Introduction to special issue on reasoning in natural language information processing

Machine learning techniques have long been the foundations of speech processing. Bayesian classiflcation, decision trees, unsupervised clustering, the EM algorithm, maximum entropy, etc. are all part of existing speech recognition systems. The success of statistical speech recognition has led to the rise of statistical and empirical methods in natural language processing. Indeed, many of the machine learning techniques used in language processing, from statistical part-of-speech tagging to the noisy channel model for machine translation have roots in work conducted in the speech fleld. However, advances in learning theory and algorithmic machine learning approaches in recent years have led to signiflcant changes in the direction and emphasis of the statistical and learning centered research in natural language processing and made a mark on natural language and speech processing. Approaches such as memory based learning, a range of linear classiflers such as Boosting, SVMs and SNoW and others have been successfully applied to a broad range of natural language problems, and these now inspire new research in speech retrieval and recognition. We have seen an increasingly close collaboration between voice and language processing researchers in some of the shared tasks such as spontaneous speech recognition and understanding, voice data information extraction, and machine translation. The purpose of this special issue was to invite speech and language researchers to communicate with each other, and with the machine learning community on the latest machine learning advances in their work. The call for papers was met with great enthusiasm from the speech and natural language community. Thirty six submissions were received; each paper was reviewed by at least three reviewers. Only ten papers were selected re∞ecting not only some of the best work on machine learning in the areas of natural language and spoken language processing but also what we view as a collection of papers that represent current trends in these areas of research both from the perspective of

In the era of digitalization, electronic gadgets such as Google Translate, Siri, and Alexa have at least one characteristic: They are all the products of natural language processing (NLP). “Natural Language” refers to a human language used for daily communication, such as English, Hindi, Bengali, etc. Natural languages, as opposed to artificial languages such as computer languages and mathematical nomenclature, have evolved as they have been transmitted from generation to generation and are challenging to explain with clear limits in the first instance. In natural language processing, artificial intelligence (Singh et al., 2021), linguistics, information processing, and cognitive science are all related fields (NLP). NLP aims to use intelligent computer techniques to process human language. However, NLP technologies such as voice recognition, language comprehension, and machine translation exist. With such limited obvious exclusions, machine learning algorithms in NLP sometimes lacked sufficient capacity to consume massive amounts of training data. In addition, the algorithms, techniques, and infrastructural facilities lack enough strength. Humans design features in traditional machine learning, and feature engineering is a limitation that requires significant human expertise. Simultaneously, the accompanying superficial algorithms lack depiction capability and, as a result, the ability to generate layers of duplicatable concepts that would naturally separate intricate aspects in forming visible linguistic data. Deep learning overcomes the challenges mentioned earlier by using deep, layered modelling architectures, often using neural networks and the corresponding full-stack learning methods. Deep learning has recently enhanced natural language processing by using artificial neural networks based on biological brain systems and Backpropagation. Deep learning approaches that use several processing layers to develop hierarchy data representations have produced cutting-edge results in various areas. This chapter introduces natural language processing (NLP) as an AI component. The history of NLP is next. Distributed language representations are the core of NLP's profound learning revolution. After the survey, the boundaries of deep learning for NLP are investigated. The paper proposes five NLP scientific fields.

Big data analytics (BDA) is an advanced analytic technique used with very large and diverse sets of data from different sources. Natural language processing (NLP) is a technology that interfaces with different fields such as computer science, linguistics, and human-computer interactions. Over the past few years, there is a growing number of firms, which are using different BDA and NLP applications in their businesses. Only a few of the research have investigated different dimensions of NLP and BDA and their impacts on the overall organizational performance. There is a growing interest among researchers and practitioners in understanding the consequences for firms that adopt BDA and NLP applications. In this context, the aim of this article is to determine the factors for the usage of BDA and NLP applications in business. With the help of dynamic capability view theory and existing literature, a theoretical model was developed conceptually. Later, the model was validated using structural equation modeling approach considering 1287 samples from 23 firms, primarily based in Asia and Europe, which use NLP and BDA applications. The article finds that NLP and BDA applications help the firms to improve their operational efficiency, which in turn improves the overall firm performance.

Like any other science, research in natural language processing (NLP) depends on the ability to draw correct conclusions from experiments. A key tool for this is statistical significance testing: We use it to judge whether a result provides meaningful, generalizable findings or should be taken with a pinch of salt. When comparing new methods against others, performance metrics often differ by only small amounts, so researchers turn to significance tests to show that improved models are genuinely better. Unfortunately, this reasoning often fails because we choose inappropriate significance tests or carry them out incorrectly, making their outcomes meaningless. Or, the test we use may fail to indicate a significant result when a more appropriate test would find one. NLP researchers must avoid these pitfalls to ensure that their evaluations are sound and ultimately avoid wasting time and money through incorrect conclusions.This book guides NLP researchers through the whole process of significance testing, making it easy to select the right kind of test by matching canonical NLP tasks to specific significance testing procedures. As well as being a handbook for researchers, the book provides theoretical background on significance testing, includes new methods that solve problems with significance tests in the world of deep learning and multidataset benchmarks, and describes the open research problems of significance testing for NLP.The book focuses on the task of comparing one algorithm with another. At the core of this is the p-value, the probability that a difference at least as extreme as the one we observed could occur by chance. If the p-value falls below a predetermined threshold, the result is declared significant. Leaving aside the fundamental limitation of turning the validity of results into a binary question with an arbitrary threshold, to be a valid statistical significance test, the p-value must be computed in the right way. The book describes the two crucial properties of an appropriate significance test: The test must be both valid and powerful. Validity refers to the avoidance of type 1 errors, in which the result is incorrectly declared significant. Common mistakes that lead to type 1 errors include deploying tests that make incorrect assumptions, such as independence between data points. The power of a test refers to its ability to detect a significant result and therefore to avoid type 2 errors. Here, knowledge of the data and experiment must be used to choose a test that makes the correct assumptions. There is a trade-off between validity and power, but for the most common NLP tasks (language modeling, sequence labeling, translation, etc.), there are clear choices of tests that provide a good balance.Beginning with a detailed background on significance testing, the book then shows the reader how to carry out tests for specific NLP tasks. There is a mix of styles, with the first four chapters providing reference material that will be extremely useful to both new and experienced researchers. Here, it is easy to find the material related to a given NLP task. The next two chapters discuss more recent research into the application of significance tests to deep neural networks and for testing across multiple datasets. Alongside open research questions, these later chapters provide clear guidelines on how to apply the proposed methods. It is this mix of background material and reference guidelines that I believe makes this book so compelling and nicely self-contained.The introduction in Chapter 1 motivates the need for a comprehensive textbook and outlines challenges that the later chapters address more deeply. The theoretical background material begins in Chapter 2, which introduces core concepts, including hypothesis testing, type 1 and type 2 errors, validity and power, and p-values. The reader does not need to have any prior knowledge of statistical significance tests to follow this part. However, experienced readers could still benefit from reading this chapter, as concepts such as p-values are widely misunderstood and misused (Amrhein, Greenland, and McShane 2019).The significance tests themselves are introduced in Chapter 3, categorized into parametric and nonparametric tests. The chapter begins with the intuitively simple paired z-test, then builds up to more commonly-applied techniques, showing the connections and assumptions that each test makes. Step-by-step algorithms help the reader to implement each test. Although the chapter does cite uses of tests in NLP research, the main purpose is to present the theory behind each test and point out their differences.Chapter 4 provides perhaps the most handy part of the book for reference: a correspondence between common NLP tasks and statistical tests. Each task is discussed in terms of the evaluation metrics used, then a decision tree is introduced to guide the reader toward a choice between a parametric test, bootstrap or randomization test, or sampling-free nonparametric test. Section 4.3 then links each NLP evaluation measure to a specific significance test, presenting a large table that helps readers identify which test they need for a specific task. Particular considerations for each task are also pointed out to provide more detail about the appropriate options. The final part of this chapter describes the issue of p-hacking, in which dataset sizes are increased until a significance threshold is reached without consideration for biases in the data (discussed, for example, in Hofmann [2015]). The chapter proposes a simple solution to ensure robust significance testing with large datasets.Where Chapter 4 presents well-established methods, Chapter 5 introduces the current research question of how best to apply statistical significance testing to deep learning. Non-convex loss functions, stochastic optimization, random initialization, and a multitude of hyperparameters limit the conclusions we can draw from a single test run of a deep neural network (DNN). This chapter, which is based on the authors’ ACL paper (Dror, Shlomov, and Reichart 2019), explains how the comparison process can be overhauled to provide more meaningful evaluations. Beginning by explaining the difficulties of evaluating DNNs, the chapter then introduces criteria for a comparison framework, then discusses the limitations of current methods. Reimers and Gurevych (2018) have previously tackled this problem, but their approach has limited power and does not provide a confidence score. Other works, such as Clark et al. (2011), compare DNNs using a collection of statistics, such as the mean or standard deviation of performance across runs. This book shows how such an approach violates the assumptions of the significance tests. The authors propose almost stochastic dominance as the basis for a better alternative. The chapter explains how to use the proposed method, evaluates it in an empirical case study, and finally analyzes the errors made by each testing approach.Large NLP models are often tested across a range of datasets, which presents another problem for standard significance testing. Chapter 6 discusses the challenges of assessing two questions: (1) On how many datasets does algorithm A outperform algorithm B? (2) On which datasets does A outperform B? Applying standard significance tests individually to each dataset and counting the number of significant results is likely to overestimate the total number of significant results, as this chapter explains. The authors then present a new framework for replicability analysis, based on partial conjunction testing, and discuss two variants (Bonferroni and Fisher) for when the datasets are independent or dependent. They introduce a method based on Benjamini and Heller (2008) to count the number of datasets where one method outperforms another, then show how to use the Holm procedure (Holm 1979) to identify which datasets these are. Chapter 6 provides a lot of detailed background on the proposed replicability analysis framework, and the later sections again link the process to specific NLP case studies, and step-by-step summaries help the reader to apply the methodology. Extensive empirical results illustrate the very substantial differences in outcomes between the proposed approach and standard procedures.The final two chapters present open problems and conclude, showing that the topic has many interesting research questions of its own, such as problems when performing cross-validation, and the limited statistical power of replicability analysis.Overall, I highly recommend this book to a wide range of NLP researchers, from new students to seasoned experts who wish to ensure that they compare methods effectively. The book is excellent as both an introduction to the topic of significance testing and as a reference to use when evaluating your results. For anyone with further interest in the topic, it also points the way to future work. If one could level any criticism at this book at all, it is that it does not deeply discuss the basic flaws of significance testing or what the alternatives might be. For now, though, significance testing is an integral part of NLP research and this book provides a great resource for researchers who wish to perform it correctly and painlessly.

Word embeddings have become the predominant representation scheme on a token-level for various clinical natural language processing (NLP) tasks. More recently, character-level neural language models, exploiting recurrent neural networks, have again received attention, because they achieved similar performance against various NLP benchmarks. We investigated to what extent character-based language models can be applied to the clinical domain and whether they are able to capture reasonable lexical semantics using this maximally fine-grained representation scheme. We trained a long short-term memory network on an excerpt from a table of de-identified 50-character long problem list entries in German, each of which assigned to an ICD-10 code. We modelled the task as a time series of one-hot encoded single character inputs. After the training phase we accessed the top 10 most similar character-induced word embeddings related to a clinical concept via a nearest neighbour search and evaluated the expected interconnected semantics. Results showed that traceable semantics were captured on a syntactic level above single characters, addressing the idiosyncratic nature of clinical language. The results support recent work on general language modelling that raised the question whether token-based representation schemes are still necessary for specific NLP tasks.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) involves the use of algorithms and models and various computational techniques to analyze, process, and generate natural language data, including speech and text. NLP helps computers interact with humans in a more natural way, which has become increasingly important as more humancomputer interactions take place. NLP allows machines to process and analyze voluminous unstructured data, including social media posts, newspaper articles, reviews from customers, emails, and others. It helps organizations extract insights, automate tasks, and improve decision-making by enabling machines to understand and generate human-like language. A linguistic background is essential for understanding NLP. Linguistic theories and models help in developing NLU systems, as NLP specialists need to understand the structure and rules of language. NLU systems are organized into different components, including language modelling, parsing, and semantic analysis. NLU systems may be assessed through the use of metrics that includes measures like precision and recall, as well as indicators that convey meaningful information that include F1 score and others. Semantics and knowledge representation are central to NLU, as they involve understanding the meaning of words and sentences and representing this information in a way that machines can use. Approaches to knowledge representation include semantic networks, ontologies, and vector embeddings. Language modelling is an essential step in NLP that sees usage in applications like speech recognition, text generation, and text completion and also in areas such as machine translation. Ambiguity Resolution remains a major challenge in NLP, as language is often ambiguous and context-dependent. Some common applications of NLP include sentiment analysis, chatbots, virtual assistants, machine translation, speech recognition, text classification, text summarization, and information extraction. In this chapter, we show the applicability of a popular unsupervised learning technique, viz., clustering through K-Means. The efficiency provided by the K-Means algorithm can be improved through the use of an optimization loop. The prospects for NLP are promising, with an increasing demand for AI-powered language technologies in various industries, including healthcare, finance, and e-commerce. There is also a growing need for ethical and responsible AI systems that are transparent and accountable.

1 IntroductionOrganizations focus on automate their processes in order to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and/or reduce human beings' errors in an easy and rapid manner. Business process management (BPM) methods provide a solution to this issue. In this context, information systems like CRM, ERP, SCM, etc. have known an increasing demand. The main problem consists of the length of the business process specifications. If new regulations appear, these specifications must be adapted. Manually extraction of visual models is time consuming. During time, a series of solutions were proposed. The literature shows a crowd of approaches that extracts data models [1], [2], [3], and process models [4], [5] from Natural Language (NL) text. This paper aims to analyze the Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques and tools used in order to provide different types of visual representations.On the last few years, approaches based on NLP have been developed in order to automate process conversion from NL text. NLP plays an important role in NL text analysis as NLP tries to understand speech and text as humans beings would do. Colloquialism, abbreviations or typos make this task a challenging one. NLP has the origins in 1950s when Alan Turing proposed the Turing test [6], by introducing the imitation game. Since then, the literature shows a plethora of NLP tools [7], [8], [9], [10] using several machine learning techniques, our focus being on those applied on data models and process models discovery from NL text, starting with the first language parser [11] to the actual ones like NLTk [7], [8], ANTLR1, etc.Linguistic analysis is closely tied to NLP. Liddy [12] highlights 7 levels of linguistic analysis: a) Phonetic or Phonological level: how words are pronounced, b) Morphological level: prefixes, suffixes and roots analysis, c) Lexical level: word level analysis including lexical meaning and Part-Of-Speech (POS) analysis, d) Syntactic level: grammatical analysis of words in a sentence, e) Semantic level: determining the possible meanings of sentences, f) Discourse level: interpreting structure and meaning for texts larger than a sentence, g) Pragmatic level: understanding the purpose of a language.Some of the problems approached by NLP are: POS tagging, parsing, Named Entity Recognition (NER), chunking, Semantic Role Labeling (SRL). Anaphora resolution [13] refers to the interpretation of the link between the anaphor and its antecedents.The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 briefly outlines the NLP domain, describing the levels of linguistic analysis and the main NLP approaches of analyzing NL requirements. Section 3 focuses on data and process models extraction from NL text. This section makes an introduction to Object Oriented Analysis and Business Process Modeling and analyses the existing tools that discover data and process models from text. Subsequently, Section 4 summarizes the results of this work and the conclusions are drawn in Section 5.2NLPA detailed review on NLP is given in [14] and in [15]. Jones [14] divides the history of NLP into four phases: the first starts at the beginning of the 1940s and lasts to the late 1960s, the second begins from the end of 60s and lasts to the end of 70s, the third is represented by late 80s, where the fourth phase starts in the late of 90s. Next, we will detail each phase as they were defined in [14] and [15]. First phase treated machine translation issues, while the second focused on artificial intelligence. The third phase can be called grammatico-logical phase, which is followed by the lexical phase. A fifth phase is proposed in [16] where formal theories and statistical data are combined. Since this study was published first in 1994 and then it was re-organized in 2001 we can add the sixth phase: from 2000 until present where NLP techniques are combined in order to contribute to visual models extraction.Software requirements are usually written in NL which is asymmetric and irregular [17]. …

Over the past few decade, smartphone technology has played a vital role in the healthcare domain. In this paper, we proposed a methodology to allow end users to automatically process the medical text image using a camera or enter text manually. Then the system output allows to extract medical concepts, its semantic type and entity type from medical text apply Natural Processing Language techniques from UMLS medical dictionary. The medical text can be a health report, a clinical case, or other kinds of a text containing medically related information. The aim of this kind of methodology of the mobile application is to contribute in the area of natural language processing (NLP), intelligent system and to increase the medical students and bioinformatics researchers interest to quickly accessing information about medical data.

In this paper we discuss some aspects of our development of a natural language (NL) processing system to be used in a virtual reality (VR) environment. Our group is pursuing two lines of work: the Natural Language and Virtual Reality (NLVR) project and the natural language research program. The latter addresses basic research problems in NL processing and the former is an implementation project. The two are, in many ways, parallel and overlapping. The research generates hypotheses that we want to test and the NLVR testbed provides new problems for research.

Introduction. Donald Walker: a Remembrance. Section 1: The Task of Natural Language Processing. Natural Language Processing: an Historical Review K. Sparck Jones. On Getting a Computer to Listen J. Robinson. Utterance and Objective: Issues in Natural Language Communication B. Grosz. On the Proper Place of Semantics in Machine Translation M. King. Developing a Natural Language Interface to Complex Data G.G. Hendrix, E.D. Sacerdoti. User-Needs Analysis and Design Methodology for an Automated Document Generator K. Kukich, K. McKeown, J. Shaw, J. Robin, J. Lim, N. Morgan, J. Philips. Section 2: Building Computational Lexicons. Machine-Readable Dictionaries and Computational Linguistics Research B. Boguraev. Research Toward the Development of a Lexical Knowledge Base for Natural Language Processing R.A. Amsler. Discovering Relationships Among Word Senses R.J. Byrd. Machine Readable Dictionary as a Source of Grammatical Information E. Hajicova, A. Rosen. The ITT Lexical Database: Dream and Reality S. Pin-Ngern Conlon. Visions of the Digital Library: Views on Using Computational Linguistics and Semantic Nets in Information Retrieval J.L. Klavans. Anatomy of a Verb Entry: from Linguistic Theory to Lexicographic Practice B.T. Atkins, J. Kegl, B. Levin. Issues for Lexicon Building N. Calzolari. Outline of a Model for Lexical Databases N. Ide, J. le Maitre, J. Veronts. Construction-Based MT Lexicons L. Levin, S. Nirenburg. Dependency-Based Grammatical Information in the Lexicon P. Sgall. Semantics in the Brain's Lexicon -- Some Preliminary Remarks on its Epistemology H. Schnelle. Section 3: The Acquisition and Use of LargeCorpora. The Ecology of Language D.E. Walker. Representativeness in Corpus Design D. Biber. The Text Encoding Initiative C.M. Sperberg-McQueen. Discrimination Decisions for 100,000 Dimensional W.A. Gale, K.W. Church, D. Yarowsky. Acquisition and Exploitation of Textual Resources for NLP S. Armstrong-Warwick. The Center for Electronic Texts in the Humanities S. Hockey. Design Principles for Electronic Textual Resources: Investigating Users and Uses of Scholarly Information N.J. Belkin. Section 4: Topics, Methods and Formalisms in Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics. Evaluating English Sentences in a Logical Model J. Friedman, D.B. Moran, D.S. Warren. Recovering Implicit Information M.S. Palmer, D.A. Dahl, R.J. Schiffman, L. Hirschman, M. Linebarger, J. Downing. Flexible Generation: Taking the User into Account C.L. Paris, V.O. Mittal. Two Principles of Parse Preference J.R. Hobbs, J. Bear. UD, yet Another Unification Device R. Johnson, M. Rosner. Varieties of Heuristics in Sentence Parsing M. Nagao. Some Recent Trends in Natural Language Processing A.K. Joshi. Stone Soup and the French Room Y. Wilks.

Generative large language models (LLMs) are a subset of transformers-based neural network architecture models. LLMs have successfully leveraged a combination of an increased number of parameters, improvements in computational efficiency, and large pre-training datasets to perform a wide spectrum of natural language processing (NLP) tasks. Using a few examples (few-shot) or no examples (zero-shot) for prompt-tuning has enabled LLMs to achieve state-of-the-art performance in a broad range of NLP applications. This article by the American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) NLP Working Group characterizes the opportunities, challenges, and best practices for our community to leverage and advance the integration of LLMs in downstream NLP applications effectively. This can be accomplished through a variety of approaches, including augmented prompting, instruction prompt tuning, and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). Our focus is on making LLMs accessible to the broader biomedical informatics community, including clinicians and researchers who may be unfamiliar with NLP. Additionally, NLP practitioners may gain insight from the described best practices. We focus on 3 broad categories of NLP tasks, namely natural language understanding, natural language inferencing, and natural language generation. We review the emerging trends in prompt tuning, instruction fine-tuning, and evaluation metrics used for LLMs while drawing attention to several issues that impact biomedical NLP applications, including falsehoods in generated text (confabulation/hallucinations), toxicity, and dataset contamination leading to overfitting. We also review potential approaches to address some of these current challenges in LLMs, such as chain of thought prompting, and the phenomena of emergent capabilities observed in LLMs that can be leveraged to address complex NLP challenge in biomedical applications.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been the cutting-edge technology in natural language processing (NLP) in recent years, making machine-generated text indistinguishable from human-generated text. On the other hand, “rule-based” Natural Language Generation (NLG) and Natural Language Understanding (NLU) algorithms were developed in earlier years, and they have performed well in certain areas of Natural Language Processing (NLP). Today, an arduous task that arises is how to estimate the quality of the produced text. This process depends on the aspects of text that you need to assess, varying from correct grammar and syntax to more intriguing aspects such as coherence and semantical fluency. Although the performance of LLMs is high, the challenge is whether LLMs can cooperate with rule-based NLG/NLU technology by leveraging their assets to overcome LLMs’ weak points. This paper presents the basics of these two families of technologies and the applications, strengths, and weaknesses of each approach, analyzes the different ways of evaluating a machine-generated text, and, lastly, focuses on a first-level approach of possible combinations of these two approaches to enhance performance in specific tasks.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) is a revolutionary discipline that resides at the crossroads of computer science and linguistics, with its primary emphasis on the interaction between computers and human language. With roots in artificial intelligence, NLP seeks to equip machines with the ability to comprehend, interpret, and respond to natural language, enabling more intuitive and meaningful communication between humans and computers. This multidisciplinary domain leverages advanced algorithms and models to tackle a range of linguistic challenges, from language translation and sentiment analysis to speech recognition. Recent breakthroughs, particularly in deep learning and neural networks, have propelled NLP to new heights, with applications spanning diverse sectors such as healthcare, finance, and education. As NLP continues to advance, its potential impact on enhancing human-machine interaction and information processing is increasingly evident, promising a future where technology seamlessly integrates with our natural modes of communication. The significance of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in research lies in its capacity to revolutionize human-computer interaction. NLP empowers machines to understand and generate human language, enabling advancements in sentiment analysis, language translation, and conversational AI. This transformative capability has profound implications across various industries, including healthcare, finance, and education. NLP research not only enhances the efficiency of information retrieval and processing but also holds the key to developing more intuitive and user-friendly technologies. As the frontier of NLP research expands, its potential to bridge the communication gap between humans and machines continues to shape the future of technology and information access. VIKOR functions as a multi-criteria decision-making technique that determines the best option by comparing it to the ideal option. The ranking procedure comprises determining distances concerning the optimal solution. VIKOR uses linear normalization to get the best possible outcomes. This technique was first presented by Opricovic in 1998 and was intended to optimize multi-attribute complex systems. Its main focus is on ranking lists that allow for flexibility in the strategy weight interval and incorporate compromise alternatives to obtain desired results. Alternative taken as Open AI GPT-4, Google BERT, Microsoft Azure Text Analytics, IBM Watson Natural Language Understanding, spaCy, NLTK (Natural Language Toolkit), Amazon Comprehend. Evaluation Parameter taken as Sentiment Analysis (F1 Score), NER Performance, Language Support, Processing Speed (Response Time) (ms), Translation Accuracy (BLEU Score), Data Privacy. The result it is seen that Amazon Comprehend is got the first rank where as is the IBM Watson Natural Language Understanding is having the lowest rank.

BackgroundLarge language models have had a huge impact on natural language processing (NLP) in recent years. However, their application in epidemiological research is still limited to the analysis of electronic health records and social media data.ObjectivesTo demonstrate the potential of NLP beyond these domains, we aimed to develop prediction models based on texts collected from an epidemiological cohort and compare their performance to classical regression methods.MethodsWe used data from the British National Child Development Study, where 10,567 children aged 11 years wrote essays about how they imagined themselves as 25-year-olds. Overall, 15% of the data set was set aside as a test set for performance evaluation. Pretrained language models were fine-tuned using AutoTrain (Hugging Face) to predict current reading comprehension score (range: 0-35) and future BMI and physical activity (active vs inactive) at the age of 33 years. We then compared their predictive performance (accuracy or discrimination) with linear and logistic regression models, including demographic and lifestyle factors of the parents and children from birth to the age of 11 years as predictors.ResultsNLP clearly outperformed linear regression when predicting reading comprehension scores (root mean square error: 3.89, 95% CI 3.74-4.05 for NLP vs 4.14, 95% CI 3.98-4.30 and 5.41, 95% CI 5.23-5.58 for regression models with and without general ability score as a predictor, respectively). Predictive performance for physical activity was similarly poor for the 2 methods (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.55, 95% CI 0.52-0.60 for both) but was slightly better than random assignment, whereas linear regression clearly outperformed the NLP approach when predicting BMI (root mean square error: 4.38, 95% CI 4.02-4.74 for NLP vs 3.85, 95% CI 3.54-4.16 for regression). The NLP approach did not perform better than simply assigning the mean BMI from the training set as a predictor.ConclusionsOur study demonstrated the potential of using large language models on text collected from epidemiological studies. The performance of the approach appeared to depend on how directly the topic of the text was related to the outcome. Open-ended questions specifically designed to capture certain health concepts and lived experiences in combination with NLP methods should receive more attention in future epidemiological studies.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) technologies are being increasingly incorporated into business and pervasive systems to better user engagement, minimize input friction, and make applications more engaging and easy to talk with. This research provides a results-driven framework for adapting NLP into Oracle APEX—Oracle's low-code development platform—APEX aimed at improving the interface and responsiveness of web-based systems used in different contexts. The architecture proposed enables natural language query processing, automatic form creation, and contextual help by embedding workflows in APEX with lightweight NLP pipelines for intent detection, entity recognition, and adaptive dialogues. The experiments were along the lines of task automation, data retrieval, and user profile management among other domains. The findings show measurable enhancements in the completion time of tasks, satisfaction levels of users, flexibility in input, alongside a drastic reduction in errors during interactions. Latency measurement, system throughput, and other user interface metrics confirm the integration approach’s scalability and realistic performance bound with operational user loads. Within the APEX framework, the study also outlines methods for capturing user input design, collecting feedback, and updating the NLP models iteratively devising fall-back strategies during haptic interactions. This research presents a paradigm that is easy to scale, maintain, and manage as well as responsive towards versatile user needs through conversational intelligence in ubiquitous systems using Oracle APEX.