临床试验中人机交互的定义与分类:一种多维度的人机分类方法
摘要
该论文提出一个多维分类框架,用于在临床试验中定义和归类人机交互(HAII),并由人类评审员与六个LLM分类器对15项试验进行独立标注,结果显示LLM辅助分类具有潜力,但不完整记录仍需人类判断。
arXiv:2609.38559v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: This paper examines human-AI interactions (HAIIs) in clinical trials and presents a multidimensional categorisation framework that classifies interactions according to AI tasks, human-AI relationships, interaction configurations and interacting human groups. We define HAII, examine existing taxonomies and extend existing categorisation approaches through this novel multidimensional framework. We purposively sampled 15 clinical trials from a previously reported dataset. Each trial was independently categorised by two human reviewers and six large language model (LLM) classifiers. The proposed categorisation provides a structured method for the consistent identification, comparison and synthesis of human-AI interactions across clinical-trial records. The framework is intended to support more consistent comparison and synthesis of AI-related clinical trials and to make explicit the different forms of human involvement associated with AI interventions. The results demonstrate the potential for LLM-assisted categorisation while indicating the continuing importance of human judgement where trial records are incomplete or ambiguous. The principal contribution is a proposed multidimensional framework that brings together AI tasks, human-AI relationships, interaction configurations and interacting human groups within a single approach designed for clinical-trial records. Its significance lies in its potential to support more systematic identification, comparison and synthesis of how humans and AI interact in clinical trials.
查看缓存全文
缓存时间: 2026/10/01 09:41
# Defining and Categorising Human-AI Interactions in Clinical Trials: A Multidimensional Human-AI Classification Approach Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38559](https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.38559) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.38559) > Abstract:This paper examines human\-AI interactions \(HAIIs\) in clinical trials and presents a multidimensional categorisation framework that classifies interactions according to AI tasks, human\-AI relationships, interaction configurations and interacting human groups\. We define HAII, examine existing taxonomies and extend existing categorisation approaches through this novel multidimensional framework\. We purposively sampled 15 clinical trials from a previously reported dataset\. Each trial was independently categorised by two human reviewers and six large language model \(LLM\) classifiers\. The proposed categorisation provides a structured method for the consistent identification, comparison and synthesis of human\-AI interactions across clinical\-trial records\. The framework is intended to support more consistent comparison and synthesis of AI\-related clinical trials and to make explicit the different forms of human involvement associated with AI interventions\. The results demonstrate the potential for LLM\-assisted categorisation while indicating the continuing importance of human judgement where trial records are incomplete or ambiguous\. The principal contribution is a proposed multidimensional framework that brings together AI tasks, human\-AI relationships, interaction configurations and interacting human groups within a single approach designed for clinical\-trial records\. Its significance lies in its potential to support more systematic identification, comparison and synthesis of how humans and AI interact in clinical trials\. ## Submission history From: Tim Collins \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/7a23b9cf/2609.38559)\] **\[v1\]**Tue, 29 Sep 2026 21:18:26 UTC \(2,953 KB\)
相似文章
临床试验中人工智能与人机交互的趋势——一种混合人机探索
本文采用GPT-5.5混合人机方法,分析了ClinicalTrials.gov中临床试验AI术语的时间与地理趋势。研究发现AI相关试验数量增加,中国和美国领先,并讨论了混合筛选对人机交互分类的可行性。
通过人类对齐设计用于药物发现代理AI的健壮LLM评估系统
本文提出一种用于药物发现代理AI的LLM-as-a-Judge评估框架,通过专家标注者的人类对齐研究验证。优化法官模型以提升与人类判断的契合度,并为科学领域可重用评估提供洞见。
@Vincent_AINotes: https://x.com/Vincent_AINotes/status/2073746845386629134
本文探讨了AI个性化带来的迎合用户偏好的风险,引用多项研究表明长期记忆可能增加模型同意的倾向。作者提出了对抗确认偏误的方法,包括使用独立会话和Andrej Karpathy的LLM Council多模型评审团,并给出了手动搭建评审团的步骤。
新研究测试多款LLM与数千真实用户,发现AI无法模拟人类偏好
一项新研究在28项真实世界研究中测试了LLM,发现它们仅在53%的情况下与人类多数一致,与随机猜测无异,挑战了用LLM取代人类反馈的趋势。
HumanLLM:通过人类认知模式对大语言模型拟人化的基准测试与改进
HumanLLM 提出了一个框架,通过将心理模式建模为相互作用的因果力来对大语言模型的拟人化进行基准测试和改进。该方法从学术文献中构建了244个心理模式和11,359个多模式场景。研究表明,真正的人类对齐需要认知建模而非表面行为模拟,HumanLLM-8B 在多模式动态上的表现超越了 Qwen3-32B 等更大的模型。