Table 6 Performance comparison of BiLSTM-Att-CRF model and basic models
| Â | Dataset of CCKS 2018 | Dataset of CCKS 2017 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Precision | Recall | F-score | Precision | Recall | F-score |
CRF | 85.63% | 79.58% | 82.49% | 87.32% | 83.06% | 85.14% |
+POS | 85.94% | 81.04% | 83.42% | 88.97% | 85.12% | 87.01% |
+Dic | 88.98% | 82.82% | 85.79% | 90.34% | 86.06% | 88.15% |
+POS + Dic | 88.72% | 83.57% | 86.04% | 91.26% | 87.11% | 89.14% |
BiLSTM-CRF | 85.20% | 83.09% | 84.13% | 90.09% | 89.24% | 89.66% |
+POS | 85.23% | 82.73% | 83.96% | 89.36% | 89.74% | 89.55% |
+Dic | 85.62% | 83.34% | 84.46% | 90.17% | 90.44% | 90.30% |
+POS + Dic | 86.02% | 82.93% | 84.45% | 90.31% | 90.12% | 90.22% |
BiLSTM-Att-CRF | 86.51% | 84.38% | 85.43% | 90.11% | 90.47% | 90.29% |
+POS | 86.62% | 84.36% | 85.48% | 90.33% | 89.88% | 90.10% |
+Dic | 86.97% | 84.79% | 85.87% | 89.87% | 90.75% | 90.31% |
+POS + Dic | 87.09% | 85.13% | 86.11% | 90.41% | 90.49% | 90.48% |