Skip to content

Author

C. Dragosloveanu

2 papers indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Open access Aug 2026

From Medical Records to AI-Ready Datasets: A Practical Guide for Clinical Researchers

Background: Medical artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL) studies frequently begin with datasets collected for routine care rather than for computational modeling. Such datasets may contain inconsistent variables, heterogeneous measurement time points, unexplained NaN values, poorly defined outcomes, missing metadata, and insufficient documentation, which can compromise model development before any algorithm is selected. Methods: This Technical Note proposes a physician-facing Clinical AI-Readiness Guide for preparing medical datasets before AI-based analysis. The guide was developed as a practical framework organized around pre-modeling decisions, including the clinical task, cohort, minimum common dataset, outcome definition, predictor variables, measurement timing, missing-data logic, standardization, non-tabular data linkage, data dictionary, and validation readiness. Results: The proposed guide translates AI-readiness principles into concrete data-collection rules for clinical, laboratory, imaging, physiological-signal, textual, follow-up, and multimodal data. It emphasizes clinically consistent data acquisition, reliable target labeling, explicit missing-data logic, patient-level linkage, structured metadata, and validation feasibility. A structured checklist and scoring approach are also proposed as practical pre-modeling assessment tools to classify datasets as not ready, exploratory only, ML-ready with limitations, or AI-ready for model development. Conclusions: Medical AI-readiness should be established before model development begins. By helping physicians collect, structure, and document data more consistently, the proposed guide may improve collaboration between clinical and technical teams and reduce preventable dataset-related failures in medical AI research.

Cătălin Anghel, A. Anghel, M. Craciun et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

GradeDrift-LLM: Measuring Student-History-Induced Score Drift in LLM-Based Automated Grading

Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly explored for automated educational assessment, while future educational platforms may combine grading, feedback, learner analytics, and personalization. The objective of this study was to determine whether student-history metadata can influence the numerical score assigned to the same answer. Methods: This study introduces GradeDrift-LLM, a controlled framework for measuring student-history-induced score drift in LLM-based automated grading. We evaluated 1000 Computer Science answers from 100 students across six student-history conditions and eight open-weight LLMs. For each grading instance, the submitted answer, question, reference answer, rubric-related information, scoring scale, and grading instruction were kept constant; only the student-history condition varied. Results: Across 39,997 valid paired comparisons, 83.92% showed no drift, 9.40% showed upward drift, and 6.68% showed downward drift. Mean absolute drift was 0.2137 points, and the 95th percentile absolute drift was 1 point. Positive-history frames tended to increase scores, whereas negative-history frames tended to decrease them. Drift was model-dependent, not uniformly explained by approximate scale, and present in both technical and argumentative answers; rare extreme deviations reached 10 points. Conclusions: Student-history metadata can influence LLM-generated grading scores despite explicit instructions to ignore it. Future LLM-based grading systems should separate answer-based scoring from learner-context-based personalization and validate score invariance under controlled learner-context variations.

Cătălin Anghel, A. Anghel, M. Craciun et al. · 0 citations