arXiv:2609.35549v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Rare-disease diagnosis is a long-tail reasoning problem: phenotypes are incomplete, individual disorders are sparsely documented, and relevant evid...
arXiv:2608. 12138v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: General-purpose large language models (LLMs) have recently been reported to match or exceed specialized clinical AI tools on medical benchmarks, but such comparisons draw on a narrow set of systems and on benchmarks developed largely in high-income settings.
arXiv:2607. 24838v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In medical multiple-choice question answering (MCQA), Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can supplement the domain knowledge of language models (LMs).
arXiv:2606. 15931v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Historical medical archives and traditional medicines hold immense potential for drug discovery and remain a primary source for current drug development.
The paper benchmarks five large language models—GPT‑5.1, Gemini 2.0 Pro, Llama 3, Qwen, and BioGPT—across five heterogeneous knowledge graphs in biomedical and cognitive neuroscience. Using a multitier query dataset, it evaluates multi‑hop reasoning and factual accuracy under graph‑grounded and graph‑agnostic conditions, finding that general‑purpose models outperform domain‑specific ones on complex reasoning tasks and that graph grounding consistently reduces hallucinations. The study offers practical guidance for selecting LLM‑KG integration strategies and discusses hybrid neurosymbolic architectures for applications such as personalized medicine and explainable AI.
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.
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...
The paper introduces BAR, a Budget‑Aware LLM Reasoning framework that enhances post‑discharge risk prediction by integrating external medical knowledge graphs (KGs). BAR refines KGs into disease‑specific evidence graphs with support scores and provenance, then uses an LLM to plan, navigate, and verify evidence within a patient‑specific budget. Experiments on MIMIC‑III and MIMIC‑IV across eight diseases show BAR improves AUPRC by 3.4 points, raises citation precision from 59.8% to 77.9%, and uses only 62‑65% of the allotted budget.
MOSAIC is a training‑free framework that adapts Graph Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (GraphRAG) to each query by converting query‑specific evidence needs into a bounded policy over seed selection, traversal, stopping, and evidence selection. It keeps the corpus graph, indexes, scoring, grounding, and answer generation shared, while an LLM analyzer tailors the exploration strategy per query. On GraphRAG‑Bench, MOSAIC improves answer correctness by over 5 points on Medical and 4 points on Novel, achieves high evidence recall and context relevancy, and reduces path and evidence evaluations compared to fixed policies.
arXiv:2609.12230v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Question-answering often requires reasoning across multiple connected facts rather than retrieving a single isolated relation. Knowledge graphs (KGs) p...
The paper investigates how to incorporate biomedical knowledge graphs (KGs) into large language models (LLMs) for clinical diagnosis. It evaluates five KG task formulations, three training paradigms, two KGs, and three base LLMs, finding that all paradigms outperform a non‑finetuned baseline but differ in knowledge transfer behavior. Introducing Gradient Intervention Density (GID) and Gradient Distortion (GD) metrics, the study identifies a ‘surgical alignment’ regime—sparse, localized updates achieved by KG‑judgment training with KL regularization—that improves reasoning quality even when in‑domain accuracy is lower than task‑specific supervised fine‑tuning.