RadMatch: Auditable Radiology Report Evaluation via Finding-Level Matching
Read the original on arXiv Computer Vision →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computer Vision.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computer Vision.
arXiv:2606. 08769v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automatic evaluation is critical for high-stakes text generation, where errors often involve omitted findings, hallucinated content, polarity reversals, location changes, uncertainty mismatches, and temporal-comparison errors rather than low surface similarity alone.
arXiv:2606. 17062v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Radiology report evaluation must distinguish clinical compatibility from surface similarity, because negation, laterality, or normal-abnormal polarity can reverse a finding.
arXiv:2607. 05880v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Imaging demand is growing faster than the radiology workforce can expand, and reporting backlogs cannot be resolved through training and recruitment alone.
arXiv:2608. 10505v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automated radiology report generation is advancing rapidly in response to the shortage of radiologists, yet unlike a perception model, existing generation models offer no control over the sensitivity-specificity trade-off of their diagnostic content.
arXiv:2608. 00147v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language pretraining learns rich medical image representations from radiology reports, but previous model variants commonly operate within a single shared embedding space, so concept-level structure and interpretability must be recovered post hoc, limiting model transparency and, hence, clinical utility.
arXiv:2608.30021v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Errors in radiology reports can adversely affect patient treatment, yet automated report quality assurance remains challenging because errors are oft...