Which Tool Response Should I Trust? Tool-Expertise-Aware Chest X-ray Agent with Multimodal Agentic Learning
AI agents with tool-use capabilities show promise for integrating the domain expertise of various tools. In the medical field, however, tools are usually AI models that are inherently error-prone and can produce contradictory responses. Existing research on medical agents lacks sufficient understanding of the tools' realistic reliability and thus cannot effectively resolve tool conflicts. To address this gap, this paper introduces a framework that enables an agent to interact with tools and empirically learn their practical trustworthiness across different types of multimodal queries via agentic learning. As a concrete instantiation, we focus on chest X-ray analysis and present a tool-expertise-aware chest X-ray agent (TEA-CXA). When tool outputs disagree, the agent experimentally accepts or rejects multimodal tool results, receives rewards, and learns which tool to trust for each query type. Importantly, TEA-CXA extends existing codebases for reinforcement learning with multi-turn tool-calling that focus on textual inputs, to support multimodal contexts effectively. In addition, we enhance the codebase for medical use scenarios by supporting multiple tool calls in one turn, parallel tool inference, and multi-image accommodation within a single user query. Our code framework is applicable to general medical research on multi-turn tool-calling reinforcement learning in multimodal settings. Experiments show that TEA-CXA outperforms the state-of-the-art methods and a comprehensive set of baselines. Code will be released.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Reinforcement LearningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
PIPES: Securing Agent Perception with Provenance and Priors
Tool-using agents consume external data from sources with different levels of trust, yet tool responses rarely identify who produced each component or what it should convey. We show that this gap enables state-corruption…
Model Routing as a Trust Problem: Route Receipts for Adaptive AI Systems
AI products often route requests through version aliases, service tiers, tool choices, regional endpoints, fallback rules, or safety handling before responding. These routing steps are documented product surfaces in seve…
Food for thought: Ethical considerations of user trust in computer vision
In computer vision research, especially when novel applications of tools are developed, ethical implications around user perceptions of trust in the underlying technology should be considered and supported. Here, we desc…
Decision MakingToolFailBench: Diagnosing Tool-Use Failures in LLM Agents
Tool calling is central to modern language model agents, but aggregate benchmark scores often hide where tool use fails. A model that never calls a needed tool and a model that calls the tool but ignores the result can l…
Position: Stop Acting Like Language Model Agents Are Normal Agents
Language Model Agents (LMAs) are increasingly treated as capable of autonomously navigating interactions with humans and tools. Their design and deployment tends to presume they are normal agents capable of sustaining co…
Language ModelingLanguage ModellingPosition