arXiv AI By Jizheng Lai, Yingyun Li, Ying Qin, Haiyang Qian

TRACE: Deployable Tree-Relational Structure Enhancement for Oncology LLMs

Read the original on arXiv AI →

TRACE is a deployable framework that enhances oncology language models by separating offline structure learning from online inference. It organizes oncology concepts and relations into an updatable tree‑relational structure, refines it with LM‑loss evidence, and retrieves compact prompt evidence during inference. The approach improves performance on ten classification tasks and a QA benchmark, outperforms vanilla RAG and generic GraphRAG, and provides interpretable evidence paths aligned with clinical reasoning.

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 AI.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 2

OncoReason: Structuring Clinical Reasoning in LLMs for Robust and Interpretable Survival Prediction

arXiv:2510. 17532v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Predicting cancer treatment outcomes requires models that are both accurate and interpretable, particularly in the presence of heterogeneous clinical data.

By Raghu Vamshi Hemadri, Geetha Krishna Guruju, Kristi Topollai, Anna Ewa Choromanska
arXiv AI
Sep 1

From Analytics to Tumor Boards: An Evidence-Linked Multi-Agent Workflow for Oncology Feature Extraction

arXiv:2608.28974v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Clinically relevant oncology information is distributed across heterogeneous, longitudinal documentation, creating substantial abstraction burden and r...

By Daniel Kang, Michelle Hu, Soorya Ram Shimgekar, Shayan Vassef, Yufan Wang, Anit Kumar Sahu, Munmun De Choudhury, Vedant Das Swain, Christian Poellabauer, Li Yan Khor, Koustuv Saha, Robert Wojciechowski, Elliot Kidd, Piyum Zonooz, Navin Kumar
arXiv AI
2d ago

OpenMTB-Audit: Exposing Over-Refusal and Clinical Expert Perspectives in LLM-Based Molecular Tumor Board Safety Evaluation

OpenMTB‑Audit is an open‑source benchmark that tests large language models on 500 synthetic non‑small cell lung cancer cases, covering five adversarial error categories and four safety labels: Supported, Partially Supported, Unsupported, and Insufficient Information. The study found that all eight tested LLMs over‑refused Partially Supported recommendations, collapsing labels to achieve high safety scores. A deterministic seven‑module framework, MTB‑AuditAgent, was introduced to reduce over‑refusal to 6.7% and reach 91.2% accuracy, while an oncologist annotation study highlighted disagreement around the boundary between information sufficiency and treatment optimization.

By Negin Ashrafi, Jia Luo, Stacey M. Frumm, Roxana Daneshjou