arXiv (All)
open access
Complementary Vulnerabilities: Auditing and Governing Clinician-LLM Error Overlap
Health systems are deploying large language models (LLMs) into clinical workflows, often on the assumption that a second automated check can only reduce error. But a second reasoner reduces error only insofar as it fails differently from the first. We say that a clinician and a model have complement
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Toward Guarantees for Clinical Reasoning in Vision Language Models via Formal Verification#1343513
- Ambiguity Detection in Medical Exams via Large Language Models: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Pilot Study#1379651
- Multi-LLM Disagreement as a Scalable Detector of Human Annotation Errors in Structured Data from Clinical Free-Text#259260
- Decide, Ask, or Defer: Clinical LLMs under Incomplete Evidence#1200193
- Cite What You Explore: Budget-Aware LLM Reasoning over Medical KGs with Verifiable Evidence#1217114
Record · ID 1400109
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive