Zhiling Yan
Publications
SegMix:Shuffle-based Feedback Learning for Semantic Segmentation of Pathology Images
Segmentation is a critical task in computational pathology, as it identifies areas affected by disease or abnormal growth and is essential for diagnosis and treatment. However, acquiring high-quality pixel-level supervised segmentation data requires significant workload demands from experienced pathologists, limiting the application of deep learning. To overcome this challenge, relaxing the label conditions to image-level classification labels allows for more data to be used and more scenarios to be enabled. One approach is to leverage Class Activation Map (CAM) to generate pseudo pixel-level annotations for semantic segmentation with only image-level labels. However, this method fails to thoroughly explore the essential characteristics of pathology images, thus identifying only small areas that are insufficient for pseudo masking. In this paper, we propose a novel shuffle-based feedback learning method inspired by curriculum learning to generate higher-quality pseudo-semantic segmentation masks. Specifically, we perform patch level shuffle of pathology images, with the model adaptively adjusting the shuffle strategy based on feedback from previous learning. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed approach outperforms state-of-the-arts on three different datasets.
Can MLLMs Read Students' Minds? Unpacking Multimodal Error Analysis in Handwritten Math
Assessing student handwritten scratchwork is crucial for personalized educational feedback but presents unique challenges due to diverse handwriting, complex layouts, and varied problem-solving approaches. Existing educational NLP primarily focuses on textual responses and neglects the complexity and multimodality inherent in authentic handwritten scratchwork. Current multimodal large language models (MLLMs) excel at visual reasoning but typically adopt an "examinee perspective", prioritizing generating correct answers rather than diagnosing student errors. To bridge these gaps, we introduce ScratchMath, a novel benchmark specifically designed for explaining and classifying errors in authentic handwritten mathematics scratchwork. Our dataset comprises 1,720 mathematics samples from Chinese primary and middle school students, supporting two key tasks: Error Cause Explanation (ECE) and Error Cause Classification (ECC), with seven defined error types. The dataset is meticulously annotated through rigorous human-machine collaborative approaches involving multiple stages of expert labeling, review, and verification. We systematically evaluate 16 leading MLLMs on ScratchMath, revealing significant performance gaps relative to human experts, especially in visual recognition and logical reasoning. Proprietary models notably outperform open-source models, with large reasoning models showing strong potential for error explanation. All evaluation data and frameworks are publicly available to facilitate further research.
LiveMedBench: A Contamination-Free Medical Benchmark for LLMs with Automated Rubric Evaluation
The deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in high-stakes clinical settings demands rigorous and reliable evaluation. However, existing medical benchmarks remain static, suffering from two critical limitations: (1) data contamination, where test sets inadvertently leak into training corpora, leading to inflated performance estimates; and (2) temporal misalignment, failing to capture the rapid evolution of medical knowledge. Furthermore, current evaluation metrics for open-ended clinical reasoning often rely on either shallow lexical overlap (e.g., ROUGE) or subjective LLM-as-a-Judge scoring, both inadequate for verifying clinical correctness. To bridge these gaps, we introduce LiveMedBench, a continuously updated, contamination-free, and rubric-based benchmark that weekly harvests real-world clinical cases from online medical communities, ensuring strict temporal separation from model training data. We propose a Multi-Agent Clinical Curation Framework that filters raw data noise and validates clinical integrity against evidence-based medical principles. For evaluation, we develop an Automated Rubric-based Evaluation Framework that decomposes physician responses into granular, case-specific criteria, achieving substantially stronger alignment with expert physicians than LLM-as-a-Judge. To date, LiveMedBench comprises 2,756 real-world cases spanning 38 medical specialties and multiple languages, paired with 16,702 unique evaluation criteria. Extensive evaluation of 38 LLMs reveals that even the best-performing model achieves only 39.2%, and 84% of models exhibit performance degradation on post-cutoff cases, confirming pervasive data contamination risks. Error analysis further identifies contextual application-not factual knowledge-as the dominant bottleneck, with 35-48% of failures stemming from the inability to tailor medical knowledge to patient-specific constraints.