跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+2471新增论文
+2025其中 AI 相关
+163已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-10 19:33 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-10 15:22各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-09 19:54 — 2026-11-10 19:54(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-10 19:33最近发现新增版本:2026-11-10 15:22库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-10 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

20,643 已收录论文17,531 AI 相关5,643 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-10 19:30(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.10681

Formalizing Patient-Set Semantics for OMOP CDM-Based Clinical Trial Feasibility Assessment:A Neuro-Symbolic Methodology for Traceable Site-Feasibility Patient Counts

Sohyeon Jeon

原文摘要

This study examines the interpretation and execution of natural-language eligibility criteria for clinical trial site-feasibility patient-count estimation using the OMOP Common Data Model (CDM). It treats each count as the size of a patient set produced under explicitly declared choices about clinical concepts, temporal conditions, exclusions, proxies, and available data. The study presents NS-CoT, a neuro-symbolic pipeline that uses an LLM to interpret and structure criteria, followed by symbolic processing and deterministic SQL compilation. Intermediate representations and execution records document how criteria are translated into patient sets and counts. Evaluation uses synthetic OMOP CDM data, controlled benchmarks, and a multi-site simulation. Comparisons with a direct-SQL baseline examine execution success, count agreement, patient-set agreement, and preservation of reference-defined site-feasibility labels and rankings. Performance varies across evaluation settings. Layer-wise inspection also supports the identification of implementation and policy errors, followed by correction and re-evaluation. The work investigates the reviewability and fidelity of cohort computation relative to declared reference definitions. It does not establish that these definitions capture a unique clinical ground truth or demonstrate improved recruitment, site selection, or trial outcomes in practice.

cs.IR