Papers › From Conversation to Query Execution: Benchmarking User and Tool Interactions for EHR...
From Conversation to Query Execution: Benchmarking User and Tool Interactions for EHR Database Agents
Gyubok Lee, Woosog Chay, Heeyoung Kwak, Yeong Hwa Kim, Haanju Yoo, Oksoon Jeong, Meong Hi Son, Edward Choi
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Despite the impressive performance of LLM-powered agents, their adoption for Electronic Health Record (EHR) data access remains limited by the absence of benchmarks that adequately capture real-world clinical data access flows. In practice, two core challenges hinder deployment: query ambiguity from vague user questions and value mismatch between user terminology and database entries. To address this, we introduce EHR-ChatQA, an interactive database question answering benchmark that evaluates the end-to-end workflow of database agents: clarifying user questions, using tools to resolve value mismatches, and generating correct SQL to deliver accurate answers. To cover diverse patterns of query ambiguity and value mismatch, EHR-ChatQA assesses agents in a simulated environment with an LLM-based user across two interaction flows: Incremental Query Refinement (IncreQA), where users add constraints to existing queries, and Adaptive Query Refinement (AdaptQA), where users adjust their search goals mid-conversation. Experiments with state-of-the-art LLMs (e.g., o4-mini and Gemini-2.5-Flash) over five i.i.d. trials show that while the best-performing agents achieve Pass@5 of over 90% (at least one of five trials) on IncreQA and 60-70% on AdaptQA, their Pass^5 (consistent success across all five trials) is substantially lower, with gaps of up to about 60%. These results underscore the need to build agents that are not only performant but also robust for the safety-critical EHR domain. Finally, we provide diagnostic insights into common failure modes to guide future agent development. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/glee4810/EHR-ChatQA.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2509.23415")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 6 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 6 have no recorded run.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 6 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
6 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 6 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 6 of the 6 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from glee4810/EHR-ChatQA. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
ee072a14fcc03fc0 · report
e3db0a1c35c198bf · report
5cb85dc98320a8a2 · report
fd3ad6e7caf61e76 · report
b2b4771dd457e441 · report
a2449ed9e9ab30f6 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2509.23415, was issued in September 2025, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections