From Sampled Evidence to Radiology Reports: Objectives, Constraints, and Realization

arXiv:2610.17318v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sampling multiple reports creates an inference problem: how should sampled evidence be converted into a final decision, and does a better structured decision yield a better report? We study these questions through a framework that separates the decision signal, scoring objective, and feasible decision set, followed by text realization. On MIMIC-CXR and IU-Xray, controlled comparisons across 13 generator configurations per benchmark under grouped development/test evaluation reveal three findings. First, changing the objective under fixed evidence and rule capacity changes predictions and their held-out metric trade-offs. Second, relaxing candidate constraints has objective-dependent effects under shared signals and frozen scores. Diagnostics connect the IU macro-oriented assertion increase to near-zero label thresholds and show that limited candidate coverage coexists with selection headroom. Third, a controlled realization study with SFT-Qwen3-VL-8B shows that decision-level gains can be attenuated, amplified, or reversed. Change decomposition reveals that realization can remove incorrect assertions while losing correct findings, so target fidelity and reference accuracy need not improve together. Finding gains also do not consistently improve reference-based report quality. These results motivate separate evaluation of decision rules, candidate constraints, and realized reports.

Abstract:Sampling multiple reports creates an inference problem: how should sampled evidence be converted into a final decision, and does a better structured decision yield a better report? We study these questions through a framework that separates the decision signal, scoring objective, and feasible decision set, followed by text realization. On MIMIC-CXR and IU-Xray, controlled comparisons across 13 generator configurations per benchmark under grouped development/test evaluation reveal three findings. First, changing the objective under fixed evidence and rule capacity changes predictions and their held-out metric trade-offs. Second, relaxing candidate constraints has objective-dependent effects under shared signals and frozen scores. Diagnostics connect the IU macro-oriented assertion increase to near-zero label thresholds and show that limited candidate coverage coexists with selection headroom. Third, a controlled realization study with SFT-Qwen3-VL-8B shows that decision-level gains can be attenuated, amplified, or reversed. Change decomposition reveals that realization can remove incorrect assertions while losing correct findings, so target fidelity and reference accuracy need not improve together. Finding gains also do not consistently improve reference-based report quality. These results motivate separate evaluation of decision rules, candidate constraints, and realized reports.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2610.17318 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2610.17318v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17318 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.

analiza aiqbench

From Sampled Evidence to Radiology Reports: Objectives, Constraints, and Realization

Subiecte conexe