arXiv Computation and Language
Quantitative Evidence Mining for Plausibility-Aware Biomedical AI
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 23
Quantitative Evidence Mining for Plausibility-Aware Biomedical AI: A Narrative Review and Conceptual Framework
The article proposes a framework called quantitative evidence mining to transform biomedical findings into structured, context-rich evidence units. It outlines core elements such as claim, measured entity, value, comparator, population, conditions, temporal context, uncertainty, provenance, validation, and expert review. The authors present an eight-stage reference architecture and emphasize that plausibility should remain multidimensional rather than collapsed into a single truth label, linking extraction to evidence synthesis for applications like clinical trials, biomarker research, and knowledge-graph construction.
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 7
Cite What You Explore: Budget-Aware LLM Reasoning over Medical KGs with Verifiable Evidence
The paper introduces BAR, a Budget‑Aware LLM Reasoning framework that enhances post‑discharge risk prediction by integrating external medical knowledge graphs (KGs). BAR refines KGs into disease‑specific evidence graphs with support scores and provenance, then uses an LLM to plan, navigate, and verify evidence within a patient‑specific budget. Experiments on MIMIC‑III and MIMIC‑IV across eight diseases show BAR improves AUPRC by 3.4 points, raises citation precision from 59.8% to 77.9%, and uses only 62‑65% of the allotted budget.
arXiv AI
Sep 7
A Semantic Model of Genetic Evidence: A Step Toward Bridging the Basic-Science-Clinic Gap
The article presents a new semantic model for representing scientific evidence, specifically tailored to genetics, that extends existing standards by adding fine‑grained, domain‑specific structure. It aligns with FHIR Evidence and SEPIO, incorporates a compact vocabulary validated by SHACL, and was tested in a human‑AI annotation pilot on six genetics papers, producing 28 evidence items and 95 source‑anchored assertions. The authors argue that this model advances trustworthy, AI‑ready infrastructure for variant interpretation by providing a reference data model and validation schema for genetic evidence.
arXiv AI
Sep 10
Building evidence-based knowledge bases from full-text literature for disease-specific biomedical reasoning
EvidenceNet is a disease‑specific dataset that transforms full‑text biomedical literature into structured evidence records and graph representations, preserving study design, provenance, and quantitative support. Using an LLM‑assisted pipeline, it extracts experimentally grounded findings, normalizes entities, scores evidence quality, and links related records via typed semantic relations. The released subsets—EvidenceNet‑HCC and EvidenceNet‑CRC—contain thousands of evidence records and richly connected graphs, with high extraction and relation‑type accuracy, enabling retrieval‑augmented question answering and graph‑based tasks such as link prediction and target prioritization.
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 11
Integrating RCTs, RWD, AI/ML and Statistics: Next-Generation Evidence Synthesis
arXiv:2511. 19735v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)have been the cornerstone of clinical evidence; however, their cost, duration, and restrictive eligibility criteria limit power and external validity.
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 24
MedRAGChecker: Claim-Level Verification for Biomedical Retrieval-Augmented Generation
MedRAGChecker is a claim-level verification framework designed for biomedical retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG). It decomposes generated answers into atomic claims and assesses each claim’s support by combining evidence‑grounded natural language inference with biomedical knowledge‑graph consistency signals. The aggregated claim decisions provide diagnostics that distinguish retrieval and generation failures, such as faithfulness, under‑evidence, contradiction, and safety‑critical errors, and the system is distilled into compact models for scalable evaluation.