Skip to main content

Table 12 Sense distributions in IMRAD segments

From: The biomedical discourse relation bank

Type-level Sense

Introduction

Methods

Results

Abstract

Discussion

Total

Alternative

4 (13.8%)

3 (10.3%)

7 (24.1%)

0 (0.0%)

15 (51.7%)

29

Background

24 (19.8%)

7 (5.8%)

36 (29.8%)

15 (12.4%)

39 (32.2%)

121

Cause

80 (17.0%)

16 (3.4%)

134 (28.5%)

33 (7.0%)

208 (44.2%)

471

Circumstance

11 (7.1%)

7 (4.5%)

112 (71.8%)

13 (8.3%)

13 (8.3%)

156

Concession

59 (21.7%)

3 (1.1%)

73 (26.8%)

21 (7.7%)

116 (42.6%)

272

Condition

1 (5.3%)

6 (31.6%)

0 0 (0.0%)

1 (5.3%)

11 (57.9%)

19

Conjunction

105 (13.9%)

100 (13.3%)

271 (35.9%)

78 (10.3%)

195 (25.9%)

754

Continuation

80 (19.3%)

121 (29.2%)

112 (27.0%)

17 (4.1%)

85 (20.5%)

415

Contrast

26 (10.6%)

9 (3.7%)

118 (48.0%)

12 (4.9%)

81 (32.9%)

246

Exception

1 (16.7%)

2 (33.3%)

2 (33.3%)

0 (0.0%)

1 (16.7%)

6

Instantiation

17 (23.9%)

0 (0.0%)

9 (12.7%)

3 (4.2%)

42 (59.2%)

71

Purpose

93 (20.2%)

84 (18.3%)

144 (31.3%)

35 (7.6%)

104 (22.6%)

460

Reinforcement

14 (16.5%)

3 (3.5%)

14 (16.5%)

4 (4.7%)

50 (58.8%)

85

Restatement

63 (19.2%)

47 (14.3%)

124 (37.8%)

29 (8.8%)

65 (19.8%)

328

Similarity

0 (0.0%)

0 (0.0%)

2 (40%)

0 (0.0%)

3 (60%)

5

Temporal

41 (8.0%)

259 (50.3%)

0 (0.0%)

22 (4.3%)

52 (10.1%)

515