Summary: Often, the most informative genes have to be selected from different gene sets and several computer gene ranking algorithms have been developed to cope with the problem. To help researchers decide which algorithm to use, we developed the analysis of gene ranking algorithms (AGRA) system that offers a novel technique for comparing ranked lists of genes. The most important feature of AGRA is that no previous knowledge of gene ranking algorithms is needed for their comparison. Using the text mining system finding-associated concepts with text analysis. AGRA defines what we call biomedical concept space (BCS) for each gene list and offers a comparison of the gene lists in six different BCS categories. The uploaded gene lists can be compared using two different methods. In the first method, the overlap between each pair of two gene lists of BCSs is calculated. The second method offers a text field where a specific biomedical concept can be entered. AGRA searches for this concept in each gene lists' BCS, highlights the rank of the concept and offers a visual representation of concepts ranked above and below it.

Availability and Implementation: Available at http://agra.fzv.uni-mb.si/, implemented in Java and running on the Glassfish server.

Contact: simon.kocbek@uni-mb.si

Motivation: While text mining technologies for biomedical research have gained popularity as a way to take advantage of the explosive growth of information in text form in biomedical papers, selecting appropriate natural language processing (NLP) tools is still difficult for researchers who are not familiar with recent advances in NLP. This article provides a comparative evaluation of several state-of-the-art natural language parsers, focusing on the task of extracting protein–protein interaction (PPI) from biomedical papers. We measure how each parser, and its output representation, contributes to accuracy improvement when the parser is used as a component in a PPI system.

Results: All the parsers attained improvements in accuracy of PPI extraction. The levels of accuracy obtained with these different parsers vary slightly, while differences in parsing speed are larger. The best accuracy in this work was obtained when we combined Miyao and Tsujii's Enju parser and Charniak and Johnson's reranking parser, and the accuracy is better than the state-of-the-art results on the same data.

Availability: The PPI extraction system used in this work (AkanePPI) is available online at http://www-tsujii.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/-100downloads/downloads.cgi. The evaluated parsers are also available online from each developer's site.

Contact: yusuke@is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp