构建可量化的临床AI信任体系,融合证据、监督与分阶段自主。
From Black-Box Confidence to Measurable Trust in Clinical AI: A Framework for Evidence, Supervision, and Staged Autonomy

- 采用确定性核心+分层模型升级+人工监督的混合架构。
- 提出测量不确定度等信任指标,实现量化评估而非主观判断。
- 适合医疗AI研发者与临床系统管理者参考,提升可信部署能力。
临床人工智能的信任不能简化为模型准确率、生成流畅度或用户总体好感。在医学领域,信任必须作为基于证据、监督和操作边界的可测量系统属性来构建。本文提出一个以证据、监督和分阶段自主为核心的可信临床AI实用框架。该方法不完全用端到端黑盒模型替代确定性临床逻辑,而是结合确定性核心、面向个体患者的上下文验证AI助手、多层级模型升级机制以及人类监督层进行验证、升级与风险控制。研究表明,信任还依赖于对关键临床发现的选择性验证、限定的临床情境、严谨的提示架构,以及在真实病例上的精细评估。以分类器驱动的模块化提示被检验为一种渐进式扩展临床深度的路径,无需等待全规则覆盖即可保持提示性能。为实现信任可操作化,提出一套基于计量学原则(测量不确定性、校准、可追溯性)的信任度量体系,支持对每一架构层级的定量评估。在此视角下,可信临床AI并非单一模型的属性,而是从一开始就嵌入证据链、人工监督、分层升级与渐进权限的系统性成果。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Trust in clinical artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be reduced to model accuracy, fluency of generation, or overall positive user impression. In medicine, trust must be engineered as a measurable system property grounded in evidence, supervision, and operational boundaries of AI autonomy. This article proposes a practical framework for trustworthy clinical AI built around three principles: evidence, supervision, and staged autonomy. Rather than replacing deterministic clinical logic wholesale with end-to-end black-box models, the proposed approach combines a deterministic core, a patient-specific AI assistant for contextual validation, a multi-tier model escalation mechanism, and a human supervision layer for verification, escalation, and risk control. We demonstrate that trust also depends on selective verification of clinically critical findings, bounded clinical context, disciplined prompt architecture, and careful evaluation on realistic cases. Classifier-driven modular prompting is examined as an incremental path to scaling clinical depth without sacrificing prompt performance and without waiting for complete rule-based coverage. To operationalize trust, a set of trust metrics is proposed, built on metrological principles -- measurement uncertainty, calibration, traceability -- enabling quantitative rather than subjective assessment of each architectural layer. In this perspective, trustworthy clinical AI emerges not as a property of an individual model, but as an architectural outcome of a system into which evidence trails, human oversight, tiered escalation, and graduated action rights are embedded from the outset.
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。