Too much evidence, too little time: From text to actionable recommendations through multi-objective evidence reasoning
Summary
SCEPTER is a framework that converts clinical case descriptions into evidence-based recommendations by combining PubMed retrieval, PubMedBERT ranking, LLM claim extraction, contradiction detection, and Pareto-optimal claim selection, achieving a 192:1 compression ratio while maintaining high evidence diversity.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/28/26, 06:25 AM
# Too much evidence, too little time: From text to actionable recommendations through multi-objective evidence reasoning Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.22574](https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.22574) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.22574) > Abstract:Evidence\-based clinical decision making requires specialists to identify, evaluate and synthesize relevant scientific literature\. However, PubMed searches for complex clinical cases often return hundreds of publications that cannot be reviewed manually under time constraints\. This study proposes SCEPTER \(Single\-Case Evidence\-driven PubMed\-To\-rEcommendation Reasoner\), a framework for transforming clinical case descriptions into evidence\-based recommendations\. SCEPTER combines PubMed retrieval, PubMedBERT semantic ranking, large language model \(LLM\)\-based claim extraction, evidence\-level weighting, contradiction detection, consensus analysis and multi\-objective Pareto claim selection\. The framework generates structured evidence syntheses and grounded actionable recommendations\. A Paper Q&A module further enables interactive exploration of selected publications\. The proposed framework introduces multi\-objective reasoning model that integrates literature support, contradiction analysis and interactive literature interrogation into a unified clinical decision\-support pipeline\. Evaluation on 150 case studies demonstrated that the framework reduced an average search space of 576 papers to 53 retained papers, 7 Pareto\-optimal claims and 3 final recommendations, corresponding to an overall compression ratio of 192:1\. Despite this reduction, the retained evidence maintained high diversity \(entropy=0\.901\)\. The ablation study showed that Pareto\-based selection increased evidence diversity and recommendation utility compared with conventional ranking approaches\. ## Submission history From: Simona\-Vasilica Oprea \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/55e19940/2607.22574)\] **\[v1\]**Fri, 5 Jun 2026 03:53:28 UTC \(1,087 KB\)
Similar Articles
Do Language Models Know What Compelling Scientific Evidence Looks Like?
The paper introduces EDB-Bio, a 96k-episode benchmark for scientific evidence deliberation across three biological domains, showing that frontier and open-weight models are systematically underconfidence-prone (Brier scores near a trivial base-rate forecaster) and that post-training with proper scoring rules improves calibration, yielding an Ibis0 model 2.5× more efficient than the best frontier model in sequential experiment selection.
Sci-MMR: Benchmarking Multi-Step Evidence-Grounded Scientific Reasoning in Multimodal Agents
Sci-MMR is a benchmark for evaluating multi-step evidence-grounded scientific reasoning in multimodal agents, revealing gaps where answer accuracy exceeds evidence recovery by over 20%.
Turning scattered evidence into discovery decisions for life sciences
OpenAI’s new life-science model “GPT-Rosalind” inside Codex autonomously ranks asthma drug targets by orchestrating specialist sub-agents that merge genetics, transcriptomics, safety and IP data into a single evidence-backed decision.
Accountable AI with Grounded, Faithful, Consistent, Actionable Rationales: A Case Study in Clinical Trial Matching with VERDICT
This paper introduces VERDICT, a neuro-symbolic system that uses LLMs and SMT solvers to ensure accountable decision-making in clinical trial matching, providing consistent policies and faithful rationales.
Evidence-RL: Towards Evidence-intensive Visual Reasoning
This paper introduces Counterfactual Evidence Disentanglement (CED), a training-time method that makes vision-language models rely on concrete image evidence rather than language priors or shortcuts, improving visual reasoning grounding across benchmarks.