Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lu, Zhixiang, Su, Jionglong
Format: Preprint
Published: 2026
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.11258
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866914469026725888
author Lu, Zhixiang
Su, Jionglong
author_facet Lu, Zhixiang
Su, Jionglong
contents Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) in healthcare suffer from severe confirmation bias, often hallucinating visual details to support initial, potentially erroneous diagnostic hypotheses. Existing Chain-of-Thought (CoT) approaches lack intrinsic correction mechanisms, rendering them vulnerable to error propagation. To bridge this gap, we propose Dialectic-Med, a multi-agent framework that enforces diagnostic rigor through adversarial dialectics. Unlike static consensus models, Dialectic-Med orchestrates a dynamic interplay between three role-specialized agents: a proponent that formulates diagnostic hypotheses; an opponent equipped with a novel visual falsification module that actively retrieves contradictory visual evidence to challenge the Proponent; and a mediator that resolves conflicts via a weighted consensus graph. By explicitly modeling the cognitive process of falsification, our framework guarantees that diagnostic reasoning is tightly grounded in verified visual regions. Empirical evaluations on MIMIC-CXR-VQA, VQA-RAD, and PathVQA demonstrate that Dialectic-Med not only achieves state-of-the-art performance but also fundamentally enhances the trustworthiness of the reasoning process. Beyond accuracy, our approach significantly enhances explanation faithfulness and decisively mitigates hallucinations, establishing a new standard over single-agent baselines.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_11258
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Dialectic-Med: Mitigating Diagnostic Hallucinations via Counterfactual Adversarial Multi-Agent Debate
Lu, Zhixiang
Su, Jionglong
Computation and Language
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) in healthcare suffer from severe confirmation bias, often hallucinating visual details to support initial, potentially erroneous diagnostic hypotheses. Existing Chain-of-Thought (CoT) approaches lack intrinsic correction mechanisms, rendering them vulnerable to error propagation. To bridge this gap, we propose Dialectic-Med, a multi-agent framework that enforces diagnostic rigor through adversarial dialectics. Unlike static consensus models, Dialectic-Med orchestrates a dynamic interplay between three role-specialized agents: a proponent that formulates diagnostic hypotheses; an opponent equipped with a novel visual falsification module that actively retrieves contradictory visual evidence to challenge the Proponent; and a mediator that resolves conflicts via a weighted consensus graph. By explicitly modeling the cognitive process of falsification, our framework guarantees that diagnostic reasoning is tightly grounded in verified visual regions. Empirical evaluations on MIMIC-CXR-VQA, VQA-RAD, and PathVQA demonstrate that Dialectic-Med not only achieves state-of-the-art performance but also fundamentally enhances the trustworthiness of the reasoning process. Beyond accuracy, our approach significantly enhances explanation faithfulness and decisively mitigates hallucinations, establishing a new standard over single-agent baselines.
title Dialectic-Med: Mitigating Diagnostic Hallucinations via Counterfactual Adversarial Multi-Agent Debate
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.11258