LLM Judges Verify Presence, Not Absence: Omission Blindness in AI Clinical Notes
sbulaev
20 points
11 comments
September 02, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 112.0ms across 5,346 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Judge relying wholly on AI in order is covered by judicial immunity, court rules delichon · 55 pts · August 17, 2026 · 55% similar
- LLMs are making me lose my savviness me2too · 54 pts · August 29, 2026 · 52% similar
- Connecticut judge says plaintiff hid messages for AI in court filings nomilk · 11 pts · August 14, 2026 · 51% similar
- I'm becoming AI-blind rcymerys · 322 pts · August 21, 2026 · 51% similar
- People are deceiving the justice system with AI root-parent · 12 pts · July 25, 2026 · 49% similar
Discussion Highlights (4 comments)
Planktonne
The fact that even the abstract is very clearly AI-generated does not fill me with confidence in the rigour of the research.
udik2
May be AI written. Used my AI to get the gist of it. One thing that I believe is LLMs need to be considered a pure play tool and can be guided to point out misses as well. The reason is simple. To find whats missing, one needs to ask the right questions on how to judge and when that is there.
velrim
Not sure about the paper but the results make sense, we see it in PDF extraction too. Fields that aren't in the document are being made up 11 to 40% of the time depending on the API. The whole thing is nasty partly because it isn't just AI problem. When checking the human labels that we used in our evals 40 out of 142 answer keys claiming absence were wrong. Tricky one.
tarboreus
"the floored note before its clean twin" People using AI like this should be run out of their jobs.