Trustworthy Clinical Decision Support Using Meta-Predicates and Domain-Specific Languages

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.21263v1
• Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 04:11:44 GMT
• Title: Trustworthy Clinical Decision Support Using Meta-Predicates and Domain-Specific Languages
• Abstract summary: Metapredicates assert which evidence types are permissible in any given rule.<n>System is instantiated in AnFiSA, an open-source platform for variant interpretation.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: \textbf{Background:} Regulatory frameworks for AI in healthcare, including the EU AI Act and FDA guidance on AI/ML-based medical devices, require clinical decision support to demonstrate not only accuracy but auditability. Existing formal languages for clinical logic validate syntactic and structural correctness but not whether decision rules use epistemologically appropriate evidence. \textbf{Methods:} Drawing on design-by-contract principles, we introduce meta-predicates -- predicates about predicates -- for asserting epistemological constraints on clinical decision rules expressed in a DSL. An epistemological type system classifies annotations along four dimensions: purpose, knowledge domain, scale, and method of acquisition. Meta-predicates assert which evidence types are permissible in any given rule. The framework is instantiated in AnFiSA, an open-source platform for genetic variant curation, and demonstrated using the Brigham Genomics Medicine protocol on 5.6 million variants from the Genome in a Bottle benchmark. \textbf{Results:} Decision trees used in variant interpretation can be reformulated as unate cascades, enabling per-variant audit trails that identify which rule classified each variant and why. Meta-predicate validation catches epistemological errors before deployment, whether rules are human-written or AI-generated. The approach complements post-hoc methods such as LIME and SHAP: where explanation reveals what evidence was used after the fact, meta-predicates constrain what evidence may be used before deployment, while preserving human readability. \textbf{Conclusions:} Meta-predicate validation is a step toward demonstrating not only that decisions are accurate but that they rest on appropriate evidence in ways that can be independently audited. While demonstrated in genomics, the approach generalises to any domain requiring auditable decision logic.

Related papers

• Concept-Grounded Reasoning with Prompt-Driven Localization for Interpretable Structured Report Generation [66.62662330558906]
  CORAL is a multimodal framework that integrates spatial grounding and concept-level supervision into a unified reasoning process.<n>CORAL employs a prompt-driven medical segmentation model to localize lesions and predicts multi-class clinical attributes through a Concept Bottleneck module.<n>Experiments on BUS-CoT and IU X-ray datasets demonstrate consistent improvements in diagnostic accuracy, concept consistency, and report quality over strong general-purpose and medical MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-14T10:21:23Z)
• A Semantic Model of Genetic Evidence: A Step Toward Bridging the Basic-Science-Clinic Gap [0.0]
  We introduce a semantic model for scientific evidence with three core classes, specialize it for genetics, and align it structurally to existing standards.<n>We evaluate the model through a human-AI annotation pilot over six genetics papers, yielding 28 evidence items and 95 source-anchored assertions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-03T21:57:23Z)
• Uncertainty Reasoning with Large Language Models for Explainable Disease Diagnosis [12.157855328093055]
  Clinical decision-making requires reasoning over incomplete, imprecise, and linguistically expressed patient narratives.<n>We propose a neuro-symbolic reasoning framework that aligns large language models with formal logic.<n>Results show performance comparable to state-of-the-art LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-25T08:18:45Z)
• Medical Model Synthesis Architectures: A Case Study [72.46211022258122]
  Current AI systems struggle with calibrated reasoning under uncertainty.<n>We propose a framework for AI systems that can make practically useful but formally transparent clinical predictions under uncertainty.<n>We show how an initial proof-of-concept of this framework can be used for differential diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-10T19:30:16Z)
• SymptomWise: A Deterministic Reasoning Layer for Reliable and Efficient AI Systems [0.9786690381850356]
  We present SymptomWise, a framework that separates language understanding from diagnostic reasoning.<n>The system combines expert-curated medical knowledge, deterministic codex-driven inference, and constrained use of large language models.<n>This architecture improves traceability, reduces unsupported conclusions, and enables modular evaluation of system components.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T19:00:53Z)
• Eligibility-Aware Evidence Synthesis: An Agentic Framework for Clinical Trial Meta-Analysis [49.83108591873481]
  EligMeta is an agentic framework that integrates automated trial discovery with eligibility-aware meta-analysis.<n>The framework structures eligibility criteria and computes similarity-based study weights reflecting population alignment between target trials.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T03:18:50Z)
• Agentic Cognitive Profiling: Realigning Automated Alzheimer's Disease Detection with Clinical Construct Validity [66.94391219005291]
  This paper proposes Agentic Cognitive Profiling (ACP), an agentic framework that realigns automated screening with clinical protocol logic.<n>Central to our design is decoupling semantic understanding from measurement by delegating all quantification to deterministic function calling.<n>ACP achieves 90.5% score match rate in task examination and 85.3% accuracy in AD prediction, surpassing popular baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-18T06:15:35Z)
• How Well Do Multimodal Models Reason on ECG Signals? [36.281141199783825]
  We introduce a reproducible framework for evaluating reasoning in ECG signals.<n>We employ an agentic framework that generates code to empirically verify the temporal structures described in the reasoning trace.<n>This dual-verification method enables the scalable assessment of "true" reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T21:04:12Z)
• Structured Decomposition for LLM Reasoning: Cross-Domain Validation and Semantic Web Integration [0.0]
  Rule-based reasoning arises in domains where decisions must be auditable and justifiable.<n>Applying rules to such inputs demands both interpretive flexibility and formal guarantees.<n>This paper presents an integration pattern that combines these strengths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-04T17:19:20Z)
• Adaptive Diagnostic Reasoning Framework for Pathology with Multimodal Large Language Models [34.28963665009494]
  We present RECAP-PATH, an interpretable framework that establishes a self-learning paradigm.<n>It shifts off-the-shelf multimodal large language models from passive pattern recognition to evidence-linked diagnostic reasoning.<n>This self-learning approach requires only small labeled sets and no white-box access or weight updates to generate cancer diagnoses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-15T03:06:59Z)
• The Epistemic Suite: A Post-Foundational Diagnostic Methodology for Assessing AI Knowledge Claims [0.7233897166339268]
  This paper introduces the Epistemic Suite, a diagnostic methodology for surfacing the conditions under which AI outputs are produced and received.<n>Rather than determining truth or falsity, the Suite operates through twenty diagnostic lenses to reveal patterns such as confidence laundering, narrative compression, displaced authority, and temporal drift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-20T00:29:38Z)
• On the notion of missingness for path attribution explainability methods in medical settings: Guiding the selection of medically meaningful baselines [48.688209040613216]
  We argue that a clinically normal but input-close counterfactual represents a more accurate representation of a meaningful absence of features in medical data.<n>We evaluate the approach on three distinct medical data sets and empirically demonstrate that counterfactual baselines yield more faithful and medically relevant attributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-20T07:13:41Z)
• Uncertainty-aware Medical Diagnostic Phrase Identification and Grounding [72.18719355481052]
  We introduce a novel task called Medical Report Grounding (MRG)<n>MRG aims to directly identify diagnostic phrases and their corresponding grounding boxes from medical reports in an end-to-end manner.<n>We propose uMedGround, a robust and reliable framework that leverages a multimodal large language model to predict diagnostic phrases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-10T07:41:35Z)
• Semi-Supervised Variational Reasoning for Medical Dialogue Generation [70.838542865384]
  Two key characteristics are relevant for medical dialogue generation: patient states and physician actions. We propose an end-to-end variational reasoning approach to medical dialogue generation. A physician policy network composed of an action-classifier and two reasoning detectors is proposed for augmented reasoning ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-13T04:14:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.