Sign in
BioinformaticsbioRxiv
Preprint

PanVasc Research for AI assisted evidence analysis in panvascular intervention

Lingsen YouiD, Yujun Guo, Wentong WangiD, Zisu Peng, Xinyu Zhong, Li Shen, Junbo GeiD

Abstract

Panvascular intervention research requires evidence workflows that preserve source identity, outcome definitions and observation windows. We developed PanVasc Research, an executable research framework, and evaluated a fixed local Qwen3-4B model using two complementary tasks. Fifty ClinicalTrials.gov records from five vascular query strata generated 200 source-fidelity tests with intact evidence or controlled removal of the requested source, primary outcome or timeframe, plus 50 clean controls. A separate 100-statement sample from the official NLI4CT test set assessed clinical-trial entailment and evidence selection against existing expert labels. Generic and checklist prompts used identical evidence and maximum generation budgets; each output was also evaluated with an input-only deterministic contract. Registry exact accuracy was 51/200 (25.5%) with the generic prompt and 77/200 (38.5%) with the checklist; intact-case agreement was 50/50 and 48/50. The rule baseline recovered 200/200 tuples. NLI label accuracy was 48/100 (48.0%) and 50/100 (50.0%), respectively. The source contract retained 35 and 31 incorrect NLI labels in the two arms. Registry references establish fidelity to a registration snapshot, while NLI4CT concerns breast-cancer trials and does not validate vascular expertise. The framework also retains provenance-recorded literature retrieval, structured research planning and local numerical analysis. These experiments support a bounded assessment of source handling and semantic failure, rather than a new foundation model or autonomous scientific discovery. A proposed endpoint representation identifies the additional domain annotation and independent validation required for a panvascular research model.

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.