mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Benchmarking LLM Summaries of Multimodal Clinical Time Series for Remote Monitoring

arXiv 2603.01557 ↗First posted 2 Mar 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent clinical summaries of remote therapeutic monitoring time series. However, it remains unclear whether these narratives faithfully capture clinically significant events, such as sustained abnormalities. Existing evaluation metrics primarily focus on semantic similarity and linguistic quality, leaving event-level correctness largely unmeasured. To address this gap, we introduce an event-based evaluation framework for multimodal time-series summarization using the Technology-Integrated Health Management (TIHM)-1.5 dementia monitoring dataset. Clinically grounded daily events are derived through rule-based abnormal thresholds and temporal persistence criteria. Model-generated summaries are then aligned with these structured facts. Our evaluation protocol measures abnormality recall, duration recall, measurement coverage, and hallucinated event mentions. We benchmark three approaches: zero-shot prompting, statistical prompting, and a vision-based pipeline that uses rendered time-series visualizations. The results reveal a striking decoupling between conventional metrics and clinical event fidelity. Models that achieve high semantic similarity scores often exhibit near-zero abnormality recall. In contrast, the vision-based approach demonstrates the strongest event alignment, achieving 45.7% abnormality recall and 100% duration recall. These findings underscore the importance of event-aware evaluation to ensure reliable clinical time-series summarization.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Mar 2026.

Builds on

15 of 27 references.

References · 15

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  2. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  3. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
  4. 2019Can You Trust Your Model's Uncertainty? Evaluating Predictive Uncertainty Under Dataset Shiftcited by 1,274
  5. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
  6. 2024Chronos: Learning the Language of Time Seriescited by 712
  7. 2023A decoder-only foundation model for time-series forecastingcited by 650
  8. 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 415
  9. 2021SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarizationcited by 402
  10. 2019SelectiveNet: A Deep Neural Network with an Integrated Reject Optioncited by 333
  11. 2023AlignScore: Evaluating Factual Consistency with a Unified Alignment Functioncited by 284
  12. 2023Adapted Large Language Models Can Outperform Medical Experts in Clinical Text Summarizationcited by 244
3 more
  1. 2023Large-scale Training of Foundation Models for Wearable Biosignalscited by 89
  2. 2024ECG-FM: An Open Electrocardiogram Foundation Modelcited by 89
  3. 2023ECG-QA: A Comprehensive Question Answering Dataset Combined With Electrocardiogramcited by 52

Built on by

Not cited yet.