# Large Language Model-Based Uncertainty-Adjusted Label Extraction for Artificial Intelligence Model Development in Upper Extremity Radiography

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.05664 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05664/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [CheXpert: A Large Chest Radiograph Dataset with Uncertainty Labels and Expert Comparison](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.07031/) (2019)
- [Deep reinforcement learning with automated label extraction from clinical reports accurately classifies 3D MRI brain volumes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09812/) (2021)
- [CheX-GPT: Harnessing Large Language Models for Enhanced Chest X-ray Report Labeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.11505/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Autonomous Structuring of Radiology Reports Across Modalities at Archive Scale Using an Open-Weight Large Language Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.04541/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Objectives: To evaluate GPT-4o's ability to extract diagnostic labels (with uncertainty) from free-text radiology reports and to test how these labels affect multi-label image classification of musculoskeletal radiographs. Methods: This retrospective study included radiography series of the clavicle (n=1,170), elbow (n=3,755), and thumb (n=1,978). After anonymization, GPT-4o filled out structured templates by indicating imaging findings as present ("true"), absent ("false"), or "uncertain." To assess the impact of label uncertainty, "uncertain" labels of the training and validation sets were automatically reassigned to "true" (inclusive) or "false" (exclusive). Label-image-pairs were used for multi-label classification using ResNet50. Label extraction accuracy was manually verified on internal (clavicle: n=233, elbow: n=745, thumb: n=393) and external test sets (n=300 for each). Performance was assessed using macro-averaged receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC), precision recall curves, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. AUCs were compared with the DeLong test. Results: Automatic extraction was correct in 98.6% (60,618 of 61,488) of labels in the test sets. Across anatomic regions, label-based model training yielded competitive performance measured by macro-averaged AUC values for inclusive (e.g., elbow: AUC=0.80 [range, 0.62-0.87]) and exclusive models (elbow: AUC=0.80 [range, 0.61-0.88]). Models generalized well on external datasets (elbow [inclusive]: AUC=0.79 [range, 0.61-0.87]; elbow [exclusive]: AUC=0.79 [range, 0.63-0.89]). No significant differences were observed across labeling strategies or datasets (p>=0.15). Conclusion: GPT-4o extracted labels from radiologic reports to train competitive multi-label classification models with high accuracy. Detected uncertainty in the radiologic reports did not influence the performance of these models.