Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42005974›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026

From memorization to generalization: fine-tuning large language models for biomedical term-to-identifier normalization.

Suswitha Pericharla, Daniel B Hier, Tayo Obafemi-Ajayi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Suswitha PericharlaComputer Science Department, Missouri State University, Springfield, MO, United States.
Daniel B HierDepartment of Neurology and Rehabilitation, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States.
Tayo Obafemi-AjayiEngineering Program, Missouri State University, Springfield, MO, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Biomedical data integration requires term-to-identifier normalization, the process of linking natural-language biomedical terms to standardized ontology codes so that extracted concepts become computable and interoperable. Although large language models perform well on clinical text summarization and concept extraction, they remain markedly less accurate at mapping ontology terms to their corresponding identifiers. Methods: We examined the roles of memorization and generalization in term-to-code mapping across the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO), the Gene Ontology (GO), and the HGNC gene naming system, including mappings between gene names, lexicalized gene symbols, and arbitrary gene identifiers. Performance was assessed across multiple base models and after task-specific fine-tuning. Results: Accuracy scaled with model size, with GPT-4o outperforming Llama 3.1 70B and Llama 3.1 8B. Fine-tuning improved forward mappings from term to identifier, with larger gains for GO than for HPO and minimal improvement for gene name-to-HGNC identifier mappings. Generalization to withheld mappings occurred primarily for HGNC gene name-to-gene symbol tasks, whereas fine-tuning on HPO and GO identifiers produced little generalization. Embedding analyses revealed strong semantic alignment between gene names and HGNC gene symbols but no comparable alignment between concept names and identifiers in GO, HPO, or HGNC. Conclusions: These results suggest that fine-tuning success depends on two interacting factors: popularity and lexicalization. Popularity, a proxy for pretraining exposure to term-identifier pairs, predicted baseline accuracy and the magnitude of memorization gains during fine-tuning, whereas long-tail identifiers remained difficult to consolidate. Lexicalization, the extent to which a symbol functions as a meaningful token in embedding space, enabled generalization and explains why generalization emerged for HGNC gene symbols but not for the arbitrary identifiers used in GO and HPO. Together, these findings provide a predictive framework for identifying when fine-tuning can improve factual term normalization, when gains primarily reflect memorization, and when normalization is likely to fail.

Indexed as

biomedical ontologiesfine-tuninggene ontologygeneralizationHGNChuman phenotype ontologylarge language modelslexicalization

Identifiers

PMID42005974
PMCPMC13082924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.