跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文,按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-15 05:41 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-14 06:03 — 2026-11-15 06:03(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:2026-11-15 05:41最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 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。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 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 3 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 05:40(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.08922

Glyph: An Interpretability Engine for AI-Driven Scientific Discovery in Clinical Data

Robbie Holland, Ashwin Kumar, Mateus A. Esmeraldo, David Le, Andrea Fisher, Jiazhen Pan, Louisa Fay, Magdalini Paschali 等 22 位作者

原文摘要

Automated scientific discovery has the potential to advance understanding of disease mechanisms and accelerate identification of early disease markers. Manual data annotation is infeasible at population scale, motivating methods that automatically extract pre-defined phenotypes in multimodal and unstructured clinical data. Such pre-defined feature sets determine and limit which associations these approaches can discover. This limitation extends to agentic AI systems that use these tools to query population-scale data. In contrast, foundation models (FMs) trained on large volumes of clinical data can perform tasks beyond their training objectives. This suggests their latent embeddings may represent novel or unexplored features that could yield insights into disease mechanisms, yet such latent features remain difficult to interpret. To address this challenge, we introduce Glyph, an automated multistage framework that extracts features from multimodal and unstructured clinical data using FMs and sparse autoencoders, interprets them as coded clinical concepts, and evaluates their value for clinical scientific discovery. We applied Glyph to abdominal CT volumes, CT radiology reports and laboratory measurements from 41,628 patients across different institutions. We identified 397 predictive concepts supported by 4,463 Bonferroni-significant associations. Moreover, a majority of discovered associations were automatically reproducible in held-out cohorts across different sites. Glyph concepts provided complementary associations to literature-derived markers, leading to gains in predictive power. We envision that interpretability can extend beyond a mechanistic understanding of neural networks to connecting implicitly learned features with clinical knowledge and establishing their significance for patient outcomes. We release Glyph at https://github.com/StanfordMIMI/Glyph.

cs.AI

版本更新 · v3arXiv:2506.04235

A Comprehensive Benchmark of Computational Models for Antibody--Antigen Binding Affinity

Xinyan Zhao, Yi-Ching Tang, Victor J Cantu, Junseok Lee, Adam E Stogsdill, Ibraheem M Hamdi, Ashwin Kumar Ramesh, Zhiqiang An 等 10 位作者

原文摘要

Computational antibody design requires benchmarks that measure functional binding rather than similarity to natural sequences. Here we present AbBiBench, which treats the antibody--antigen complex as the evaluation unit and harmonizes 216,560 experimental measurements spanning 13 antibodies and 9 antigens. We compare 20 computational approaches without task-specific training or fine-tuning. The analyses show that global structure-conditioned inverse folding yields the strongest and most consistent affinity rankings, whereas antibody-specific fine-tuning does not consistently improve performance. Across models, rankings are more useful for prioritizing likely affinity gains than for excluding weak variants. In a subsequent case study, multi-objective evaluation of model-generated F045-092 CDR-H3 variants for H1N1 binding revealed a trade-off between predicted binding potential and evolutionary sequence plausibility; all 21 selected candidates produced H1-reactive ELISA signals. AbBiBench provides an open framework for developing and evaluating function-aware antibody design methods.

q-bio.QM · cs.AI · cs.CE · cs.LG · q-bio.BM

版本更新 · v5arXiv:2507.03152Google Research

MedVAL: Toward Expert-Level Medical Text Validation with Language Models

Asad Aali, Vasiliki Bikia, Maya Varma, Nicole Chiou, Sophie Ostmeier, Arnav Singhvi, Magdalini Paschali, Ashwin Kumar 等 27 位作者

原文摘要

With the growing use of language models (LMs) in clinical environments, there is an immediate need to evaluate the accuracy and safety of LM-generated medical text. Currently, such evaluation relies solely on manual physician review. However, detecting errors in LM-generated text is challenging because 1) manual review is costly and 2) expert-composed reference outputs are often unavailable in real-world settings. While the "LLM-as-a-judge" paradigm offers scalable evaluation, even frontier LMs can miss subtle but clinically significant errors. We propose MedVAL, a novel, self-supervised, data-efficient distillation method that leverages synthetic data to train evaluator LMs to assess whether LM-generated medical outputs are factually consistent with inputs, without requiring physician labels or reference outputs. To evaluate LM performance, we introduce MedVAL-Bench, a dataset of 840 physician-annotated outputs across 6 diverse medical tasks capturing real-world challenges. Across 10 state-of-the-art LMs spanning open-source and proprietary models, MedVAL distillation significantly improves (p < 0.001) alignment with physicians across seen and unseen tasks, increasing average F1 scores from 66% to 83%. Despite strong baseline performance, MedVAL improves the best-performing proprietary LM (GPT-4o) by 8% without training on physician-labeled data, demonstrating a performance statistically non-inferior to a single human expert on a subset annotated by multiple physicians (p < 0.001). To support a scalable, risk-aware pathway towards clinical integration, we open-source: 1) Codebase (https://github.com/StanfordMIMI/MedVAL), 2) MedVAL-Bench (https://huggingface.co/datasets/stanfordmimi/MedVAL-Bench), 3) MedVAL-4B (https://huggingface.co/stanfordmimi/MedVAL-4B). Our benchmark provides evidence of LMs approaching expert-level ability in validating AI-generated medical text.

cs.CL · cs.AI · cs.LG