Research
July 14, 2026
1 min read
1 views

From ML Predictions to Informed Diagnostic Assistance Using the Toulmin Model of Argumentation

Original Source

ArXiv AI (cs.AI)

by Anca Marginean, Adrian Groza
arXiv:2607.09664v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: To provide a structured and interpretable assessment, we decompose the image-based diagnosis into components following the Toulmin model of argumentation. This model consists of a claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and ba

arXiv:2607.09664v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: To provide a structured and interpretable assessment, we decompose the image-based diagnosis into components following the Toulmin model of argumentation. This model consists of a claim, grounds, warrant, qualifier, rebuttal, and backing. Consider a claim generated by a machine learning (ML) model for retinal diagnosis. Rather than accepting this claim at face value, one could either apply explainable AI (XAI) methods or adopt an argumentation-based approach. In our framework, a model specialized in biomarker extraction from images provides the grounds. The warrant-linking the grounds to the claim - is analyzed by an agent equipped with medical knowledge; in our architecture, this role is fulfilled by a MedGemma agent. The qualifier is determined based on the overall quantitative evaluation of both the warrant and grounds models. Finally, a rebuttal is constructed using image similarity measures computed with MedSigLip. All these components are presented to the human expert, enabling a more informed and critical assessment of the ML-generated diagnosis.

Tags:AI

Original Content Credit

This summary is sourced from ArXiv AI (cs.AI). For the complete article with full details, research data, and author insights, please visit the original source.

Visit ArXiv AI (cs.AI)

Related Articles

Interpreting Latent CoT Reasoning as Dynamical Systems
ArXiv AI (cs.AI)
Industry News1m

Interpreting Latent CoT Reasoning as Dynamical Systems

arXiv:2607.09698v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent latent reasoning methods, such as CODI and COCONUT, face a fundamental interpretability problem: they maintain multiple superimposed candidate traces in the hidden space at each step, unlike explicit- CoT, which follows a sin

Jul 14, 2026