Signals 4 · free daily AI digest

Recognizing Study Lineage Is Not Enough: Over-Crediting Same-Trial Evidence in LLM-Based Medical Verification

Paper recorded by Signals 4 on 2026-10-16 in cs.CL. Abstract reproduced from arXiv; link to the original below.

Published 2026-10-16 on arXiv · recorded by Signals 4 on 2026-10-19

Category: cs.CL · 自然语言处理 · first seen 2026-10-19

Abstract

Publication count is not study count. A model can identify shared trial lineage correctly in a direct task yet over-credit a second publication from the same trial when aggregating evidence. We evaluate this behavior in medical LLM verification using 14 source-audited clinical families and five model conditions. The families span provenance, clinical applicability, result direction, and compositio

Read on arXiv →

#223 most recent of 660 cs.CL papers we have recorded · ↑ newer: The Italian lawmaking process: a unified and structured dataset · ↓ older: The Cognitive Cost of LLM Writing: A Reading-Time Comparison with Huma
Cite this page: Recognizing Study Lineage Is Not Enough: Over-Crediting Same-Trial Evidence in LLM-Based Medical Verification: the #223 most recent of 660 cs.CL papers we have recorded (as of 2026-10-16). Source: Signals 4 (Signals API) — https://data.jiangzhang.ca/signals4/t/papers/recognizing-study-lineage-is-not-enough-over-crediting-same-trial-evidence-in-ll.html
Free to quote with attribution to “Signals 4 (Signals API)”. Machine-readable: papers.json
Related: More cs.CL papers · arXiv signals · All papers · Today in AI
Get 4 AI signals a day by email — free.
Subscribe free → See all plans →
Get 4 AI signals a day by email — free
All models · All repos · By company · Daily editions