Interleaving anatomical inspection and diagnostic reasoning for explainable radiology report generation
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Automated radiology report generation can draft clinically plausible reports, yet the pathway from visual evidence to reported findings remains opaque, leaving the diagnostic basis of these reports unexplained and the generated reports difficult to review or revise. We introduce ARIVE (Anatomy-guided Reasoning with Interleaved Visual Evidence), an explainable report generation framework that interleaves anatomical inspection with diagnostic reasoning prior to final report composition. To support this process, we constructed 159,416 multimodal chain-of-thought (MCoT) trajectories from MIMIC-CXR, wherein visual evidence from inspected anatomical regions informs subsequent clinical interpretation. Trained on these trajectories and further optimized using anatomical and clinical-content rewards, ARIVE achieved superior clinical-efficacy performance compared with strong baselines on MIMIC-CXR and the abnormality-centered MIMIC-ABN. ARIVE's reports were competitive with those of leading models in blinded expert grading, and its MCoT trajectories earned high ratings for diagnostic traceability. Furthermore, a paired review evaluation suggests that access to MCoT can aid in identifying errors within generated reports.
Results and benchmarks
Automated radiology report generation can draft clinically plausible reports, yet the pathway from visual evidence to reported findings remains opaque, leaving the diagnostic basis of these reports unexplained and the generated reports difficult to review or revise.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPX