← Back to all news
arXiv Machine Learning By Arya Rahgozar, Pouria Mortezaagha

Auxiliary uncertainty signals for LLM-assisted systematic review screening: a benchmark across eight Cohen drug-class reviews

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

arXiv:2608. 14551v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for title-abstract screening in systematic reviews, but their decisions lack calibrated uncertainty.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Aug 28

Evaluating human and LLM screening workflows in a conceptually complex scoping review: Recall--workload trade-offs and run-to-run consistency

The study compared human and large language model (LLM) workflows for title‑and‑abstract screening in a complex scoping review. Human reviewers and two GPT‑5.4 file‑batch runs retained 42.2‑45.0% of records with 82.3‑82.9% recall, while Gemini 3.1 achieved the highest recall (83.9%) but retained 56.7% of records. Identical GPT‑5.4 runs showed 91.7% agreement yet differed on 94 records, including 29 verified eligible ones.

By Nikol Figalov\'a, Lynn Huestegge, Anne B\"ockler-Raettig
llmsagents
More like this →
arXiv AI
Sep 18

Correct Now, Insufficient Later: Auditing Update Sufficiency in Context Compression

The paper investigates how memory systems can answer a current query correctly yet fail to retain distinctions needed for later updates. Using a paired‑history audit, the authors evaluate 24 history pairs across six synthetic mechanisms and two model backends, achieving perfect reveal accuracy on DeepSeek and high accuracy on GLM. Record‑level audits reveal specific failures in structured reveal memories and frontier late‑reference adequacy, and the authors test a label‑equivariant repair that only partially restores correctness.

By Guangzhe Zhang
More like this →
arXiv AI
Aug 24

Inhibitory Attention for Clinical Long-Context Reasoning: Characterizing and Mitigating Lost-in-the-Middle Effects in EHR Processing

The paper identifies a new problem in clinical natural language processing called the clinical lost‑in‑the‑middle (CLitM) effect, where large language models perform poorly on information located near the center of long electronic health record (EHR) documents. Using the MedAlign dataset, the authors quantify a 21.9‑percentage‑point accuracy gap across 2,196 instruction‑response pairs and six models, showing that most critical facts lie in the CLitM trough. They propose Query‑Conditioned Clinical Suppression (QCCS), a lightweight context‑selection gate that outperforms traditional retrieval methods (BM25, dense retrieval, cross‑encoder reranking) on a held‑out set of 83 instructions, achieving up to 25.3% accuracy for middle‑position queries. whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that standard retrieval strategies fail to reliably surface central clinical information, and that a query‑aligned selection mechanism can substantially improve model performance on critical EHR data."

By Sanjay Basu
llmsrag
More like this →