Papers
arxiv:2609.06931

CARDEA: Auditable Reasoning Grounded in Spatial Evidence for End-to-End Coronary Angiography Interpretation

Published on Sep 7
Authors:
,
,
,
,

Abstract

A unified vision-language model for coronary angiography uses chain-of-box reasoning and reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards to provide auditable diagnoses and improve zero-shot report generation.

Invasive coronary angiography (CAG) is the gold standard for diagnosing coronary artery disease, but interpretation varies substantially among observers. Existing AI systems can improve consistency but lack auditable decision processes and are limited in comprehensive open-ended assessment, undermining clinician trust and clinical adoption readiness. We developed CARDEA, a unified large vision-language model that serves as the inference core of a CAG pipeline. It was trained solely on public datasets and closed-ended tasks in three stages: visual feature alignment, a self-distilled Chain-of-Box (CoB) cold start, and reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) with a CoB reward encouraging bounding-box use in the reasoning trace. We assessed its two study-level diagnoses, dominance classification and complexity assessment, against a dedicated classifier and two interventional cardiologists. Report generation was excluded from training and evaluated zero-shot across stages on an external cohort using vessel-severity macro-F_1. CARDEA trailed the classifier on in-distribution dominance but drew level under domain shift (accuracy, 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.86 to 0.95]) and was comparable to the cardiologists on complexity assessment (accuracy, 0.90 [CI, 0.82 to 0.97]). Only RLVR improved zero-shot report generation, raising its vessel-severity macro-F_1 (0.686 [CI, 0.664 to 0.707]) above the untuned base model (0.513) and over twice the always-normal floor (0.312). CARDEA runs an end-to-end CAG pipeline from raw multi-view videos through keyframe selection to study-level diagnosis while exposing auditable spatial evidence behind its conclusions. RLVR on verifiable closed-ended tasks surfaced open-ended reporting ability that supervised imitation did not. Clinical use requires prospective validation against expert cardiologists.

Community

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2609.06931
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 1

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.06931 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.06931 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.