Cite-While-You-Generate: Training-Free Evidence Attribution for Multimodal Clinical Summarization

Trustworthy clinical summarization requires not only fluent generation but also transparency about where each statement comes from. We propose a training-free framework for generation-time source attribution that leverages decoder attentions to directly cite supporting text spans or images, overcoming the limitations of post-hoc or retraining-based methods. We introduce two strategies for multimodal attribution: a raw image mode, which directly uses image patch attentions, and a caption-as-span mode, which substitutes images with generated captions to enable purely text-based alignment. Evaluations on two representative domains: clinician-patient dialogues (CliConSummation) and radiology reports (MIMIC-CXR), show that our approach consistently outperforms embedding-based and self-attribution baselines, improving both text-level and multimodal attribution accuracy (e.g., +15% F1 over embedding baselines). Caption-based attribution achieves competitive performance with raw-image attention while being more lightweight and practical. These findings highlight attention-guided attribution as a promising step toward interpretable and deployable clinical summarization systems.

Adversarial Multi-Agent Evaluation of Large Language Models through Iterative Debates

This paper explores optimal architectures for evaluating the outputs of large language models (LLMs) using LLMs themselves. We propose a novel framework that interprets LLMs as advocates within an ensemble of interacting agents, allowing them to defend their answers and reach conclusions through a judge and jury system. This approach offers a more dynamic and comprehensive evaluation process compared to traditional human-based assessments or automated metrics. We discuss the motivation behind this framework, its key components, and comparative advantages. We also present a probabilistic model to evaluate the error reduction achieved by iterative advocate systems. Finally, we outline experiments to validate the effectiveness of multi-advocate architectures and discuss future research directions.

The Price of Diversity

Systemic bias with respect to gender, race and ethnicity, often unconscious, is prevalent in datasets involving choices among individuals. Consequently, society has found it challenging to alleviate bias and achieve diversity in a way that maintains meritocracy in such settings. We propose (a) a novel optimization approach based on optimally flipping outcome labels and training classification models simultaneously to discover changes to be made in the selection process so as to achieve diversity without significantly affecting meritocracy, and (b) a novel implementation tool employing optimal classification trees to provide insights on which attributes of individuals lead to flipping of their labels, and to help make changes in the current selection processes in a manner understandable by human decision makers. We present case studies on three real-world datasets consisting of parole, admissions to the bar and lending decisions, and demonstrate that the price of diversity is low and sometimes negative, that is we can modify our selection processes in a way that enhances diversity without affecting meritocracy significantly, and sometimes improving it.