The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
arXiv:2606. 17113v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Distinguishing causal adverse drug events (ADEs) from spurious correlations remains a central challenge in pharmacovigilance.
arXiv:2607. 18086v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Background: LLM judges increasingly score whether clinical language models give overconfident answers under incomplete evidence, yet whether a measured "safety gain" reflects real behavior change or the judge's calibration is unresolved.
arXiv:2610.41368v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Overly restrictive eligibility criteria contribute to widespread enrollment failure in clinical trials, yet published recommendations for how specific...
arXiv:2606. 03198v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Clinical AI evaluation increasingly delegates scoring to large language models (LLMs) acting as AI raters, yet their scoring behavior across evaluation conditions has not been quantitatively characterized.
The paper introduces a retrieval‑augmented multi‑agent framework that automatically generates instance‑specific evaluation rubrics for medical language models. By retrieving authoritative medical evidence, decomposing it into atomic facts, and combining these with user interaction constraints, the system produces fine‑grained criteria that outperform GPT‑4o on HealthBench and LLMEval‑Med. The generated rubrics also guide response refinement, improving medical LLM output quality by 9.2%.
arXiv:2606. 26205v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Patients increasingly seek medication information online, yet safety knowledge for psychiatric drugs is split between regulatory adverse-event records, which are authoritative but abstract, and patient narratives, which are experience-near but unvalidated.