Med-VCD: Mitigating hallucination for medical large vision language models through visual contrastive decoding
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large vision-language models (LVLMs) are now central to healthcare applications such as medical visual question answering and imaging report generation. Yet, these models remain vulnerable to hallucination outputs that appear plausible but are in fact incorrect. In the natural image domain, several decoding strategies have been proposed to mitigate hallucinations by reinforcing visual evidence, but most rely on secondary decoding or rollback procedures that substantially slow inference. Moreover, existing solutions are often domain-specific and may introduce misalignment between modalities or between generated and ground-truth content. We introduce Med-VCD, a sparse visual-contrastive decoding method that mitigates hallucinations in medical LVLMs without the time overhead of secondary decoding. Med-VCD incorporates a novel token-sparsification strategy that selects visually informed tokens on the fly, trimming redundancy while retaining critical visual context and thus balancing efficiency with reliability. Evaluations on eight medical datasets, spanning ophthalmology, radiology, and pathology tasks in visual question answering, report generation, and dedicated hallucination benchmarks, show that Med-VCD raises factual accuracy by an average of 13% and improves hallucination accuracy by 6% relative to baseline medical LVLMs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it