
Bioinformatics workflows are essential for complex biological data analyses and are often described in scientific articles with source code in public repositories. Extracting detailed workflow information from articles can improve accessibility and reusability but is hindered by limited annotated corpora. To address this, we framed the problem as a low-resource extraction task and tested four strategies: 1) creating a tailored annotated corpus, 2) few-shot named-entity recognition (NER) with an autoregressive language model, 3) NER using masked language models with existing and new corpora, and 4) integrating workflow knowledge into NER models. Using BioToFlow, a new corpus of 52 articles annotated with 16 entities, a SciBERT-based NER model achieved a 70.4 F-measure, comparable to inter-annotator agreement. While knowledge integration improved performance for specific entities, it was less effective across the entire information schema. Our results demonstrate that high-performance information extraction for bioinformatics workflows is achievable.
[INFO.INFO-AI] Computer Science [cs]/Artificial Intelligence [cs.AI], FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Computation and Language, Bioinformatics Workflows, [INFO] Computer Science [cs], Information Extraction, Computation and Language (cs.CL), Natural Language Processing, [INFO.INFO-BI] Computer Science [cs]/Bioinformatics [q-bio.QM]
[INFO.INFO-AI] Computer Science [cs]/Artificial Intelligence [cs.AI], FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Computation and Language, Bioinformatics Workflows, [INFO] Computer Science [cs], Information Extraction, Computation and Language (cs.CL), Natural Language Processing, [INFO.INFO-BI] Computer Science [cs]/Bioinformatics [q-bio.QM]
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
