From ML Predictions to Informed Diagnostic Assistance Using the Toulmin Model of Argumentation
Abstract: To provide a structured and interpretable assessment, we decompose the image-based diagnosis into components following the Toulmin model of argumentation. This model consists of a claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing. Consider a claim generated by a machine learning (ML) model for retinal diagnosis. Rather than accepting this claim at face value, one could either apply explainable AI (XAI) methods or adopt an argumentation-based approach. In our framework, a model specialized in biomarker extraction from images provides the grounds. The warrant-linking the grounds to the claim - is analyzed by an agent equipped with medical knowledge; in our architecture, this role is fulfilled by a MedGemma agent. The qualifier is determined based on the overall quantitative evaluation of both the warrant and grounds models. Finally, a rebuttal is constructed using image similarity measures computed with MedSigLip. All these components are presented to the human expert, enabling a more informed and critical assessment of the ML-generated diagnosis.
Submission history
Access Paper:
Current browse context:
References & Citations
BibTeX formatted citation
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 .
Verified source · arXiv.org
Reported by arXiv.org. Open the original for full media and formatting.
More in Research
All newsFaithful, Not Corrective: Message-Format Effects in Multi-Hop Agent Relays Are Tier-Dependent
When LLM agents hand off information to one another, does the message format matter? Two literatures disagree: format-optimization work reports that structured messages cut cost without hurting accuracy, while format-restriction work finds that imposing structure degrades generation -- and neither measures what happens when a message traverses multiple hops, where copy fidelity, not one-shot generation, dominates. We introduce a controlled relay testbed: briefs of twelve programmatically generated atomic facts are re-encoded hop-by-hop in five formats (free NL, precision-instructed NL, JSON,…
Read at arXiv cs.AIBoltzmann MapReduce: A Partition-Function Reduce for Forkable Sandboxes
To leading order under local asymptotic normality (LAN), the confidence density a worker emits over a chunk of size $n$ is a Gibbs--Boltzmann measure $\exp\{-βE(θ)\}$ whose inverse temperature is the sample size, $β=n$. Three consequences are exact in the Gaussian/linear case and first-order otherwise: disjoint chunks carry independent Boltzmann factors, so the MapReduce \emph{reduce}, read literally, is a partition function $Z=\int\prod_k h_k\,dθ$ whose mode is precision-weighted (inverse-variance) pooling; frequentist consistency is the zero-temperature limit $T=1/n\to0$
Read at arXiv cs.AIFormat Sensitivity Index: Token-Controlled Prompt Wrapper Robustness and Schema Compliance in LLM Benchmarking
Prompt wrappers often differ only in formatting, yet they can change model scores enough to flip leaderboard conclusions. We study this variance under a token-controlled protocol and introduce two complementary metrics: the Format Sensitivity Index (FSI), the accuracy range induced by wrapper choice, and the Parseability Sensitivity Index (PSI), the corresponding range in answer parseability. Across 140,000 OpenRouter generations spanning 7 QA tasks, 5 wrapper families, and 4 instruct models from 7B to 72B parameters, we find that mean FSI varies by over 30x across models and is largely expla…
Read at arXiv cs.AIInterpreting Latent CoT Reasoning as Dynamical Systems
Recent latent reasoning methods, such as CODI and COCONUT, face a fundamental interpretability problem: they maintain multiple superimposed candidate traces in the hidden space at each step, unlike explicit- CoT, which follows a single transparent reasoning trace. Existing mechanistic methods show compression, shortcuts, and superposition without explaining how reasoning evolves across latent steps. To address this gap, we model latent token sequences as trajectories in representation space and apply dynamical systems analysis to characterize the evolution of reasoning. Using quantitative mea…
Read at arXiv cs.AI