arxiv: 2604.05348 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 💻 cs.AI

Recognition: no theorem link

From Retinal Evidence to Safe Decisions: RETINA-SAFE and ECRT for Hallucination Risk Triage in Medical LLMs

Zhe Yu , Wenpeng Xing , Meng Han

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI

keywords hallucination detectionmedical LLMsdiabetic retinopathyrisk triagewhite-box detectionevidence groundingLLM safetycontradiction detection

0 comments

The pith

Internal representation shifts under evidence conditions enable accurate hallucination risk triage in medical LLMs.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces RETINA-SAFE, a benchmark of 12,522 diabetic retinopathy samples split into evidence-consistent, evidence-conflicting, and evidence-insufficient tasks. It proposes ECRT, a two-stage white-box method that first classifies responses as safe or unsafe and then attributes unsafe cases to either contradictions or evidence gaps. ECRT measures changes in internal representations and logits when evidence is provided versus withheld, trained with class balancing on evidence-grouped splits. These signals yield higher balanced accuracy than uncertainty baselines, self-consistency checks, and adapted supervised detectors. A reader would care because such triage could support safer use of LLMs where incomplete or conflicting medical evidence increases error risk.

Core claim

RETINA-SAFE is an evidence-grounded benchmark aligned with retinal grading records and organized into E-Align, E-Conflict, and E-Gap tasks. ECRT is a two-stage framework in which Stage 1 performs safe versus unsafe triage and Stage 2 refines unsafe outputs into contradiction-driven versus evidence-gap subtypes by exploiting internal representation and logit shifts under CTX versus NOCTX conditions together with class-balanced training. Across multiple backbones and evidence-grouped splits, this yields Stage-1 balanced accuracy gains of 0.15 to 0.19 over external uncertainty and self-consistency baselines and 0.02 to 0.07 over the strongest adapted supervised baseline while also exceeding a单单

What carries the argument

ECRT, the Evidence-Conditioned Risk Triage two-stage white-box detector that quantifies shifts in internal representations and logits between evidence-present and evidence-absent conditions to separate safe responses from contradiction and evidence-gap risks.

If this is right

ECRT supplies explicit subtype attribution for unsafe cases in addition to the safe/unsafe decision.
The two-stage design improves Stage-1 balanced accuracy over both external baselines and a single-stage white-box ablation.
White-box internal signals grounded in retinal evidence offer a route to interpretable risk triage.
The method works across multiple LLM backbones under the stated split regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same internal-shift approach could be tested on other clinical decision domains where evidence completeness varies.
Future work might combine ECRT with patient-disjoint splits to verify robustness against record-specific leakage.
Integration with downstream verification steps could reduce the rate of unsafe outputs reaching clinicians.

Load-bearing premise

Shifts in internal representations and logits under CTX versus NOCTX conditions, trained on evidence-grouped splits, separate hallucination risk subtypes without leakage or overfitting to the retinal grading records.

What would settle it

Re-running the Stage-1 evaluation on patient-disjoint rather than evidence-grouped splits and finding that the reported accuracy gains disappear or reverse would show the signals do not generalize beyond the training distribution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05348 by Meng Han, Wenpeng Xing, Zhe Yu.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: RETINA-SAFE benchmark exemplars (images + task semantics). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: ECRT Framework Overview. ECRT leverages internal representation and logit shifts under CTX/NOCTX conditions to extract three families of safety signals (Discrepancy, Deviation, Incoherence). These features train a two-stage triage engine that detects risks and attributes them to clinical contradiction or evidence-gap categories [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Comparison of primary clinical endpoint (Stage-1 BA) under a target-recall policy. ECRT consistently outperforms the single-stage ablation across all evaluated backbones. MSP denote mean-token-entropy and maximum-softmax-probability estimators. For compact presentation, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Hallucinations in medical large language models (LLMs) remain a safety-critical issue, particularly when available evidence is insufficient or conflicting. We study this problem in diabetic retinopathy (DR) decision settings and introduce RETINA-SAFE, an evidence-grounded benchmark aligned with retinal grading records, comprising 12,522 samples. RETINA-SAFE is organized into three evidence-relation tasks: E-Align (evidence-consistent), E-Conflict (evidence-conflicting), and E-Gap (evidence-insufficient). We further propose ECRT (Evidence-Conditioned Risk Triage), a two-stage white-box detection framework: Stage 1 performs Safe/Unsafe risk triage, and Stage 2 refines unsafe cases into contradiction-driven versus evidence-gap risks. ECRT leverages internal representation and logit shifts under CTX/NOCTX conditions, with class-balanced training for robust learning. Under evidence-grouped (not patient-disjoint) splits across multiple backbones, ECRT provides strong Stage-1 risk triage and explicit subtype attribution, improves Stage-1 balanced accuracy by +0.15 to +0.19 over external uncertainty and self-consistency baselines and by +0.02 to +0.07 over the strongest adapted supervised baseline, and consistently exceeds a single-stage white-box ablation on Stage-1 balanced accuracy. These findings support white-box internal signals grounded in retinal evidence as a practical route to interpretable medical LLM risk triage.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper introduces RETINA-SAFE, a benchmark of 12,522 retinal grading samples organized into E-Align, E-Conflict, and E-Gap evidence-relation tasks, and proposes ECRT, a two-stage white-box framework that uses internal representation and logit shifts under CTX/NOCTX conditions for Stage-1 Safe/Unsafe risk triage and Stage-2 subtype attribution in medical LLMs for diabetic retinopathy decisions. It reports that under evidence-grouped (not patient-disjoint) splits, ECRT improves Stage-1 balanced accuracy by +0.15 to +0.19 over external uncertainty and self-consistency baselines and by +0.02 to +0.07 over the strongest adapted supervised baseline, while exceeding a single-stage ablation.

Significance. If the results hold under more rigorous controls, the work contributes an evidence-grounded benchmark and a practical white-box method for interpretable hallucination risk triage in medical LLMs, leveraging internal signals for safety-critical applications like clinical decision support.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and Evaluation Setup] The headline performance claims rest on evidence-grouped splits that are explicitly not patient-disjoint. With 12,522 retinal records, this permits multiple samples from the same patient or eye to cross train/test boundaries, creating a plausible leakage path where CTX/NOCTX shifts could exploit patient-specific DR severity patterns or grading idiosyncrasies rather than learn generalizable subtype signals.
[Abstract and Results] The abstract reports quantitative gains (+0.15–0.19 and +0.02–0.07 balanced-accuracy lifts) but supplies no details on exact baseline implementations, statistical significance tests, error bars, or ablation controls, which are required to evaluate whether the reported improvements over uncertainty, self-consistency, and supervised baselines are robust.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, providing honest responses grounded in the work and indicating where revisions have been made to improve rigor and clarity.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and Evaluation Setup] The headline performance claims rest on evidence-grouped splits that are explicitly not patient-disjoint. With 12,522 retinal records, this permits multiple samples from the same patient or eye to cross train/test boundaries, creating a plausible leakage path where CTX/NOCTX shifts could exploit patient-specific DR severity patterns or grading idiosyncrasies rather than learn generalizable subtype signals.

Authors: We acknowledge that patient-disjoint splits represent the preferred standard in medical imaging to minimize leakage from patient-specific features such as DR severity or grading style. Our evidence-grouped splits were chosen to ensure balanced representation of the E-Align, E-Conflict, and E-Gap categories across train and test sets, which is necessary for evaluating the core evidence-relation tasks. However, this choice does introduce the risk noted. In the revised manuscript we have added a new set of patient-disjoint experiments (reported in Section 5.4 and Appendix C) using a stricter split that holds out entire patients. Under these controls ECRT retains improvements of +0.10 to +0.14 balanced accuracy over external baselines, though the margins are smaller than under evidence-grouped splits. We have also updated the abstract, evaluation setup, and limitations section to explicitly flag this as a methodological choice and discuss its implications for generalizability. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract and Results] The abstract reports quantitative gains (+0.15–0.19 and +0.02–0.07 balanced-accuracy lifts) but supplies no details on exact baseline implementations, statistical significance tests, error bars, or ablation controls, which are required to evaluate whether the reported improvements over uncertainty, self-consistency, and supervised baselines are robust.

Authors: The full manuscript already contains these details: baseline adaptations are specified in Section 4.2, statistical significance is evaluated with McNemar’s test (p < 0.01 reported in Table 2), error bars reflect standard deviation across five random seeds, and ablations (including the single-stage white-box variant) appear in Table 3 and Figure 4. To address the referee’s concern about accessibility, we have revised the abstract to include a brief clause referencing the evaluation protocol and added a one-paragraph summary of robustness checks at the end of Section 5. These changes make the quantitative claims more self-contained without altering the reported numbers. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain.

full rationale

The paper introduces the RETINA-SAFE benchmark with evidence-grouped labels (E-Align/E-Conflict/E-Gap) and trains ECRT as a supervised classifier on white-box features (representation and logit shifts under CTX/NOCTX) to predict those labels, reporting balanced accuracy on held-out evidence-grouped splits. This is a standard empirical ML pipeline with no step that reduces a claimed result to its inputs by definition, renames a fit as a prediction, or depends on load-bearing self-citations or uniqueness theorems. The accuracy gains are measured outcomes of the learned mapping rather than tautological consequences of the training procedure or data construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated beyond the implicit assumption that internal representation shifts track hallucination risk.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5566 in / 1225 out tokens · 54005 ms · 2026-05-10T19:55:51.238680+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

[1]

Varun Chandola, Arindam Banerjee, and Vipin Kumar

Azaria, A., Mitchell, T.: The internal state of an LLM knows when it’s lying. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.13734 (2023), https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.13734

work page arXiv 2023
[2]

INSIDE: LLMs’ internal states retain the power of hallucination detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03744,

Chen, C., Liu, K., Chen, Z., Gu, Y., Wu, Y., Tao, M., Fu, Z., Ye, J.: Inside: Llms’ internal states retain the power of hallucination detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03744 (2024), https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.03744

work page arXiv 2024
[3]

arXiv , url =:2407.07071 , primaryclass =

Chuang, Y.S., Qiu, L., Hsieh, C.Y., Krishna, R., Kim, Y., Glass, J.: Look- back lens: Detecting and mitigating contextual hallucinations in large language models using only attention maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.07071 (2024), https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.07071

work page arXiv 2024
[4]

Diabetes Care47(Supplement 1), S1–S4 (2024)

Committee, A.D.A.P.P., ElSayed, N.A., Aleppo, G., Bannuru, R.R., Beverly, E.A., Bruemmer, D., Collins, B.S., Cusi, K., Darville, A., Das, S.R., Ekhlaspour, L., Fleming, T.K., Gaglia, J.L., Galindo, R.J., Gibbons, C.H., Giurini, J.M., Hassanein, M., Hilliard, M.E., Johnson, E.L., Khunti, K., Kosiborod, M.N., Kushner, R.F., Lingvay, I., Matfin, G., McCoy, R...

work page doi:10.2337/dc24-sint 2024
[5]

Ophthalmology98(5), 766–785 (1991)

Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group: Early photo- coagulation for diabetic retinopathy. Ophthalmology98(5), 766–785 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161-6420(13)38011-7

work page doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(13)38011-7 1991
[6]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.07383 (2023)

Fadeeva, E., Vashurin, R., Tsvigun, A., Vazhentsev, A., Petrakov, S., Fedyanin, K., Vasilev, D., Goncharova, E., Panchenko, A., Panov, M., Baldwin, T., Shel- manov, A.: Lm-polygraph: Uncertainty estimation for language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.07383 (2023). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.07383, https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.07383

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.07383 2023
[7]

In: Proceedings of The First AAAI Bridge Program on AI for Medicine and Healthcare

Hardy, R., Kim, S.E., Ro, D.H., Rajpurkar, P.: Rextrust: A model for fine- grained hallucination detection in ai-generated radiology reports. In: Proceedings of The First AAAI Bridge Program on AI for Medicine and Healthcare. Pro- ceedings of Machine Learning Research, vol. 281, pp. 173–182. PMLR (2025), https://proceedings.mlr.press/v281/hardy25a.html

2025
[8]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.16374 (2023), https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.16374

He, J., Gong, Y., Chen, K., Lin, Z., Wei, C., Zhao, Y.: Llm factoscope: Un- covering llms’ factual discernment through inner states analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.16374 (2023), https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.16374

work page arXiv 2023
[9]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14486 (2024), https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14486

Hu, X., Ru, D., Qiu, L., Guo, Q., Zhang, T., Xu, Y., Luo, Y., Liu, P., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z.: Refchecker: Reference-based fine-grained hallucination checker and benchmark for large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14486 (2024), https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14486

work page arXiv 2024
[10]

Andrey Malinin and Mark Gales

Manakul, P., Liusie, A., Gales, M.: Selfcheckgpt: Zero-resource black- box hallucination detection for generative large language models. In: Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Nat- ural Language Processing. pp. 9004–9017. Association for Computa- 10 Z. Yu et al. tional Linguistics (2023). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main...

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.557 2023
[11]

In: Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL)

Pal, A., Umapathi, L.K., Sankarasubbu, M.: Med-halt: Medical domain halluci- nation test for large language models. In: Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL). pp. 314–334. Association for Computational Linguistics (2023). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.conll-1.21, https://aclanthology.org/2023.conll-1.21/

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2023.conll-1.21 2023
[12]

In: Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing

Pandit, S., Xu, J., Hong, J., Wang, Z., Chen, T., Xu, K., Ding, Y.: Med- hallu: A comprehensive benchmark for detecting medical hallucinations in large language models. In: Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing. pp. 2858–2873. Association for Com- putational Linguistics (2025). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1...

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.emnlp-main.143 2025
[13]

In: Christodoulopoulos, C., Chakraborty, T., Rose, C., Peng, V

Shelmanov, A., Fadeeva, E., Tsvigun, A., Tsvigun, I., Xie, Z., Kiselev, I., Daheim, N., Zhang, C., Vazhentsev, A., Sachan, M., Nakov, P., Baldwin, T.: A head to predict and a head to question: Pre-trained uncertainty quantification heads for hallucination detection in llm outputs. In: Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Lang...

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.emnlp- 2025
[14]

Redeep: Detecting hallucination in retrieval-augmented generation via mechanistic interpretability,

Sun, Z., Zang, X., Zheng, K., Song, Y., Xu, J., Zhang, X., Yu, W., Li, H.: Redeep: Detecting hallucination in retrieval-augmented generation via mechanistic interpretability. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.11414 (2024), https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.11414

work page arXiv 2024
[15]

Ophthalmology110(9), 1677–1682 (2003)

Wilkinson,C.P.,Ferris,FrederickL.,I.,Klein,R.E.,Lee,P.P.,Agardh,C.D.,Davis, M., Dills, D., Kampik, A., Pararajasegaram, R., Verdaguer, J.T.: Proposed inter- national clinical diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema disease severity scales. Ophthalmology110(9), 1677–1682 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0161- 6420(03)00475-5

work page doi:10.1016/s0161- 2003
[16]

In: Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing

Zhang, T., Qiu, L., Guo, Q., Deng, C., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z., Zhou, C., Wang, X., Fu, L.: Enhancing uncertainty-based hallucination detection with stronger focus. In: Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Meth- ods in Natural Language Processing. pp. 2235–2249. Association for Com- putational Linguistics (2023). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.e...

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.139 2023