Recognizing Study Lineage Is Not Enough: Over-Crediting Same-Trial Evidence in LLM-Based Medical Verification
A model can identify shared trial lineage correctly in a direct task yet over-credit a second publication from the same trial when aggregating evidence.
ProofPaper ↗
Key points
- Publication count is not study count.
- We evaluate this behavior in medical LLM verification using 14 source-audited clinical families and five model conditions.
- Across all three original provenance families, GPT-5.5 identifies the independent update in 10/10 recognition calls per family but over-credits the same-trial report in 5/5 separate aggregation calls per family.
- The results identify a behavioral gap between elicited lineage recognition and evidence aggregation.
Sources (1)
- [1]Recognizing Study Lineage Is Not Enough: Over-Crediting Same-Trial Evidence in LLM-Based Medical VerificationarXiv (AI, ML, NLP, CV, robotics, multi-agent) · Oct 16, 04:42 PM
A model can identify shared trial lineage correctly in a direct task yet over-credit a second publication from the same trial when aggregating evidence.
Publication count is not study count.
Extractive summary: sentences quoted from the sources.
Before this
- Oct 16, 2026Liquid AI Releases d1-ultra: A Multimodal Decision Model That Scores 65 on the AA Decision Index
- Oct 15, 2026Granite Switch 4.1: Chat, Decisions, and Speech from One Endpoint
- Oct 15, 2026FlashAttention with Statistics: Low-Overhead Attention Features for Compact Hallucination Detectors
- Oct 15, 2026Multi-Reward Hacking: From Aggregation-Induced Drift to Trust-Anchored Defense
- Oct 15, 2026Fractional Power-of-Two Quantization for Efficient and Effective Multiplier-Free LLM Inference
- Oct 15, 2026PremiseCheck: Efficient Fact-Checking of Human and AI Peer Reviews