arXiv:2607. 21859v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Constructing causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) is a core step in biomedical causal analysis, yet it remains a largely manual process.
arXiv:2607. 22592v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Graph-based retrieval-augmented generation (GraphRAG) grounds answers in structured knowledge, but current systems extract entities and relationships exhaustively, producing graphs whose size and construction cost scale with corpus length rather than with the reasoning a query requires.
The paper "Medical Causal Hypothesis Verification with Large Language Models" reports a small-scale study evaluating eight LLMs on 17 medical causal hypotheses. The authors introduce an evaluation framework and annotate 1,067 evidence points across six criteria, using nine metrics to assess performance. Results show that while LLMs have strong recall, they frequently fail to provide valid scientific articles, evidence, or reject unsupported hypotheses, revealing a critical limitation for their use in healthcare.
EvidenceNet is a disease‑specific dataset that transforms full‑text biomedical literature into structured evidence records and graph representations, preserving study design, provenance, and quantitative support. Using an LLM‑assisted pipeline, it extracts experimentally grounded findings, normalizes entities, scores evidence quality, and links related records via typed semantic relations. The released subsets—EvidenceNet‑HCC and EvidenceNet‑CRC—contain thousands of evidence records and richly connected graphs, with high extraction and relation‑type accuracy, enabling retrieval‑augmented question answering and graph‑based tasks such as link prediction and target prioritization.
The article proposes a framework called quantitative evidence mining to transform biomedical findings into structured, context-rich evidence units. It outlines core elements such as claim, measured entity, value, comparator, population, conditions, temporal context, uncertainty, provenance, validation, and expert review. The authors present an eight-stage reference architecture and emphasize that plausibility should remain multidimensional rather than collapsed into a single truth label, linking extraction to evidence synthesis for applications like clinical trials, biomarker research, and knowledge-graph construction.
arXiv:2608.15382v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for healthcare decision support, but their evaluations still reward single-answer accuracy r...
arXiv:2608. 15382v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for healthcare decision support, but their evaluations still reward single-answer accuracy rather than reasoning about interventions, mechanisms, harms, evidence, and uncertainty.
MedRAGChecker is a claim-level verification framework designed for biomedical retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG). It decomposes generated answers into atomic claims and assesses each claim’s support by combining evidence‑grounded natural language inference with biomedical knowledge‑graph consistency signals. The aggregated claim decisions provide diagnostics that distinguish retrieval and generation failures, such as faithfulness, under‑evidence, contradiction, and safety‑critical errors, and the system is distilled into compact models for scalable evaluation.
The paper introduces CLEAR, an agentic framework designed to improve the reliability of large language models (LLMs) in medical contexts by adjudicating evidence from multiple sources. CLEAR generates candidate answers from three distinct pathways—parametric knowledge, locally curated corpora, and dynamically retrieved evidence—and then uses an aggregation verifier to evaluate agreement and conflict among these sources. An adjudication module decides whether to preserve or revise conclusions, employing override-guard and challenge-audit mechanisms, and initiates targeted follow-up searches when conflicts remain unresolved.
arXiv:2607. 19678v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI-generated answers in high-stakes domains are often fluent but difficult to verify, especially when they contain multi-step reasoning rather than a single final answer.
The paper investigates evidence generation for biomedical claim verification, evaluating various large language models and retrieval strategies on the CARE-XAI benchmark. It finds that fine‑tuned LLMs excel at producing evidence, while biomedical classifiers still lead in verdict‑only prediction. PubMed retrieval helps on PubMed‑aligned datasets but can mislead on broader public‑health claims, prompting the authors to propose Bio‑GRACE, a diagnostic that normalizes gold references to assess retrieval utility.
arXiv:2608.30393v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Biomedical artificial intelligence (AI) systems increasingly extract, organize, and reuse scientific claims from literature, clinical trials, and regul...
arXiv:2606. 07525v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Causal graphs in text are typically populated by observable, predefined events.