Reason Like a Radiologist: Chain-of-Thought and Reinforcement Learning for Verifiable Report Generation

Radiology report generation is critical for efficiency but current models lack the structured reasoning of experts, hindering clinical trust and explainability by failing to link visual findings to precise anatomical locations. This paper introduces BoxMed-RL, a groundbreaking unified training framework for generating spatially verifiable and explainable radiology reports. Built on a large vision-language model, BoxMed-RL revolutionizes report generation through two integrated phases: (1) In the Pretraining Phase, we refine the model via medical concept learning, using Chain-of-Thought supervision to internalize the radiologist-like workflow, followed by spatially verifiable reinforcement, which applies reinforcement learning to align medical findings with bounding boxes. (2) In the Downstream Adapter Phase, we freeze the pretrained weights and train a downstream adapter to ensure fluent and clinically credible reports. This framework precisely mimics radiologists' workflow, compelling the model to connect high-level medical concepts with definitive anatomical evidence. Extensive experiments on public datasets demonstrate that BoxMed-RL achieves an average 7% improvement in both METEOR and ROUGE-L metrics compared to state-of-the-art methods. An average 5% improvement in large language model-based metrics further underscores BoxMed-RL's robustness in generating high-quality radiology reports.

GEMA-Score: Granular Explainable Multi-Agent Score for Radiology Report Evaluation

Automatic medical report generation supports clinical diagnosis, reduces the workload of radiologists, and holds the promise of improving diagnosis consistency. However, existing evaluation metrics primarily assess the accuracy of key medical information coverage in generated reports compared to human-written reports, while overlooking crucial details such as the location and certainty of reported abnormalities. These limitations hinder the comprehensive assessment of the reliability of generated reports and pose risks in their selection for clinical use. Therefore, we propose a Granular Explainable Multi-Agent Score (GEMA-Score) in this paper, which conducts both objective quantification and subjective evaluation through a large language model-based multi-agent workflow. Our GEMA-Score parses structured reports and employs NER-F1 calculations through interactive exchanges of information among agents to assess disease diagnosis, location, severity, and uncertainty. Additionally, an LLM-based scoring agent evaluates completeness, readability, and clinical terminology while providing explanatory feedback. Extensive experiments validate that GEMA-Score achieves the highest correlation with human expert evaluations on a public dataset, demonstrating its effectiveness in clinical scoring (Kendall coefficient = 0.70 for Rexval dataset and Kendall coefficient = 0.54 for RadEvalX dataset). The anonymous project demo is available at: https://github.com/Zhenxuan-Zhang/GEMA_score.