate Named Entity Recognition (NER) tools and frameworks. Comparison and selection of NER tools and frameworks is a critical step in leveraging NER for Information Retrieval to support the development of Clinical Practice Guidelines. In addition, this study examines the main challenges faced by ML experts when choosing suitable NER tools and frameworks. Using Nunamaker's methodology, the article begins with an introduction to the topic, contextualizes the research, reviews the state-of-the-art in science and technology, and identifies challenges for an expert survey on NER tools and frameworks. This is followed by a description of the survey's design and implementation. The paper concludes with an evaluation of the survey results and the insights gained, ending with a summary and conclusions.