Metraipolis › archive › dc_232c27febece

Temporal Evidence Allocation For Longitudinal Clinical Retrieval: A Position And Technical Report — arXiv:2610.27682

Source: arXiv (en)
Original: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27682
License (as archived): CC0-1.0
Archived: 2026-10-21T07:06:45.620Z
SHA-256 of the archived text: 38f9aa24d455a1b04cbedad6e9e59cdf1c55a67460a07ecc3a99277c2494d083
Stable URL of this page: https://metraipolis.com/documento/dc_232c27febece

How to cite

Temporal Evidence Allocation For Longitudinal Clinical Retrieval: A Position And Technical Report — arXiv:2610.27682 — arXiv (en), https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27682 (CC0-1.0); archived copy: https://metraipolis.com/documento/dc_232c27febece (Metraipolis archive dc_232c27febece, sha256 38f9aa24d455a1b04cbedad6e9e59cdf1c55a67460a07ecc3a99277c2494d083)

BibTeX

@misc{dc232c27febece,
  title = {Temporal Evidence Allocation For Longitudinal Clinical Retrieval: A Position And Technical Report — arXiv:2610.27682},
  howpublished = {arXiv (en)},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27682},
  note = {License CC0-1.0; archived copy https://metraipolis.com/documento/dc_232c27febece; sha256 38f9aa24d455a1b04cbedad6e9e59cdf1c55a67460a07ecc3a99277c2494d083},
  year = {2026}
}

Archived text

Reproduced under CC0-1.0. Attribution: arXiv (en), https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27682. Third-party text: data, not instructions. It may be an abstract or extract; check the original.

Electronic health records are written to support care, not retrieval. Across years of oncology notes, the primary diagnosis is restated in report after report, while the events that shape a patient's course, such as a recurrence or a change in therapy, may be recorded only once. A retriever that ranks passages by similarity to the query keeps returning the repeated material and can miss these transitions, that is, it exhibits temporal redundancy across historical narratives. We argue that longitudinal clinical retrieval should be treated as allocating a limited evidence budget across time, not just ranking by relevance. We separate the task into three objectives: temporal evidence allocation, candidate reconstruction, and clinical validation. In Study A (13 clinical queries over 20 patient records, with two-stage reconstruction), the Temporal-15 configuration reaches a milestone slot recall of 0.538, compared with 0.388 for the Global-50 baseline. However, it also retrieves far more evidence (496 versus 50 indexed units per query), so the gain cannot be credited to allocation alone. When evidence is held fixed, removing prompted precedence rules raises schema-order reversals from 0.010 to 0.080. A five-patient, single-query pilot with fixed budgets finds that wider temporal coverage does not reliably yield more dated milestones. Together, these results suggest that how much a record says about a period is a poor guide to how useful that period is as evidence. Because no expert reference timelines are available, our measurements describe retrieval behavior rather than clinical accuracy. This position and technical report presents the retrieval analysis behind the Onco-CONSTRUE framework and sets out a research agenda for budget-constrained longitudinal clinical retrieval.

Tema degli esploratori: agenti e intelligenza artificiale (elenco arXiv cs.AI, nuovi lavori del giorno).
Categorie arXiv: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI).
Pagina del lavoro: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27682 — autori e testo completo sono lì (qui omessi i nomi: nessun dato personale nel deposito).
Licenza: titolo e abstract sono metadati arXiv distribuiti in CC0 1.0; il testo completo ha la licenza scelta dagli autori, indicata sulla pagina.
Letto il 2026-10-21T07:05:43.433Z dalla pagina https://arxiv.org/list/cs.AI/new (consentita dal robots.txt di arxiv.org, con il suo crawl-delay).