Automated Generation of Accurate & Fluent Medical X-ray Reports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our paper aims to automate the generation of medical reports from chest X-ray image inputs, a critical yet time-consuming task for radiologists. Existing medical report generation efforts emphasize producing human-readable reports, yet the generated text may not be well aligned to the clinical facts. Our generated medical reports, on the other hand, are fluent and, more importantly, clinically accurate. This is achieved by our fully differentiable and end-to-end paradigm that contains three complementary modules: taking the chest X-ray images and clinical history document of patients as inputs, our classification module produces an internal checklist of disease-related topics, referred to as enriched disease embedding; the embedding representation is then passed to our transformer-based generator, to produce the medical report; meanwhile, our generator also creates a weighted embedding representation, which is fed to our interpreter to ensure consistency with respect to diseaserelated topics. Empirical evaluations demonstrate very promising results achieved by our approach on commonly-used metrics concerning language fluency and clinical accuracy. Moreover, noticeable performance gains are consistently observed when additional input information is available, such as the clinical document and extra scans from different views.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".