← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2610.38774 · v1
Auditable Hierarchical Inference with Multimodal Evidence and Bayesian Active Inquiry
首次提交 2026-10-29 03:48
版本更新 2026-10-29 03:48
雷达观测 2026-10-30 10:22
摘要
Most multimodal classifiers assume that all useful evidence is available upfront, whereas clinical inquiry is sequential. We present a synthetic evaluation framework separating objective multimodal inference from active inquiry. An objective model maps synthetic tongue, bilateral multipressure pulse, and acoustic observations to eight syndrome families. A provenance-bearing Knowledge Core and training-only answer model support Bayesian narrowing over 33 fine terms using 25 typed questions, while seven safety questions remain outside the diagnostic posterior. Weak shared symptom factors limit fine-term influence on objective phenotypes, and an objective-only probe tests leakage. In a preregistered 600-case synthetic evaluation, objective family accuracy was 87.0%. Cost-sensitive expected information gain (cost-EIG) raised family accuracy to 95.5% and exact fine-term accuracy to 42.5%, versus 92.7% and 33.0% for an unoptimized fixed-order baseline. Selective family accuracy reached 96.9% at 95.3% coverage. However, cost-EIG asked more questions on average than fixed order (9.795 versus 9.352). Missing-audio routing retained 94.0% family accuracy, and a workflow invariant enforced abstention when all objective modalities were absent. Permuting fine-term answer likelihoods reduced family accuracy to 78.7%. Five of six frozen checks passed, but the question-efficiency hypothesis failed. Comparisons are descriptive because only aggregate, not paired case-level, outputs were retained. These results establish a reproducible synthetic workflow, not clinical diagnostic or treatment validity.
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-10-29 03:48 · 最新观测版本
Auditable Hierarchical Inference with Multimodal Evidence and Bayesian Active Inquiry
Most multimodal classifiers assume that all useful evidence is available upfront, whereas clinical inquiry is sequential. We present a synthetic evaluation framework separating objective multimodal inference from active inquiry. An objective model maps synthetic tongue, bilateral multipressure pulse, and acoustic observations to eight syndrome families. A provenance-bearing Knowledge Core and training-only answer model support Bayesian narrowing over 33 fine terms using 25 typed questions, while seven safety questions remain outside the diagnostic posterior. Weak shared symptom factors limit fine-term influence on objective phenotypes, and an objective-only probe tests leakage. In a preregistered 600-case synthetic evaluation, objective family accuracy was 87.0%. Cost-sensitive expected information gain (cost-EIG) raised family accuracy to 95.5% and exact fine-term accuracy to 42.5%, versus 92.7% and 33.0% for an unoptimized fixed-order baseline. Selective family accuracy reached 96.9% at 95.3% coverage. However, cost-EIG asked more questions on average than fixed order (9.795 versus 9.352). Missing-audio routing retained 94.0% family accuracy, and a workflow invariant enforced abstention when all objective modalities were absent. Permuting fine-term answer likelihoods reduced family accuracy to 78.7%. Five of six frozen checks passed, but the question-efficiency hypothesis failed. Comparisons are descriptive because only aggregate, not paired case-level, outputs were retained. These results establish a reproducible synthetic workflow, not clinical diagnostic or treatment validity.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗