待翻译：Standalone LLM and a Pre-specified Agentic Pipeline for Explaining ICU Mortality Predictions: a Feasibility Study on the eICU Demo Dataset
AI 服务暂时不可用，以下为来源摘要，待恢复后补全翻译：arXiv:2608.26109v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine-learning models can predict ICU mortality accurately, but feature-attribution methods alone rarely provide the clinical narrative needed for bedside use. Large language models (LLMs) may bridge this gap, and multi-step agentic pipelines are a plausible extension because they separate data interpretation, guideline checking, and final explanation. This revised feasibility study preserves the original standalone-versus-agentic comparison while making the main clinical findings more explicit. Using the retained local eICU Demo artifact set (2,353 ICU stays; 8.1\% mortality), XGBoost achieved an AUROC of 0.855 (95\% CI 0.796--0.906) and an AUPRC of 0.332 (95\% CI 0.217--0.494). On a stratified 38-case explanation subset, the standalone LLM produced 1 explanation with explicit outcome leakage, whereas the four-step agentic pipeline produced none. Among the 14 cases that overlapped with the SHAP review subset, the standalone LLM showed higher SHAP alignment (mean Jaccard 0.171 versus 0.077) and higher direction consistency (92.9\% versus 78.6\%), while the agentic pipeline showed higher guideline grounding (0.762 versus 0.143), higher value specificity (0.236 versus 0.143), and slightly higher plausibility (0.700 versus 0.671). Clinically, the results suggest that agentic decomposition may improve safety-relevant grounding and patient-specific detail, but it should be paired with attribution-based checks before use in high-stakes risk explanation.
AI 服务暂时不可用，以下为来源正文，待恢复后补全翻译。
--> [Submitted on 21 May 2026] Title:Standalone LLM and a Pre-specified Agentic Pipeline for Explaining ICU Mortality Predictions: a Feasibility Study on the eICU Demo Dataset View a PDF of the paper titled Standalone LLM and a Pre-specified Agentic Pipeline for Explaining ICU Mortality Predictions: a Feasibility Study on the eICU Demo Dataset, by Di Zhu and 7 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Machine-learning models can predict ICU mortality accurately, but feature-attribution methods alone rarely provide the clinical narrative needed for bedside use. Large language models (LLMs) may bridge this gap, and multi-step agentic pipelines are a plausible extension because they separate data interpretation, guideline checking, and final explanation. This revised feasibility study preserves the original standalone-versus-agentic comparison while making the main clinical findings more explicit. Using the retained local eICU Demo artifact set (2,353 ICU stays; 8.1\% mortality), XGBoost achieved an AUROC of 0.855 (95\% CI 0.796--0.906) and an AUPRC of 0.332 (95\% CI 0.217--0.494). On a stratified 38-case explanation subset, the standalone LLM produced 1 explanation with explicit outcome leakage, whereas the four-step agentic pipeline produced none. Among the 14 cases that overlapped with the SHAP review subset, the standalone LLM showed higher SHAP alignment (mean Jaccard 0.171 versus 0.077) and higher direction consistency (92.9\% versus 78.6\%), while the agentic pipeline showed higher guideline grounding (0.762 versus 0.143), higher value specificity (0.236 versus 0.143), and slightly higher plausibility (0.700 versus 0.671). Clinically, the results suggest that agentic decomposition may improve safety-relevant grounding and patient-specific detail, but it should be paired with attribution-based checks before use in high-stakes risk explanation. Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2608.26109 [cs.AI] (or arXiv:2608.26109v1 [cs.AI] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.26109 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite Submission history From: Ziwei Wang [view email] [v1] Thu, 21 May 2026 03:17:27 UTC (618 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Standalone LLM and a Pre-specified Agentic Pipeline for Explaining ICU Mortality Predictions: a Feasibility Study on the eICU Demo Dataset, by Di Zhu and 7 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.AI new | recent | 2026-08 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Loading... Data provided by: Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)