Paper detail

Honesty-Aware Multi-Agent Framework for High-Fidelity Synthetic Data Generation in Digital Psychiatric Intake Doctor-Patient Interactions

Data scarcity and unreliable self-reporting -- such as concealment or exaggeration -- pose fundamental challenges to psychiatric intake and assessment. We propose a multi-agent synthesis framework that explicitly models patient deception to generate high-fidelity, publicly releasable synthetic psychiatric intake records. Starting from DAIC-WOZ interviews, we construct enriched patient profiles and simulate a four-role workflow: a \emph{Patient} completes self-rated scales and participates in a semi-structured interview under a topic-dependent honesty state; an \emph{Assessor} selects instruments based on demographics and chief complaints; an \emph{Evaluator} conducts the interview grounded in rater-administered scales, tracks suspicion, and completes ratings; and a \emph{Diagnostician} integrates all evidence into a diagnostic summary. Each case links the patient profile, self-rated and rater-administered responses, interview transcript, diagnostic summary, and honesty state. We validate the framework through four complementary evaluations: diagnostic consistency and severity grading, chain-of-thought ablations, human evaluation of clinical realism and dishonesty modeling, and LLM-based comparative evaluation. The resulting corpus spans multiple disorders and severity levels, enabling controlled study of dishonesty-aware psychiatric assessment and the training and evaluation of adaptive dialogue agents.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.