Numan:评估优先的 AI 健康教练
英国数字健康公司 Numan 介绍了其 AI 健康教练 Nu 的评估实践:Nu 运行在 LangGraph 图上,由主管模型把对话分派给各领域的专科子智能体,评估则在 LangSmith 中进行。Numan 表示,单轮固定用例和预先写好脚本的多轮对话都无法真正评估教练式对话,因此改为按类别分别打分,并已原型化了“模拟患者人设”的方式,让更便宜的模型扮演患者与真实智能体多轮对话,再由评审模型对整段对话打分。文章还介绍了为守住 MHRA 监管边界而设的安全探针(出现回归即阻止变更自动上线)、在对话图内逐条审查对外回复的安全守卫,以及健康教练每日抽检真实对话。
Numan 称安全探针一旦出现回归就会自动阻止变更上线,这是把评估标准当作受监管场景发布闸门的一个具体做法。
Numan is a UK digital health company helping patients manage long-term conditions across weight, hormones, and sexual health. Many of our patients are on a weight-loss programme and use the app daily to track progress.
When building Nu, our AI health coach, one of our design challenges was delivering high-quality health coaching without crossing the line into medical diagnosis, prescriptions, or making clinical decisions—all strict boundaries for agents in our highly regulated medical space. While we initially focused on the agent and automation around it, what turned out to matter most was the quality of our evaluation criteria. This is the story of how we developed and improved our evaluation criteria to deliver high-quality user experiences while steering clear of areas subject to regulation.
Where standard eval approaches fell short for Nu
We started where most teams start, with a dataset of inputs and expected outputs, and an LLM judge scoring each reply. While that playbook works well for a Q&A agent, coaching is a conversation, not an answer. Every approach that fixed Nu's reply in advance failed in two ways: