The study introduces an evidence-aware evaluation protocol for a retrieval‑augmented generation system focused on breast lesion management literature. Using an 18‑document corpus and 18 queries, the authors compared dense embeddings, BM25, and cross‑encoder reranking across various chunk sizes and overlaps, finding that a hybrid retriever with 384‑token chunks and 20% overlap achieved top‑three retrieval success for 17 of 18 queries and high recall and precision metrics. Expanding ground‑truth relevance annotations increased recognized evidence spans and accepted chunk targets, though retrieval rankings remained unchanged, underscoring the sensitivity of evaluation to annotation coverage.
By Miguel Mochizuki Silva, Samuel Ismael, Mateus C. Dias, Tha\'is Gaud\^encio, Yuri Malheiros, Barufaldi
arXiv:2611.07935v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: The growing adoption of digital pathology has rapidly expanded collections of hematoxylin-and-eosin whole-slide images, yet efficient navigation thro...
By Jingsong Liu, Youssef Wally Han Li, Weiwei Zhou, Jing Dai, Elisabeth Wetzer, Peter J. Sch\"uffler
arXiv:2610.27682v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Electronic health records are written to support care, not retrieval. Across years of oncology notes, the primary diagnosis is restated in report after...
By Soumya Ranjan Sahoo, Divya Bharti, Sanand Sasidharan
Large chest radiography archives are difficult to search because most studies are paired only with free-text reports rather than structured clinical annotations. Vision-language models offer a natural interface for text-to-image retrieval, but current biomedical models are primarily optimized for report-to-image matching rather than for satisfying short clinical search queries.
arXiv:2604. 04593v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds large language models in external medical knowledge, yet standard retrievers frequently surface hard negatives that are semantically close to the query but describe clinically distinct conditions.
By Byeolhee Kim, Min-Kyung Kim, Young-Hak Kim, Tae-Joon Jeon
The paper investigates whether incorporating an evidence-support signal into retrieval evaluation for retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG) improves downstream decision‑making. Across multiple benchmarks and a TREC RAG 2025 setting, the evidence signal alters retriever rankings but its benefits vary: it does not consistently enhance retriever training, its usefulness for system selection depends on generator instructions, and it does not reliably predict answer quality on unseen topics. Human filtering of evidence‑rich passages preserves useful content, yet evaluators disagree on whether this improves final answers, indicating that evidence‑aware evaluation alone does not guarantee better downstream outcomes.
By Utshab Kumar Ghosh, Debayan Mukhopadhyay, Shubham Chatterjee