arXiv Paper Proposes Governed State for Clinical AI Reasoning
A new paper on arXiv (2608.14804) argues that large language models (LLMs) in clinical AI lack explicit, persistent, and governed representations of patient state, which is critical for longitudinal clinical reasoning. The authors distinguish between generated context and governed state, and identify five objects that clinical AI often conflates: true state, observations, evidence, belief, and simulated state. They propose a tiered governance standard for auditing clinical AI systems and define accountability as decomposing into four information requirements, including an immutable evidence trail. The paper positions longitudinal clinical reasoning as a state-estimation problem under partial observability, suggesting that success depends on governance of patient state rather than model fluency. The work is relevant to the development of accountable AI in healthcare, with implications for regulatory standards and clinical practice.
Key facts
- Paper arXiv:2608.14804, announced as new, discusses clinical AI and longitudinal reasoning.
- Authors argue LLMs lack persistent, governed patient state representation.
- Five conflated objects: true state, observations, evidence, belief, simulated state.
- Proposes tiered governance standard for auditing clinical AI systems.
- Accountability decomposes into four information requirements, including immutable evidence.
- Longitudinal reasoning framed as state-estimation under partial observability.
- Success axis is governance of patient state, not model fluency.
- Published on arXiv, source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.14804
Entities
Institutions
- arXiv