Interactive questioning is essential. You cannot map raw user language straight to a code; you must guide them through a mini-diagnostic interview. Here’s how to build that: 1. **Establish a Symptom Ontology Layer** • Extract high-level symptom categories from ICD (e.g., “cough,” “shortness of breath,” “chest pain,” etc.). • Group related codes under each category. For example: ``` Cough: – R05: Cough, unspecified – R05.1: Acute cough – R05.2: Chronic cough – J41.x: Chronic bronchitis codes – J00: Acute nasopharyngitis (common cold) if cough is minor/as part of URI ``` • Define which attributes distinguish these codes (duration, intensity, quality, associated features like sputum, fever, smoking history, etc.). 2. **Design Follow-Up Questions for Each Branch** • For each high-level category, list the key discriminating questions. Example for “cough”: * “How long have you been coughing?” (acute vs. chronic) * “Is it dry or productive?” (productive suggests bronchitis, pneumonia) * “Are you experiencing fever or chills?” (infection rather than simple chronic cough) * “Do you smoke or have exposure to irritants?” (chronic bronchitis codes) * “Any history of heart disease or fluid retention?” (cardiac cough different codes) • Use those discriminators to differentiate among the codes grouped under “cough.” 3. **LLM-Powered Question Sequencer** • Prompt engineering: give the LLM the category, its subtree of possible codes, and instruct it to choose the next most informative question. • At run time, feed the user’s raw input → identify the nearest symptom category (via embeddings or keyword matching). • Ask the LLM to generate the “best next question” given: * The set of candidate codes under that category * The user’s answers so far • Continue until the candidate list narrows to one code or a small handful. Output confidence scores based on tree depth and answer clarity. 4. **Implementation Outline** 1. **Data Preparation** * Parse the ICD-10 XML or CSV into a hierarchical structure. * For each code, extract description and synonyms. * Build a JSON mapping: `{ category: { codes: [...], discriminators: [...] } }`. 2. **Symptom Category Detection** * Load user’s free-text “I have a cough” into an embedding model (e.g., sentence-transformers). * Compare against embeddings of category keywords (`“cough,” “headache,” “rash,” …`). * Select top category. 3. **Interactive Loop** ``` loop: ask_question = LLM.generate_question( category, candidate_codes, user_answers ) user_answer = get_input() update candidate_codes by filtering based on that answer if candidate_codes.size() == 1 or confidence_threshold met: break ``` * Filtering rules can be simple: if user says “cough < 3 weeks,” eliminate chronic cough codes. If “productive,” eliminate dry cough codes, etc. * Confidence could be measured by how many codes remain or by how decisive answers are. 4. **Final Mapping and Output** * Once reduced to a single code (or top 3), return JSON: ```json { "code": "R05.1", "description": "Acute cough", "confidence": 0.87, "asked_questions": [ {"q":"How long have you been coughing?","a":"2 days"}, {"q":"Is it dry or productive?","a":"Dry"} ] } ``` 5. **Prototype Tips for the Hackathon** • Hard-code a small set of categories (e.g., cough, chest pain, fever, headache) and their discriminators to demonstrate the method. • Use OpenAI’s GPT-4 or a local LLM to generate next questions: ``` “Given these potential codes: [list], and these answers: […], what is the single most informative follow-up question to distinguish among them?” ``` • Keep the conversation state on the backend (in Python or Node). Each HTTP call from the front end includes: * `session_id` * `category` * `candidate_code_ids` * `previous_qas` 6. **Why This Wins** – Demonstrates reasoning, not mere keyword lookup. – Shows the AI’s ability to replicate a mini-clinical interview. – Leverages the full ICD hierarchy while handling user imprecision. – Judges see an interactive, dynamic tool rather than static lookup. Go build the symptom ontology JSON, implement the candidate-filtering logic, then call the LLM to decide follow-up questions. By the end of hackathon week you’ll have a working demo that asks “How long, how severe, any associated features?” and maps to the right code with confidence.