Jan 2026· arXiv.org· Vol abs/2601.12547· 1 citation· 65 references
Computer Science
TL;DR
It is argued that purposive clinical AI should use decision-sufficient abstraction: model detail should be conditioned by the objective structure of the decision and limited by the evidence available to support that detail, which should often be ordinal-first.
Abstract
Clinical artificial intelligence increasingly builds high-dimensional representations of patients, yet every finite clinical model is an abstraction. The key question is not only how accurately a model predicts, but which distinctions need to be represented, at what resolution, for the decision at hand. We argue that purposive clinical AI should use decision-sufficient abstraction: model detail should be conditioned by the objective structure of the decision and limited by the evidence available to support that detail. We further argue that this objective structure should often be ordinal-first. The primitive objects are objective-threshold propositions that may recur at progressively finer levels. For example, mortality below 10 percent may appear early and mortality below 5 percent later. We formalize ordered threshold refinement, a set-valued decision relation, and threshold-sufficient abstraction. A model needs only enough resolution to preserve the survivor set induced by the thresholds reached so far. Once an earlier threshold resolves the choice, further refinement of later objectives has no decision value for that choice. When a potentially decisive threshold is unresolved, additional information or model complexity should be targeted to that threshold rather than added globally. The framework links clinical reasoning, model abstraction, causal inference, lexicographic optimization, constrained learning, and human-AI collaboration. Its central claim is that clinical AI should pursue purpose before fidelity, order before abstraction, and refinement until decision-sufficient rather than reality-complete.
Abstract Artificial intelligence now enters the clinical encounter at three points: before the visit, during clinical reasoning, and after it, when ambient tools generate the note. AI has the potential to adversely influence the diagnostic process at each of these steps. This opinion piece names interpretive drift, the...
Clinical AI systems increasingly match or exceed clinicians on some diagnostic benchmarks. Yet this reveals little about how AI output functions within clinical reasoning or how repeated reliance affects clinicians' independent capability. This paper proposes Bounded Reciprocal Adaptation for Clinician Engagement (BRAC...
C. Greengrass· Frontiers in Digital Health· 0 citations
Cognitive safety is proposed here as a longitudinal property of the clinician-AI-organization sociotechnical system: its capacity to support or improve clinical performance without eroding independent hypothesis generation, uncertainty calibration, reasoned dissent, metacognitive control, and resilient performance when...
S. Corrao· Recenti progressi in medicin...· 0 citations
Clinical LLMs must decide not only what diagnosis to produce, but also whether the available evidence is sufficient for autonomous decision making. Binary DECIDE/ABSTAIN formulations merge distinct non decision states and do not explicitly evaluate information acquisition. We introduce a DECIDE/ASK/DEFER formulation to...
The clinical integration of artificial intelligence has outpaced the development of robust evaluative frameworks, raising critical safety concerns. This perspective establishes a clear taxonomy distinguishing probabilistic language models from deterministic classifiers and applies a multi-dimensional combinatorial mode...
M. Toma, David Yusupov· Bioengineering· 1 citation