arXiv AI

MARC v1: An Open-Source Multi-Agent Framework for Clinical AI Reasoning and Coordination

arXiv:2608. 13476v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present Multi-Agent Reasoning and Coordination (MARC), an open-source framework that replaces monolithic LLM prompting with deterministic multi-agent orchestration for clinical reasoning.

arXiv AI
Aug 25

MACD: Multi-Agent Clinical Diagnosis with Self-Learned Knowledge for LLM

The paper introduces MACD, a Multi-Agent Clinical Diagnosis framework that enables large language models to self‑learn clinical knowledge through a multi‑agent pipeline of summarization, refinement, and application. MACD is extended into a human‑AI collaborative workflow where multiple diagnostician agents consult iteratively, guided by a judge agent and human oversight. Evaluation on the MIMIC‑MACD cohort shows significant gains in diagnostic accuracy—an average 11.6 percentage‑point improvement over authoritative knowledge for open‑weight LLMs and an 18.3‑percentage‑point boost over physician‑only diagnosis in text‑only vignettes.

By Wenliang Li, Rui Yan, Xu Zhang, Li Chen, Hongji Zhu, Jing Zhao, Junjun Li, Mengru Li, Wei Cao, Zihang Jiang, Wei Wei, Kun Zhang, Shaohua Kevin Zhou
arXiv AI
2d ago

LLM-based Agentic Reasoning Frameworks: A Survey from Methods to Scenarios

The article surveys LLM-based agentic reasoning frameworks, presenting a unified formal language that categorizes them into single-agent, tool-based, and multi-agent methods. It reviews application scenarios in scientific discovery, healthcare, software engineering, society, economics, and general-purpose tasks, and compares the distinct features and evaluation strategies of each category. The survey highlights the rapid development of complex agentic systems in real-world contexts.

By Bingxi Zhao, Lin Geng Foo, Ping Hu, Christian Theobalt, Hossein Rahmani, Jun Liu
arXiv AI
Sep 4

Medical Reasoning in the Era of LLMs: A Systematic Review of Enhancement Techniques and Applications

The paper reviews how Large Language Models (LLMs) are being adapted for medical reasoning, moving beyond single-step answers to systems that can systematically, transparently, and verifiably reason. It introduces a taxonomy of enhancement techniques, split into training-time methods such as supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning, and test-time methods like prompt engineering and multi‑agent systems. The review examines their application across text, image, and code modalities in key clinical areas—diagnosis, education, and treatment planning—and tracks the shift in evaluation benchmarks from simple accuracy to more nuanced assessments of reasoning quality and visual interpretability.

By Zizhan Ma, Wenxuan Wang, Meidan Ding, Shiyi Zheng, Shengyuan Liu, Jie Liu, Jiaming Ji, Linlin Shen, Yixuan Yuan, Wenting Chen
arXiv AI
Sep 15

ClinAgent: A ReAct-Based Agent for Conversational Access to Clinical Trial Information

ClinAgent is a conversational system that uses a ReAct-based LLM agent to retrieve and synthesize clinical trial information from multiple sources such as ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, and a local dataset. The agent iteratively reasons over user queries, selects appropriate tools, and refines its actions to provide grounded, up-to-date responses in natural language across multi-turn interactions. Evaluation across three phases shows that DeepSeek (thinking mode) excels in planning quality while Gemini 3.0 Flash delivers the highest overall performance and expert ratings, demonstrating the promise of agentic AI for improving clinical trial data access.

By Antonino Vaccarella, Riccardo Cantini, Domenico Talia, Paolo Trunfio, Marianna Talia, Rosamaria Lappano, Marcello Maggiolini
arXiv AI
Jun 16

MedCollab: IBIS-Guided Multi-Agent Collaboration with Hierarchical Disease Relation Chains for Clinical Diagnosis

arXiv:2603. 01131v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Clinical diagnosis is a gradual process of evidence integration, in which physicians move from symptoms and medical history to examinations, competing hypotheses, disease relations, and treatment decisions.

By Yuqi Zhan, Xinyue Wu, Tianyu Lin, Yutong Bao, Xiaoyu Wang, Weihao Cheng, Huangwei Chen, Feiwei Qin, Zhu Zhu