arXiv:2606. 08769v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automatic evaluation is critical for high-stakes text generation, where errors often involve omitted findings, hallucinated content, polarity reversals, location changes, uncertainty mismatches, and temporal-comparison errors rather than low surface similarity alone.
arXiv:2606. 17062v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Radiology report evaluation must distinguish clinical compatibility from surface similarity, because negation, laterality, or normal-abnormal polarity can reverse a finding.
The paper evaluates large language model (LLM) judges for radiology report assessment across multiple imaging modalities and anatomical regions, comparing four existing metrics (RadFact, GREEN, FineRadScore, CRIMSON) with a new metric called VERT. GREEN emerges as the most robust among current metrics, while VERT improves correlation with radiologist judgments by up to 26% over GREEN. The study also shows that ensembling and lightweight fine‑tuning of the Qwen3‑30B model can yield additional performance gains and significant latency reductions.
arXiv:2607. 05880v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Imaging demand is growing faster than the radiology workforce can expand, and reporting backlogs cannot be resolved through training and recruitment alone.
arXiv:2609.27607v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: An AI-generated radiology report can resemble a physician's report while omitting an abnormality, adding an unsupported finding, or reversing its pre...
arXiv:2608. 10505v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automated radiology report generation is advancing rapidly in response to the shortage of radiologists, yet unlike a perception model, existing generation models offer no control over the sensitivity-specificity trade-off of their diagnostic content.
arXiv:2608. 00147v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language pretraining learns rich medical image representations from radiology reports, but previous model variants commonly operate within a single shared embedding space, so concept-level structure and interpretability must be recovered post hoc, limiting model transparency and, hence, clinical utility.
arXiv:2608.30021v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Errors in radiology reports can adversely affect patient treatment, yet automated report quality assurance remains challenging because errors are oft...
arXiv:2609.22281v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Foundation models have recently demonstrated strong capabilities across a wide range of medical imaging tasks. However, their performance in structured...
The study examines how differences in radiologists’ reporting styles—such as terminology, shorthand, formatting, and detail—affect the evaluation of AI-generated chest X‑ray reports. By quantifying the sensitivity of common metrics to these variations, the authors show that changes in reference reports can shift model rankings. They introduce a taxonomy of reporting variations and a rewriting method, ReRef, that preserves clinical meaning while altering style, and release a validated dataset of paired reference reports to aid future research.
Automated radiology report generation is advancing rapidly in response to the shortage of radiologists, yet unlike a perception model, existing generation models offer no control over the sensitivity-specificity trade-off of their diagnostic content. Such control is essential because clinical scenarios diverge: emergency triage prioritizes sensitivity to reduce missed findings, whereas confirmatory interpretation emphasizes specificity to limit unnecessary interventions.
arXiv:2601.16753v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Longitudinal information in radiology reports refers to the sequential tracking of findings across multiple examinations over time, which is...