arXiv:2604.05125cs.IRcs.AI2026-04

用强化学习让医保审核自动决定查多少政策条文,又快又准。

Offline RL for Adaptive Policy Retrieval in Prior Authorization

  • 把查政策条文变成逐步决策过程,智能选择查或停。
  • 最优策略准确率达92%,比固定查法高30个百分点,少查一半内容。
  • 适合医疗系统、政策推理等需权衡效率与准确的场景。

医保预授权(PA)需解析复杂碎片化的覆盖政策,现有检索增强系统依赖固定的前K项检索策略,效率低且易冗余或不足。本文将政策检索建模为序列决策问题,构建马尔可夫决策过程(MDP),让智能体从候选段落中逐次选择或停止决策。奖励函数平衡决策正确性与检索成本,体现准确率与效率的权衡。在合成医保请求数据上,基于日志轨迹使用离线强化学习训练策略,采用保守Q学习(CQL)、隐式Q学习(IQL)和直接偏好优化(DPO)。CQL实现92%决策准确率(比最佳固定K基线高出30个百分点),通过全量检索;IQL以44%更少检索步骤达到最佳基线准确率,唯一获得正回报;过渡级DPO达92%准确率,检索步数减少47%(10.6 vs 20.0),处于帕累托前沿优势区域,优于CQL与行为克隆。行为克隆基线性能接近CQL,说明需优势加权或偏好学习才能学会精准筛选。λ消融实验显示,仅当步代价λ=0.2时,CQL由全量检索转向选择性检索,揭示效率-精度拐点。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Prior authorization (PA) requires interpretation of complex and fragmented coverage policies, yet existing retrieval-augmented systems rely on static top-$K$ strategies with fixed numbers of retrieved sections. Such fixed retrieval can be inefficient and gather irrelevant or insufficient information. We model policy retrieval for PA as a sequential decision-making problem, formulating adaptive retrieval as a Markov Decision Process (MDP). In our system, an agent iteratively selects policy chunks from a top-$K$ candidate set or chooses to stop and issue a decision. The reward balances decision correctness against retrieval cost, capturing the trade-off between accuracy and efficiency. We train policies using Conservative Q-Learning (CQL), Implicit Q-Learning (IQL), and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) in an offline RL setting on logged trajectories generated from baseline retrieval strategies over synthetic PA requests derived from publicly available CMS coverage data. On a corpus of 186 policy chunks spanning 10 CMS procedures, CQL achieves 92% decision accuracy (+30 percentage points over the best fixed-$K$ baseline) via exhaustive retrieval, while IQL matches the best baseline accuracy using 44% fewer retrieval steps and achieves the only positive episodic return among all policies. Transition-level DPO matches CQL's 92% accuracy while using 47% fewer retrieval steps (10.6 vs. 20.0), occupying a "selective-accurate" region on the Pareto frontier that dominates both CQL and BC. A behavioral cloning baseline matches CQL, confirming that advantage-weighted or preference-based policy extraction is needed to learn selective retrieval. Lambda ablation over step costs $λ\in \{0.05, 0.1, 0.2\}$ reveals a clear accuracy-efficiency inflection: only at $λ= 0.2$ does CQL transition from exhaustive to selective retrieval.

强化学习医保审核智能检索离线学习

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。