最新资讯
dev.to 我们在 DolphinBench 上测试记忆检索:纯关键词搜索暴露了自身回归 dev.to 别再把 Agent 写成 while 循环,把它建模为状态机 bloomberg.com Rightmove 与 Scout24 借 AI 产品应对低迷房市并上调展望 stackoverflow.blog 欢迎来到芯片时代:半导体制造、AI 数据中心与芯片设计的未来 www.youtube.com AI Agent 总犯同样的错:CentralAgent AI 将记忆重构为经验系统 pub.towardsai.net Netflix 科学家建议重采样 LLM 评判:5 次仅将误差棒缩小 13% pub.towardsai.net Jev 作为 LLM 前的静默层:构建提示感知的模型路由器 reddit.com OpenAI 称 Astra 仅满足 10% 安全任务标准 dev.to FreeToken:在自有 GPU 上运行前沿 MoE 模型及其内存需求 dev.to 当 AI Agent 说“完成”时,究竟完成了什么? dev.to 部署 Underdog Bark 3.0 Pro:逐字转写、自定义后端与分块设置 dev.to 为艰难对话构建 AI:五个 Agent、一条安全正则与一位盲评监督者
多元动态
登录 注册
行业动态 arxiv.org · @Michael Oberst

报告书写习惯影响评测:参考报告选择对胸部 X 光报告评估的影响

原文 我的收藏

放射科医生书写习惯存在异质性,同一影像、同一临床发现可能因术语、缩写、格式和详略不同而生成表面差异明显的报告,这给基于与人工参考报告一致性的 AI 放射报告生成(RRG)评测带来被低估的障碍。本文量化了既有评测指标对报告书写习惯变异的敏感性,发现其影响足以改变模型排名;作者提出由放射科医生参与制定的报告变异分类体系,以及在不改变临床解读的前提下沿该分类轴改写参考报告的方法 ReRef,并在 MIMIC 上比较了九个 RRG 模型。

AI推荐理由 针对放射报告生成(RRG)评测中参考报告选择偏差这一被低估的问题,提出放射科医生参与制定的报告变异分类体系与 ReRef 改写方法,并量化了评测指标对报告书写习惯的敏感性,指出其影响足以改变模型排名。属于评测方法论层面的具体新贡献,对医学 AI 评测有实际用途;局限是摘要仅给出在 MIMIC 上比较九个 RRG 模型的片段,未展示完整结果与指标细节。

72

正文

Computer Science > Computation and Language arXiv:2609.19093v1 (cs) [Submitted on 16 Sep 2026] Title:Reporting Practice Matters: The Impact of Reference Choice on Chest X-ray Report Evaluation Authors:Daniel P. Jeong, Charles Q. Li, Hossein Hosseiny, Nitya M. Bhalla, Fatma Uyar Morency, Pradeep Ravikumar, Zachary C. Lipton, Michael Oberst View a PDF of the paper titled Reporting Practice Matters: The Impact of Reference Choice on Chest X-ray Report Evaluation, by Daniel P. Jeong and 7 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Radiologists follow heterogeneous reporting practices. Two radiologists examining the same image and identifying the same clinical findings might nevertheless compose superficially distinct reports, varying in terminology, shorthand, formatting, and level of detail. These variations in reporting norms represent an under-appreciated obstacle in efforts to evaluate AI-based radiology report generation (RRG) models, where machine-generated reports are typically assessed based on their concordance with human-generated references. In this paper, we quantify the sensitivity of established evaluation metrics to variations in reporting practices, revealing impacts large enough to alter the rankings of models. We introduce a radiologist-informed taxonomy of variations in radiology reporting practice and a method (ReRef) that rewrites reference reports along the axes of our taxonomy while preserving clinical interpretation. For instance, when comparing the performance of nine RRG models on MIMIC-CXR using RadCliQ-v1, condensing the discussion of normal findings in the reference reports causes Libra to drop from first to second place while CheXOne rises from third to first. Our results suggest that many current metrics fail to decouple clinical interpretation from conformity to reporting practices and that choosing the ``right'' references that accurately reflect the desired reporting practices can be important in practice. To support future research, we release MIMIC-CXR-Ext-ReRef, a radiologist-validated dataset of 120 (original, alternative) reference report pairs derived from MIMIC-CXR. Comments: Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2609.19093 [cs.CL] (or arXiv:2609.19093v1 [cs.CL] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.19093 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Daniel Jeong [view email] [v1] Wed, 16 Sep 2026 17:28:51 UTC (1,158 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Reporting Practice Matters: The Impact of Reference Choice on Chest X-ray Report Evaluation, by Daniel P. Jeong and 7 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CL new | recent | 2026-09 Change to browse by: cs cs.AI References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar export BibTeX citation Loading... BibTeX formatted citation × loading... Data provided by: Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

来源报道 · 1 篇 · 以下链接均前往原始媒体

← 返回精选动态 原文

更多内容