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
+0已有论文修订
+93新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-16 01:34 · 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 2026-11-15 06:36 — 2026-11-16 06:36(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:2026-11-16 01:34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 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-16 01:33(北京时间)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2609.13062

Anchoring Clinical Events in Time: UID-Preserving Multimodal Reconstruction and Source-Grounded Adjudication

Sayantan Kumar, Nicolas Grimaldi, Jack Cummins, Jeremy C. Weiss

原文摘要

Interpreting a patient's hospital course depends on when symptoms developed, tests were performed, and treatments began. Discharge summaries often leave this chronology unclear, while structured electronic health record (EHR) tables timestamp only some of these events. We reconstruct clinical timelines by retrieving structured evidence for narrative events and jointly revising their estimated times. Each extracted occurrence carries a persistent unique identifier (UID) linked to its source span, keeping repeated mentions distinct throughout reconstruction. We also introduce GAVEL, a large language model (LLM) judge that checks disagreements between two timelines against the note and structured record and cites evidence for its verdicts. We evaluated six open-weight models on 40 clinician-annotated discharge summaries. Our pipeline recovered more reference events than LLM-Timeline and TKW2 when each comparison used the same backbone. For GLM-5.2, adding structured evidence improved timestamp agreement with essentially unchanged event recovery; ablations showed that links to timestamped source rows contributed to this improvement. Results varied across the other models, with some timing gains accompanied by fewer recovered events. Both GAVEL judges, GLM-5.2 and MiMo-V2.6-Pro-RL, favored multimodal over text-only GLM-5.2 timelines, while neither clearly distinguished the DeepSeek V3.2 variants. Manual review upheld most sampled GAVEL findings. The source links allow reconstructed times to be checked, and GAVEL identifies disagreements for human review.

cs.AI