Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Safety

aiqbench analysis

SHIFT-M3 introduces a lightweight, pre-fusion screening mechanism that detects cross-patient data linkage failures in multimodal ECG records by measuring consistency between LLM-generated interpretations and clinical summaries. Evaluated on nearly 800k records, the method significantly outperforms lexical baselines in identifying partial or full text-view swaps while maintaining high sensitivity to hard negatives. This work addresses a critical safety gap in clinical AI where standard models fail to detect silently assembled, cross-patient components that could lead to diagnostic errors.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

SHIFT-M3: Pre-fusion Alignment-based Consistency Screening for Multimodal ECG Record Integrity

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2609.13874v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal clinical AI typically assumes that the waveform, report, metadata, and downstream predictions attached to a record belong to the same patient. In practice, linkage failures can silently assemble individually plausible but cross-patient components, creating a safety problem that standard predictive models are not designed to detect. We study this problem as multimodal record integrity triage: given an assembled record, should its modalities be trusted to belong together? We introduce SHIFT-M3, a lightweight text-based pre-fusion screen that measures alignment-based consistency between two separately produced ECG text views: an LLM-generated interpretation and a clinical report summary. On 784,680 MEETI ECG records, SHIFT-M3 achieves 97.6% TPR@5% FPR for full text-view swaps (AUROC 0.996), 90.3% for partial swaps (AUROC 0.974), and 97.7% for label-matched hard negatives (AUROC 0.996) with only 573,569 parameters. Compared with same-dataset lexical baselines, the gains are largest on partial swaps and hard negatives, suggesting that the model is learning more than surface overlap. We also introduce the CMST (Conflict-type Multimodal Stress Test) evaluation taxonomy, a three-seed stability study, a loss ablation, a temporal-tolerance sweep, and a shared-token masking control. The main remaining failure mode is longitudinal ambiguity: at the default operating point, same-patient cross-visit pairs still produce 87.0% Type-II false positives.

Abstract:Multimodal clinical AI typically assumes that the waveform, report, metadata, and downstream predictions attached to a record belong to the same patient. In practice, linkage failures can silently assemble individually plausible but cross-patient components, creating a safety problem that standard predictive models are not designed to detect. We study this problem as multimodal record integrity triage: given an assembled record, should its modalities be trusted to belong together? We introduce SHIFT-M3, a lightweight text-based pre-fusion screen that measures alignment-based consistency between two separately produced ECG text views: an LLM-generated interpretation and a clinical report summary. On 784,680 MEETI ECG records, SHIFT-M3 achieves 97.6% TPR@5% FPR for full text-view swaps (AUROC 0.996), 90.3% for partial swaps (AUROC 0.974), and 97.7% for label-matched hard negatives (AUROC 0.996) with only 573,569 parameters. Compared with same-dataset lexical baselines, the gains are largest on partial swaps and hard negatives, suggesting that the model is learning more than surface overlap. We also introduce the CMST (Conflict-type Multimodal Stress Test) evaluation taxonomy, a three-seed stability study, a loss ablation, a temporal-tolerance sweep, and a shared-token masking control. The main remaining failure mode is longitudinal ambiguity: at the default operating point, same-patient cross-visit pairs still produce 87.0% Type-II false positives.

This paper has been accepted and presented at MLHC 2026. Please cite from the official proceedings

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

I.2.1; J.3; I.2.7

arXiv:2609.13874 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.13874v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.13874 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 316 words

Related coverage