Spaces:
Sleeping
Sleeping
File size: 10,586 Bytes
f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 9ab33d8 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 9ab33d8 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 60c0453 f2beac3 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 | ---
title: Pharmacovigilance Signal Detector
colorFrom: blue
colorTo: green
sdk: docker
app_port: 7860
pinned: false
license: mit
short_description: OpenEnv pharmacovigilance signal detection environment
tags:
- openenv
- healthcare
- pharmacovigilance
- safety
- real-world
base_path: /web
---
# Pharmacovigilance Signal Detector
`Pharmacovigilance Signal Detector` is a real-world OpenEnv environment where an agent acts like a drug-safety analyst. The agent reviews synthetic adverse event reports, uses a hardcoded drug interaction knowledge base, and decides whether the case is a new safety signal, a known side effect, or low-value noise. This mirrors pharmacovigilance triage work performed by regulators and pharmaceutical safety teams.
All case data in this repo is synthetic. No real patient data is used.
## Why This Environment Matters
Pharmacovigilance teams are responsible for detecting harmful safety patterns after a drug is already on the market. That work is operationally important, high-stakes, and difficult: analysts must distinguish expected reactions from true emerging risks, recognize confounding from polypharmacy, and escalate only when justified. This makes the domain a strong fit for agent evaluation because it tests causal reasoning, prioritization, and safety-sensitive decision making.
## Environment Overview
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Environment name | `pharma-vigilance` |
| Domain | Pharmacovigilance / drug safety triage |
| Episode length | 2-step triage and review workflow |
| Task count | 3 |
| Difficulties | Easy, Medium, Hard |
| Step reward range | `-0.25` to `1.0` |
| Final grader range | strict `(0, 1)` |
| API | `reset()`, `step()`, `state()` |
| Server | FastAPI |
Each episode has two phases. On step 1 the agent performs an initial triage. The environment then returns additional senior-review context through feedback, and on step 2 the agent submits a final reviewed assessment. Each task includes one or more synthetic reports plus a hardcoded drug interaction database. The environment never exposes ground truth to the agent.
## Action Space
| Field | Type | Allowed values | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
| `classification` | `str` | `new_signal`, `known_side_effect`, `noise`, `duplicate` | Overall pharmacovigilance judgment |
| `suspect_drug` | `str` | Free text | Drug or interaction the agent believes is causal |
| `severity_assessment` | `str` | `mild`, `moderate`, `severe`, `critical` | Clinical severity assessment |
| `recommended_action` | `str` | `escalate`, `log_and_monitor`, `dismiss`, `request_more_info` | Operational follow-up |
| `reasoning` | `str` | Free text | Short explanation used for grading bonus on hard task |
| `confidence` | `Optional[int]` | `0` to `100` | Optional analyst confidence used for calibration-aware reward shaping |
## Observation Space
| Field | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
| `task_id` | `str` | Current task identifier |
| `reports` | `List[AdverseEventReport]` | Synthetic adverse event reports for the task |
| `drug_interaction_db` | `dict` | Hardcoded safety and interaction hints |
| `step_number` | `int` | Current step index |
| `max_steps` | `int` | Maximum number of steps in the episode |
| `feedback` | `Optional[str]` | Feedback or senior-review note returned after the previous action |
Each `AdverseEventReport` contains:
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| `report_id` | Unique synthetic report identifier |
| `patient_age` | Patient age |
| `patient_sex` | Patient sex |
| `drugs` | All drugs the patient was taking |
| `suspect_drug` | Drug named by the original reporter |
| `reaction` | Observed adverse reaction |
| `onset_days` | Days after drug start when reaction began |
| `severity` | Reported severity |
| `outcome` | Recovery status |
| `similar_reports_last_30d` | Count of similar recent reports |
## Tasks
| Task | Difficulty | Scenario | Ground-truth goal | Expected baseline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| `known_signal_easy` | Easy | Patient on `Lisinopril` develops persistent dry cough with many similar recent reports already known in-label | Recognize a known side effect and recommend `log_and_monitor` | Around `0.85` |
| `cluster_signal_medium` | Medium | Four recent `Cardiovexa` cases show symptomatic bradycardia and near-syncope despite no labeled rhythm toxicity | Recognize a plausible emerging signal and `escalate` | Around `0.65` |
| `confounded_hard` | Hard | Transplant patient with acute kidney injury is blamed on `Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole`, but the deeper issue is a `Voriconazole`-`Tacrolimus` interaction | Detect the interaction, classify as `new_signal`, and `escalate` | Around `0.40` |
The hard task is intentionally more difficult because the named suspect drug is not the true cause. The agent must reason over interaction evidence and therapeutic drug-monitoring clues in the provided hardcoded drug database.
## Reward Function
The environment uses deterministic programmatic graders. Reward is now shaped across a true two-step trajectory:
1. initial triage reward on step 1
2. final review reward on step 2 after additional context arrives
Within each step, the agent is also scored on classification, causal attribution, severity,
and action, then receives extra credit if those sub-decisions form a coherent
triage story.
| Reward component | Value |
|---|---|
| Correct `classification` | `+0.25` |
| Correct `suspect_drug` | `+0.25` |
| Correct `severity_assessment` | `+0.20` |
| Correct `recommended_action` | `+0.15` |
| Consistency bonus when classification, severity, and action form a coherent pharmacovigilance pipeline | `+0.10` |
| Calibration bonus for high-confidence correct answers | `+0.05` |
| Overconfidence penalty for high-confidence weak answers | `-0.10` |
| Underconfidence penalty for low-confidence strong answers | `-0.03` |
| False alarm penalty: agent says `new_signal` when truth is `noise` | `-0.10` |
| Missed signal penalty: agent says `noise` when truth is `new_signal` | `-0.20` |
| Hard-task reasoning bonus if explanation mentions `drug interaction`, `tacrolimus`, `voriconazole`, `azole`, `calcineurin`, or `level monitoring` | `+0.05` |
Notes:
- Step-level rewards may be slightly negative for clearly unsafe or suboptimal actions.
- Final grader outputs remain deterministic and strictly bounded inside `(0, 1)` for evaluation safety.
- `suspect_drug` matching is forgiving for the hard task and allows substring matches.
- The environment is deterministic and reproducible because all tasks and grading logic are hardcoded.
- Confidence is optional, but calibrated confidence can improve reward while reckless overconfidence is penalized.
- Step 1 gives partial reward for initial triage and returns new review context; step 2 gives the final adjudicated reward.
- The environment also rewards productive revision and penalizes stubbornly repeating a weak initial answer or making an unjustified late flip.
## Project Structure
| Path | Purpose |
|---|---|
| `env.py` | Main environment class and Pydantic models |
| `tasks.py` | Task definitions and grader functions |
| `data.py` | Synthetic reports and drug interaction database |
| `server.py` | Root FastAPI entrypoint |
| `server/app.py` | OpenEnv-compatible app entrypoint |
| `inference.py` | Baseline inference runner |
| `openenv.yaml` | OpenEnv metadata |
| `Dockerfile` | Multi-stage OpenEnv-style container build |
| `tests/test_env.py` | Local tests |
| `validate-submission.sh` | Pre-submission validation helper |
## Running Locally
### Option 1: Local virtual environment
If you already created the local virtual environment in this repo:
```powershell
.\.venv\Scripts\Activate.ps1
```
Install dependencies if needed:
```bash
pip install -r requirements.txt
```
Start the server:
```bash
uvicorn server:app --host 0.0.0.0 --port 7860
```
### Option 2: Docker
Build the image:
```bash
docker build -t pharmacovigilance-env .
```
Run the container:
```bash
docker run -p 7860:7860 pharmacovigilance-env
```
The health endpoint will be available at:
```text
http://localhost:7860/health
```
## API Endpoints
| Method | Endpoint | Description |
|---|---|---|
| `POST` | `/reset` | Starts a task and returns the initial observation |
| `POST` | `/step` | Submits the current agent action and returns observation, reward, done, info |
| `GET` | `/state` | Returns internal environment state summary |
| `GET` | `/tasks` | Lists available task ids |
| `GET` | `/health` | Health check endpoint |
## Baseline Inference Script
The required baseline runner is `inference.py`.
It:
- reads `API_BASE_URL`, `MODEL_NAME`, `HF_TOKEN`, and optional `ENV_URL`
- uses the OpenAI client for all model calls
- runs all three tasks sequentially
- follows the full 2-step episode loop until `done=true`
- emits the required `[START]`, `[STEP]`, and `[END]` lines
- keeps stdout restricted to the judge-expected line types
Required environment variables:
```bash
export API_BASE_URL=https://router.huggingface.co/v1
export MODEL_NAME=Qwen/Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct
export HF_TOKEN=hf_your_token_here
export ENV_URL=http://localhost:7860
```
Run:
```bash
python inference.py
```
## Testing And Validation
Run local tests:
```bash
pytest tests/test_env.py -q
```
Run OpenEnv validation:
```bash
openenv validate
```
Run the pre-submission helper:
```bash
chmod +x validate-submission.sh
./validate-submission.sh https://your-space.hf.space
```
That script checks:
1. your Hugging Face Space responds to `POST /reset`
2. the Docker image builds
3. `openenv validate` passes
## Submission Checklist
- `openenv validate` passes
- `docker build` succeeds
- `docker run` starts cleanly
- `POST /reset` returns HTTP `200`
- `inference.py` runs all 3 tasks successfully
- your Hugging Face Space responds to `POST /reset`
- replace the expected baseline values with your measured live baseline values before final submission
## Notes
- No external API calls are made by the environment itself.
- The drug interaction database is hardcoded.
- Ground truth is never exposed in the observation returned to the agent.
- The environment is lightweight enough for a 2 vCPU / 8GB RAM target.
- The expected baseline scores in this README are planning targets until replaced with measured live results.
|