arXiv:2603.23501v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision Language Models (VLMs) are increasingly used for tasks like medical report generation and visual question answering. However, fluent diagnostic text does not guarantee safe visual understanding. In clinical practice, interpretation begins with pre-diagnostic sanity checks: verifying that the input is valid to read (correct modality and anatomy, plausible viewpoint and orientation, and no obvious integrity violations). Existing benchmarks largely assume this step is solved, and therefore miss a critical failure mode: a model can produce plausible narratives even when the input is inconsistent or invalid. We introduce MedObvious, a 1,880-task benchmark that isolates input validation as a set-level consistency capability over small multi-panel image sets: the model must identify whether any panel violates expected coherence. MedObvious spans five progressive tiers, from basic orientation/modality mismatches to clinically motivated anatomy/viewpoint verification and triage-style cues, and includes five evaluation formats to test robustness across interfaces. Evaluating 17 different VLMs, we find that sanity checking remains unreliable: several models hallucinate anomalies on normal (negative-control) inputs, performance degrades when scaling to larger image sets, and measured accuracy varies substantially between multiple-choice and open-ended settings. These results show that pre-diagnostic verification remains unsolved for medical VLMs and should be treated as a distinct, safety-critical capability before deployment.

arXiv:2602.19158v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Medical foundation models generate narrative explanations but cannot quantify intervention effects, detect evidence conflicts, or validate literature claims, limiting clinical auditability. We propose causal compilation, a paradigm that transforms medical evidence from narrative text into executable code. The paradigm standardizes heterogeneous research evidence into structured estimand objects, each explicitly specifying intervention contrast, effect scale, time horizon, and target population, supporting six executable causal queries: do-calculus, counterfactual reasoning, temporal trajectories, heterogeneous effects, mechanistic decomposition, and joint interventions. We instantiate this paradigm in DoAtlas-1, compiling 1,445 effect kernels from 754 studies through effect standardization, conflict-aware graph construction, and real-world validation (Human Phenotype Project, 10,000 participants). The system achieves 98.5% canonicalization accuracy and 80.5% query executability. This paradigm shifts medical AI from text generation to executable, auditable, and verifiable causal reasoning.

arXiv:2512.00403v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Scientific discovery increasingly entails long-horizon exploration of complex hypothesis spaces, yet most existing approaches emphasize final performance while offering limited insight into how scientific exploration unfolds over time, particularly balancing efficiency-diversity trade-offs and supporting reproducible, human-in-the-loop discovery workflows. We introduce SelfAI, a self-directed, multi-agent-enabled discovery system that automates scientific exploration as a strategic, trajectory-driven decision-making process. SelfAI translates high-level research intent into executable experiments, reasons over accumulated experimental trajectories to guide subsequent exploration, and applies adaptive stopping decisions to terminate unproductive search paths within a closed-loop workflow governed by explicit efficiency-diversity trade-offs. Evaluated using real-world experiments spanning domains from machine learning to drug discovery, SelfAI consistently discovers high-quality solutions with substantially fewer redundant trials than classical optimization and recent LLM-based baselines. The proposed methods establish a general framework for organizing long-horizon scientific discovery and adaptive decision-making in complex scientific and engineering systems.