Disagreements are frequently studied from the perspective of either detecting toxicity or analysing argument structure. We propose a framework of dispute tactics that unifies these two perspectives, as well as other dialogue acts which play a role in resolving disputes, such as asking questions and providing clarification. This framework includes a preferential ordering among rebuttal-type tactics, ranging from ad hominem attacks to refuting the central argument. Using this framework, we annotate 213 disagreements (3,865 utterances) from Wikipedia Talk pages. This allows us to investigate research questions around the tactics used in disagreements; for instance, we provide empirical validation of the approach to disagreement recommended by Wikipedia. We develop models for multilabel prediction of dispute tactics in an utterance, achieving the best performance with a transformer-based label powerset model. Adding an auxiliary task to incorporate the ordering of rebuttal tactics further yields a statistically significant increase. Finally, we show that these annotations can be used to provide useful additional signals to improve performance on the task of predicting escalation.

A key component of fact verification is thevevidence retrieval, often from multiple documents. Recent approaches use dense representations and condition the retrieval of each document on the previously retrieved ones. The latter step is performed over all the documents in the collection, requiring storing their dense representations in an index, thus incurring a high memory footprint. An alternative paradigm is retrieve-and-rerank, where documents are retrieved using methods such as BM25, their sentences are reranked, and further documents are retrieved conditioned on these sentences, reducing the memory requirements. However, such approaches can be brittle as they rely on heuristics and assume hyperlinks between documents. We propose a novel retrieve-and-rerank method for multi-hop retrieval, that consists of a retriever that jointly scores documents in the knowledge source and sentences from previously retrieved documents using an autoregressive formulation and is guided by a proof system based on natural logic that dynamically terminates the retrieval process if the evidence is deemed sufficient. This method is competitive with current state-of-the-art methods on FEVER, HoVer and FEVEROUS-S, while using $5$ to $10$ times less memory than competing systems. Evaluation on an adversarial dataset indicates improved stability of our approach compared to commonly deployed threshold-based methods. Finally, the proof system helps humans predict model decisions correctly more often than using the evidence alone.

人们利用小组讨论进行协作以解决复杂的任务，例如在项目会议或招聘面板中。通过这样做，他们参与了各种对话策略，他们试图相互说服最佳方法，并最终做出决定。在这项工作中，我们研究了检测是什么使某人改变主意的方法。为此，我们利用了最近介绍的数据集，其中包含有关解决任务的人协作的小组讨论。为了找出使某人改变主意的原因，我们结合了各种技术，例如神经文本分类和语言不足的变化点检测。对这些方法的评估表明，虽然任务并非微不足道，但最好的方法是使用与学习级别培训的语言感知模型。最后，我们研究了模型发展为改变主意的原因的线索。

由于信息和错误信息都可以在现代媒体生态系统中传播的速度，事实检查变得越来越重要。因此，研究人员一直在探索如何自动检查，使用基于自然语言处理，机器学习，知识表示以及数据库来自动检查的技术，以自动预测所称的索赔的真实性。在本文中，我们从自然语言处理中调查了自动检查源，并讨论其与相关任务和学科的联系。在此过程中，我们概述了现有数据集和模型，旨在统一给出的各种定义和识别共同概念。最后，我们突出了未来研究的挑战。

事实验证系统通常依靠神经网络分类器来实现缺乏解释性的准确性预测。本文提出了验证器，该证明器使用SEQ2SEQ模型来生成基于自然逻辑的推论作为证明。这些证明包括声明中的跨度和检索的证据之间的词汇突变，每个突变都标有自然逻辑操作员。声称准确性仅基于这些操作员的序列确定。因此，这些证明是忠实的解释，这使验证者忠实于构造。目前，Proofver具有最高的标签精度，并且是发烧排行榜中第二高的得分。此外，它在具有反事实实例的数据集上的下一个最佳模型中提高了13.21％的积分，证明了其稳健性。作为解释，与基于注意的重点相比，证明与人类理由的重叠更好，并且证明可以帮助人类正确预测模型决策，而不是直接使用证据。

In this paper we introduce a new publicly available dataset for verification against textual sources, FEVER: Fact Extraction and VERification. It consists of 185,445 claims generated by altering sentences extracted from Wikipedia and subsequently verified without knowledge of the sentence they were derived from.The claims are classified as SUPPORTED, RE-FUTED or NOTENOUGHINFO by annotators achieving 0.6841 in Fleiss κ. For the first two classes, the annotators also recorded the sentence(s) forming the necessary evidence for their judgment. To characterize the challenge of the dataset presented, we develop a pipeline approach and compare it to suitably designed oracles. The best accuracy we achieve on labeling a claim accompanied by the correct evidence is 31.87%, while if we ignore the evidence we achieve 50.91%. Thus we believe that FEVER is a challenging testbed that will help stimulate progress on claim verification against textual sources.

Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA) provides information on the presence, extent, and severity of obstructive coronary artery disease. Large-scale clinical studies analyzing CCTA-derived metrics typically require ground-truth validation in the form of high-fidelity 3D intravascular imaging. However, manual rigid alignment of intravascular images to corresponding CCTA images is both time consuming and user-dependent. Moreover, intravascular modalities suffer from several non-rigid motion-induced distortions arising from distortions in the imaging catheter path. To address these issues, we here present a semi-automatic segmentation-based framework for both rigid and non-rigid matching of intravascular images to CCTA images. We formulate the problem in terms of finding the optimal \emph{virtual catheter path} that samples the CCTA data to recapitulate the coronary artery morphology found in the intravascular image. We validate our co-registration framework on a cohort of $n=40$ patients using bifurcation landmarks as ground truth for longitudinal and rotational registration. Our results indicate that our non-rigid registration significantly outperforms other co-registration approaches for luminal bifurcation alignment in both longitudinal (mean mismatch: 3.3 frames) and rotational directions (mean mismatch: 28.6 degrees). By providing a differentiable framework for automatic multi-modal intravascular data fusion, our developed co-registration modules significantly reduces the manual effort required to conduct large-scale multi-modal clinical studies while also providing a solid foundation for the development of machine learning-based co-registration approaches.

The release of ChatGPT, a language model capable of generating text that appears human-like and authentic, has gained significant attention beyond the research community. We expect that the convincing performance of ChatGPT incentivizes users to apply it to a variety of downstream tasks, including prompting the model to simplify their own medical reports. To investigate this phenomenon, we conducted an exploratory case study. In a questionnaire, we asked 15 radiologists to assess the quality of radiology reports simplified by ChatGPT. Most radiologists agreed that the simplified reports were factually correct, complete, and not potentially harmful to the patient. Nevertheless, instances of incorrect statements, missed key medical findings, and potentially harmful passages were reported. While further studies are needed, the initial insights of this study indicate a great potential in using large language models like ChatGPT to improve patient-centered care in radiology and other medical domains.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become commonplace to solve routine everyday tasks. Because of the exponential growth in medical imaging data volume and complexity, the workload on radiologists is steadily increasing. We project that the gap between the number of imaging exams and the number of expert radiologist readers required to cover this increase will continue to expand, consequently introducing a demand for AI-based tools that improve the efficiency with which radiologists can comfortably interpret these exams. AI has been shown to improve efficiency in medical-image generation, processing, and interpretation, and a variety of such AI models have been developed across research labs worldwide. However, very few of these, if any, find their way into routine clinical use, a discrepancy that reflects the divide between AI research and successful AI translation. To address the barrier to clinical deployment, we have formed MONAI Consortium, an open-source community which is building standards for AI deployment in healthcare institutions, and developing tools and infrastructure to facilitate their implementation. This report represents several years of weekly discussions and hands-on problem solving experience by groups of industry experts and clinicians in the MONAI Consortium. We identify barriers between AI-model development in research labs and subsequent clinical deployment and propose solutions. Our report provides guidance on processes which take an imaging AI model from development to clinical implementation in a healthcare institution. We discuss various AI integration points in a clinical Radiology workflow. We also present a taxonomy of Radiology AI use-cases. Through this report, we intend to educate the stakeholders in healthcare and AI (AI researchers, radiologists, imaging informaticists, and regulators) about cross-disciplinary challenges and possible solutions.

The future of population-based breast cancer screening is likely personalized strategies based on clinically relevant risk models. Mammography-based risk models should remain robust to domain shifts caused by different populations and mammographic devices. Modern risk models do not ensure adaptation across vendor-domains and are often conflated to unintentionally rely on both precursors of cancer and systemic/global mammographic information associated with short- and long-term risk, respectively, which might limit performance. We developed a robust, cross-vendor model for long-term risk assessment. An augmentation-based domain adaption technique, based on flavorization of mammographic views, ensured generalization to an unseen vendor-domain. We trained on samples without diagnosed/potential malignant findings to learn systemic/global breast tissue features, called mammographic texture, indicative of future breast cancer. However, training so may cause erratic convergence. By excluding noise-inducing samples and designing a case-control dataset, a robust ensemble texture model was trained. This model was validated in two independent datasets. In 66,607 Danish women with flavorized Siemens views, the AUC was 0.71 and 0.65 for prediction of interval cancers within two years (ICs) and from two years after screening (LTCs), respectively. In a combination with established risk factors, the model's AUC increased to 0.68 for LTCs. In 25,706 Dutch women with Hologic-processed views, the AUCs were not different from the AUCs in Danish women with flavorized views. The results suggested that the model robustly estimated long-term risk while adapting to an unseen processed vendor-domain. The model identified 8.1% of Danish women accounting for 20.9% of ICs and 14.2% of LTCs.