arXiv:2604.01661cs.AI2026-04被引 1

为临床AI系统设计防语义扭曲的架构模式,让算法更懂医学术语的真实含义。

Ontology-Aware Design Patterns for Clinical AI Systems: Translating Reification Theory into Software Architecture

  • 基于本体理论提出7种可落地的软件架构模式
  • 在糖尿病风险预测场景中完整验证了模式组合效果
  • 适合医疗AI开发者和系统架构师参考落地

临床AI系统常因病历流程、计费激励和术语碎片化导致数据结构失真。已有研究揭示了三种扭曲机制:文档执行的三力模型、AI可能放大的编码伪影反馈循环,以及术语治理失效引发的语义漂移。然而如何将这些洞见转化为可实施的软件架构仍是未解难题。本文提出七种基于《四人组》设计模式语言的本体感知架构模式,用于构建抵御本体扭曲的临床AI流水线:本体检查点(数据摄入验证)、休眠感知流水线(低频信号保留)、漂移哨兵(持续漂移监控)、双本体层(并行表示维护)、再实体化熔断器(反馈环中断)、术语版本门(术语演化管理)、合规适配器(可插拔合规)。每个模式包含问题、约束、解决方案、后果、已知用例与关联模式。以初级保健AI系统为例,演示了七个模式在糖尿病风险预测中的协同应用。本文未报告实证验证,仅提供基于理论分析的设计词汇,需未来在生产环境评估。其中三个模式有部分先例,其余四个尚未正式描述。局限包括缺乏运行时基准,且适用范围限于德国和欧盟监管框架。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Clinical AI systems routinely train on health data structurally distorted by documentation workflows, billing incentives, and terminology fragmentation. Prior work has characterised the mechanisms of this distortion: the three-forces model of documentary enactment, the reification feedback loop through which AI may amplify coding artefacts, and terminology governance failures that allow semantic drift to accumulate. Yet translating these insights into implementable software architecture remains an open problem. This paper proposes seven ontology-aware design patterns in Gang-of-Four pattern language for building clinical AI pipelines resilient to ontological distortion. The patterns address data ingestion validation (Ontological Checkpoint), low-frequency signal preservation (Dormancy-Aware Pipeline), continuous drift monitoring (Drift Sentinel), parallel representation maintenance (Dual-Ontology Layer), feedback loop interruption (Reification Circuit Breaker), terminology evolution management (Terminology Version Gate), and pluggable regulatory compliance (Regulatory Compliance Adapter). Each pattern is specified with Problem, Forces, Solution, Consequences, Known Uses, and Related Patterns. We illustrate their composition in a reference architecture for a primary care AI system and provide a walkthrough tracing all seven patterns through a diabetes risk prediction scenario. This paper does not report empirical validation; it offers a design vocabulary grounded in theoretical analysis, subject to future evaluation in production systems. Three patterns have partial precedent in existing systems; the remaining four have not been formally described. Limitations include the absence of runtime benchmarks and restriction to the German and EU regulatory context.

临床AI本体设计架构模式术语治理

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。