mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Agentic Governance and Adversarial Verification for Policy-Constrained LLM Healthcare Appeal Generation

arXiv 2609.27844 ↗First posted 20 Aug 2026cs.AI cs.CL cs.IRcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Medical and scientific domain agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Claim denial management costs U.S. healthcare approximately 260 billion annually in administrative overhead. Large Language Models (LLMs) and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can produce fluent clinical text, but single-agent architectures fail in high-stakes healthcare: they introduce unsupported clinical details and lose the logical structure of hierarchical payer policy. We propose AGVF (Agentic Governance and Adversarial Verification Framework), a multi-agent architecture for medical-necessity appeal generation under explicit policy and evidence constraints. AGVF models appeal synthesis as a Constrained Markov Decision Process (CMDP) over five agents: policy formalization, evidence retrieval, gap analysis, adversarial critique, and gated synthesis. We prove that refinement over a fixed policy constraint graph monotonically reduces evidence-deficiency and terminates with either a complete satisfying frontier or a localized evidence gap. A deterministic citation- grounding gate prevents assertions without admissible evidence from entering shared state. We provide a reference implementation and validate it on 1,000 synthetic appeal cases parameterized from de-identified public hospital discharge data. The validation confirms zero citation-grounding violations across all AGVF cases and monotone deficiency reduction in every episode; ablating the gate raises violations to 100%, confirming it is load-bearing. The study uses no real patient records and does not measure clinical efficacy. AGVF thus contributes a theory-backed agentic architecture and verified reference implementation for policy-constrained LLM generation in healthcare.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Medical and scientific domain agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 5 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Aug 2026.

Builds on

5 of 12 references.

References · 5

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
  2. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
  3. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
  4. 2024From Local to Global: A Graph RAG Approach to Query-Focused Summarizationcited by 1,453
  5. 2024RAPTOR: Recursive Abstractive Processing for Tree-Organized Retrievalcited by 532

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Many-to-One Adversarial Consensus: Exposing Multi-Agent Collusion Risks in AI-Based Healthcare
  2. 2026Courtroom-Style Multi-Agent Debate with Progressive RAG and Role-Switching for Controversial Claim Verification
  3. 2026Green Shielding: A User-Centric Approach Towards Trustworthy AI
  4. 2026Accountable AI with Grounded, Faithful, Consistent, Actionable Rationales: A Case Study in Clinical Trial Matching with VERDICT
  5. 2026Improving the Safety and Trustworthiness of Medical AI via Multi-Agent Evaluation Loops
  6. 2026CLEAR: Cross-Source Evidence Adjudication for Large Language Models in Medicine
  7. 2026ClinSeekAgent: Automating Multimodal Evidence Seeking for Agentic Clinical Reasoning
  8. 2025Haibu Mathematical-Medical Intelligent Agent:Enhancing Large Language Model Reliability in Medical Tasks via Verifiable Reasoning Chains