arXiv AI

A Controlled Audit of Pretraining Contamination in Public Medical Vision-Language Benchmarks

arXiv:2606. 10066v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical vision-language models (VLMs) are evaluated on public benchmarks whose images and question-answer pairs have been freely downloadable for years, yet reported accuracy assumes these examples were absent from pretraining.

arXiv AI
Jul 21

Med-OPD: Improving Medical Vision-Language Models via Evidence-Aware On-Policy Distillation

arXiv:2607. 16303v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical Vision-Language Models (Med-VLMs) require reliable reasoning from fine-grained visual evidence, yet existing models can produce plausible clinical answers by relying on language priors or medical templates rather than truly attending to diagnosis-critical regions.

By Yunhang Qian, Jiaquan Yu, Jiawei Liu, Meng Wang, Hongwei Bran Li, Xiaobin Hu
arXiv AI
Jul 29

Why Does Grounding Hurt Medical VQA? Benchmarking, Diagnosis, and Fine-Tuning of Vision-Language Models

arXiv:2604. 27720v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly applied to medical visual question answering (Med-VQA), yet whether they can \emph{localize} the evidence behind their answers---a prerequisite for clinical auditability---is poorly characterized.

By Xupeng Chen, Binbin Shi, Chenqian Le, Qifu Yin, Lang Lin, Haowei Ni, Ran Gong, Panfeng Li
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 29

SHOVIR: A Benchmark for Evaluating Vision Shortcut Learning in Radiology Report Generation

Current evaluation protocols for Vision-Language Models (VLMs) in Radiology Report Generation (RRG) rely on report-level metrics that measure lexical overlap or aggregate clinical correctness. However, such metrics do not test whether individual diagnostic statements stem from the actual pathological evidence visible in the image.

arXiv AI
Jul 17

Demographically-Conditioned Synthetic Medical Images for Bias Mitigation and Bias Detection in Disease Classifiers

arXiv:2607. 14984v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Per-subgroup fairness audits of medical image classifiers face a sample-size problem: minority subgroups in held-out test sets have so few samples that the resulting confidence intervals on per-subgroup performance are wider than the bias the audit is meant to detect.

By Mahmoud Ibrahim, Bart Elen, Chang Sun, Gokhan Ertaylan, Michel Dumontier