# Coverage-Controlled Preference Mining from Noisy Claim Verification for Evidence-Grounded Generation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.10494 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.10494/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Medical LLM alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation.
- Builds on 18 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Mar 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Medical LLM alignment](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/medical-llm-alignment/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [GPT-4o System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21276/) (2024)
- [QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14314/) (2023)
- [The Curious Case of Neural Text Degeneration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09751/) (2019)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.00661/) (2020)
- [RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00267/) (2023)
- [Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.12840/) (2019)
- [Fact or Fiction: Verifying Scientific Claims](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14974/) (2020)
- [Chain-of-Verification Reduces Hallucination in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.11495/) (2023)
- [RARR: Researching and Revising What Language Models Say, Using Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.08726/) (2022)
- [Med42-v2: A Suite of Clinical LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.06142/) (2024)
- [A dataset and benchmark for hospital course summarization with adapted large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.05720/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Evidence-grounded generation produces summaries whose claims should be supported by supplied evidence, but claim-level verifiers provide noisy feedback and can reward models that simply say less. We study this problem in clinical Brief Hospital Course summarization, where outputs must remain grounded in patient-specific EHR evidence. We introduce VERI-DPO, a preference-mining framework that converts noisy claim verification into coverage-controlled summary-level preferences. For each evidence-window prompt, VERI-DPO samples multiple candidate summaries, decomposes them into claims, verifies each claim against patient evidence, and forms a preference pair only when the chosen summary has better aggregate verifier-estimated support while retaining comparable verifiable content. Standard Direct Preference Optimization then distills these pairs into a single-sample policy, avoiding inference-time reranking. On patient-disjoint MIMIC-III-Ext-VeriFact-BHC test data, VERI-DPO reduces Not Supported rates from 10.7% to 1.9% under the mining verifier and from 11.6% to 6.4% under a separately prompted GPT-4o judge. In 100 blinded pairwise assessments by two domain researchers, VERI-DPO is preferred over the base model 56 times versus 18 times for factual faithfulness. In a locked zero-shot MIMIC-IV-Ext-BHC transfer test with 1,000 patients and no model adaptation, VERI-DPO lowers Not Supported rates with nearly unchanged scored-claim counts. Multi-seed ablations show that verifier-guided pair construction drives the gains, while coverage and anti-degeneration controls prevent apparent factuality improvements from coming from shorter or less checkable outputs.