mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Deterministic Integrity Gates for LLM-Assisted Clinical Manuscript Preparation: An Auditable Biomedical Informatics Architecture

arXiv 2606.09500 ↗First posted 8 Jun 2026cs.AI cs.DLcited by 2

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Web, search, and research agents

Abstract (arXiv)

As autonomous research agents and AI co-scientist systems push large language models (LLMs) from drafting toward end-to-end manuscript production, the bottleneck shifts from generation to verification. Fluent LLM output can hide fabricated citations, numbers that drift from source tables, and unmet reporting-guideline items; existing tools generate without verifying, and self-critique inherits the blind spots that produce confident fabrication. We describe an architecture pairing generation with verification, resting on three principles: decompose the workflow into self-contained skills, gate every stage transition with halt-on-failure, and resolve each integrity question with the cheapest sufficient mechanism, a deterministic, re-executable check where one suffices and a prose-level probe only where interpretation is unavoidable. This determinism-where-possible split, organized as an integrity-gate taxonomy, is the core contribution. It is realized as MedSci Skills, an open-source toolkit of 43 skills with a 21-detector deterministic tier, evaluated on three public-dataset pipelines (STARD, PRISMA, STROBE) and a seeded-defect ablation. Across the three pipelines every content-hash manifest verified clean and the gates surfaced real defects; on 27 identical injected defects the deterministic gates detected all 27 with no false positives on the matched clean fixtures, whereas a single-prompt LLM reviewer detected 11, its misses in code, bibliography, and style defects the prose hides. Determinism-where-possible verification yields an auditable, re-executable trail that exposes the evidence a human needs to check an LLM-assisted manuscript: feasibility and reproducibility evidence, not a claim of human-competitive quality, which a separate blinded study addresses. MedSci Skills is MIT-licensed and archived (v3.8.0).

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Web, search, and research agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 1 of its 4 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2026.

Builds on

1 of 4 references.

References · 1

  1. 2023Large Language Modelscited by 774

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Autonomous Research Agents: A Survey of AI Scientists and the Verification Gap
  2. 2025BadScientist: Can a Research Agent Write Convincing but Unsound Papers that Fool LLM Reviewers?
  3. 2025Haibu Mathematical-Medical Intelligent Agent:Enhancing Large Language Model Reliability in Medical Tasks via Verifiable Reasoning Chains
  4. 2026Closed-Loop Validation-Repair for Healthcare Interoperability: A Multi-Model Study of Schema Compliance in Clinical LLMs
  5. 2026Rethinking LLM Verification: Evidence Structure, Uncertainty, and Selective Refinement
  6. 2025Black-Box Behavioral Distillation Breaks Safety Alignment in Medical LLMs
  7. 2026Prompt-to-Paper: Agentic AI System for Bioinformatics
  8. 2026SciCoQA: Quality Assurance for Scientific Paper--Code Alignment