Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

LLM Judges Verify Presence, Not Absence: Omission Blindness in AI Clinical Notes and What Recovers It

Ambient AI scribes draft clinical notes, and published audits find their dominant error is omission: information the encounter established that the note fails to record. The standard check is an LLM judge: a second model reads the note against the transcript and flags problems. We ask whether judges detect omissions. Public corpora cannot supply the answer key: their clinician reference notes and transcripts are materially discrepant. Our benchmark has 500 single-error note pairs from audited fact sheets, 298 with a named fact certainly absent and 202 added-or-altered controls. Across eight judge designs, paired discrimination (the flawed note below its clean twin, 0.5 a coin flip) reads ...

AuthorsSebastian Fox, Luke Markham, Ryan Lail et al.
Primary categorycs.CL
Published31 August 2026
Last updated at source31 August 2026
cs.CLcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/1ef7fd58-2592-48b7-a0ef-d26c5be7dcd7" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 4 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Connected in the knowledge graph

Explore this entry in the graph

Models and datasets referencing this paper

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 20 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.