Warranted Extraction: A Verification Architecture for Machine-Read Coverage Policy

Large language models can read a payer medical-policy document and produce structured coverage criteria that look right. Nothing in the model's output distinguishes the criteria that are right from the criteria that are invented, and in clinical revenue-cycle use an invented criterion is acted on. We describe an architecture in which an LLM is treated as an untrusted proposer whose output becomes queryable only after a deterministic, separately built verifier has resolved every claim to a verbatim span in a hash-pinned rendering of the source document. Every served criterion carries that span, called a warrant, so any consumer can check any claim against the captured source bytes without trusting the extractor, the operator, or the model vendor. We define three evaluation metrics for this class of system (grounding rate, content recall, and exact-span rate) and report our own numbers, including the one that plateaued. The architecture is disclosed so that it cannot be enclosed; the measurements exist so that "the extraction is good" can be a claim with content.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22227918
Primary Topic
Topic Modeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Warranted Extraction: A Verification Architecture for Machine-Read Coverage Policy

James H. Rosing
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Topic Modeling
article

Warranted Extraction: A Verification Architecture for Machine-Read Coverage Policy

James H. Rosing
article en

Abstract

Large language models can read a payer medical-policy document and produce structured coverage criteria that look right. Nothing in the model's output distinguishes the criteria that are right from the criteria that are invented, and in clinical revenue-cycle use an invented criterion is acted on. We describe an architecture in which an LLM is treated as an untrusted proposer whose output becomes queryable only after a deterministic, separately built verifier has resolved every claim to a verbatim span in a hash-pinned rendering of the source document. Every served criterion carries that span, called a warrant, so any consumer can check any claim against the captured source bytes without trusting the extractor, the operator, or the model vendor. We define three evaluation metrics for this class of system (grounding rate, content recall, and exact-span rate) and report our own numbers, including the one that plateaued. The architecture is disclosed so that it cannot be enclosed; the measurements exist so that "the extraction is good" can be a claim with content.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Chart Industries (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Topic Modeling
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.