Abstract:Large-scale multimodal models (LMMs) have achieved superior performance in visual recognition by synergizing information across diverse, massive-scale paired modalities. In real-world scenarios, however, missing-modality inputs are ubiquitous, causing models optimized for modality-complete data to exhibit precipitous performance degradation. Existing research has introduced prompt learning to mitigate this issue, typically by generating dynamic prompts from instance-level features, regardless of whether the input modalities are complete or partially absent. However, such input-conditioned strategies are hindered by the escalating unreliability of instance-level features; as higher missing rates increase the proportion of incomplete modalities, the resulting instability in prompt learning limits the model's performance. To address this limitation, we hypothesize that learnable latent prompts themselves encapsulate stable, modality-intrinsic priors that are decoupled from corrupted inputs. Consequently, we propose a novel paradigm: Learning from Reliable Latent Prompts. Unlike prior methods, we model input-agnostic learnable prompts as stable latent anchors that enable robust guidance and effective cross-modal knowledge compensation, even under extreme missing rates (e.g., 90%). Empirical results across three benchmark datasets demonstrate that our "learn-from-latent-prompts" approach achieves state-of-the-art performance across a wide range of missing-modality scenarios. Extensive experiments further confirm the effectiveness of this paradigm in providing a robust solution to the missing-modality problem.
Abstract:The rapid adoption of large language models (LLMs) in digital health has been driven by a "scaling-first" philosophy, i.e., the assumption that clinical intelligence increases with model size and data. However, real-world clinical needs include not only effectiveness, but also reliability and reasonable deployment cost. Since clinical decision-making is inherently collaborative, we challenge the monolithic scaling paradigm and ask whether a Small Agent Group (SAG) can support better clinical reasoning. SAG shifts from single-model intelligence to collective expertise by distributing reasoning, evidence-based analysis, and critical audit through a collaborative deliberation process. To assess the clinical utility of SAG, we conduct extensive evaluations using diverse clinical metrics spanning effectiveness, reliability, and deployment cost. Our results show that SAG achieves superior performance compared to a single giant model, both with and without additional optimization or retrieval-augmented generation. These findings suggest that the synergistic reasoning represented by SAG can substitute for model parameter growth in clinical settings. Overall, SAG offers a scalable solution to digital health that better balances effectiveness, reliability, and deployment efficiency.