SlideBank: A Persistent Hierarchical Evidence Bank for
Consistent Whole-Slide Reasoning

Early pathology vision–language models mainly learned image–text alignment or instruction following from localized fields. CONCH learns transferable visual–language representations, while Quilt-LLaVA and PathChat support instruction following and open-ended interaction with histology images Lu et al. (2024a); Seyfioglu et al. (2024); Lu et al. (2024b). Because these models cannot directly process a complete WSI at native resolution, subsequent methods aggregate pre-extracted patch features into slide-level representations. WSI-VQA introduced generative question answering over WSIs, TITAN learned a multimodal whole-slide representation, and SlideChat and WSI-LLaVA connected slide features to language models for slide-level dialogue and reasoning Chen et al. (2024); Ding et al. (2025); Chen et al. (2025b); Liang et al. (2025). More recent systems improve hierarchical or large-scale slide understanding: MLLM-HWSI aligns cell-, patch-, region-, and slide-level tokens with pathology language, while ALPaCA and PRISM2 scale slide-level supervision through question answering and clinical dialogue Alawode et al. (2026); Gao et al. (2026); Vorontsov et al. (2026). In parallel, agentic systems make evidence acquisition more adaptive. PathFinder, WSI-Agents, SlideSeek, GIANT, and PathAgent introduce specialized agents, planning, tool use, iterative navigation, or evidence synthesis for gigapixel slides Ghezloo et al. (2025); Lyu et al. (2025); Weishaupt et al. (2025); Buckley et al. (2025); Chen et al. (2025a); HistoSelect performs question-guided coarse-to-fine selection, BEACON acquires patches according to expected information gain, and AdaptivePath learns question-agnostic multiscale navigation Huang et al. (2026); Wong et al. (2026); Chen et al. (2026). EviPathBench further shows that locating diagnostic regions remains substantially harder than reasoning over preselected evidence Liao et al. (2026). PathNavigate is particularly related to our setting because it performs a question-independent scan and maintains an online memory over frozen slide features before question-conditioned search Yang et al. (2026). However, existing methods primarily represent acquired evidence as model-internal features or transient reasoning states. SlideBank instead materializes selected multiscale image fields, morphological descriptions, pathology signals, and WSI coordinates as an independently inspectable bank that can be retrieved across multiple questions about the same slide.

Hierarchical modeling provides a natural way to represent gigapixel WSIs. HIPT learns nested patch- and region-level representations, while H²-MIL organizes heterogeneous instances into a hierarchy for slide analysis Chen et al. (2022); Hou et al. (2022); however, both primarily structure latent visual features for downstream prediction. Concept bottleneck models expose human-interpretable intermediate variables, and post-hoc variants add such structure to pretrained models Koh et al. (2020); Yuksekgonul et al. (2023). Persistent memory has also been studied in long-horizon agents: Generative Agents store episodic experiences, MemGPT manages context through external memory, and A-MEM and G-Memory organize memories through linked or hierarchical structures Park et al. (2023); Packer et al. (2023); Xu et al. (2025); Zhang et al. (2025). Related ideas have recently appeared in pathology. SurvAgent constructs a multimodal case bank for cross-case survival prediction, whereas PathMem organizes structured diagnostic knowledge as long-term memory and transfers relevant content into working memory Huang et al. (2025); Li et al. (2026). These approaches focus on latent hierarchies, general episodic memory, cross-case experience, or domain knowledge rather than persistent spatial evidence from repeated examination of one WSI. SlideBank combines hierarchical visual evidence with an interpretable routing interface: concepts represent coarse question-side categories, signals represent localized image-derived findings, and a predefined ontology maps concepts to relevant signals. Each signal record retains its status and links to associated anchors, multiscale patch views, descriptions, and WSI coordinates.The resulting slide-specific bank is reused across questions, so every turn is answered from the persistent evidence bank, not only affected by the accumulated conversation history.

Whole-slide reasoning is challenging since a gigapixel WSI exceeds the accepted maximum image size of current vision-language models (VLMs) and clinically relevant findings may occupy only a small fraction of the slide. SlideBank therefore separates slide exploration from question answering. As illustrated in Fig. 1, the framework consists of three components: Agent-Driven Hierarchical Evidence Bank Construction organizes multi-scale slide observations into a persistent, spatially grounded evidence bank; Hierarchical Evidence-Augmented WSI Reasoning retrieves and integrates question-relevant evidence from the bank; and Persistent Evidence Reuse Across Queries enables the same slide representation to support subsequent questions without reconstructing the underlying evidence.

Let a whole slide image be represented by a resolution pyramid $s=\{L_{0},\ldots,L_{H}\}$, where $L_{0}$ and $L_{H}$ denote the highest- and lowest-resolution views, respectively. In Section 3.2, SlideBank performs question-independent coarse-to-fine exploration to construct a slide-specific evidence bank $M_{s}$ that organizes multi-scale observations and links pathology signals to their supporting evidence and WSI locations. In Section 3.3, the online reader maps a question $q_{t}$ to relevant signals and evidence scales, retrieves the linked evidence, and combines global, regional, and patch-level predictions through confidence-based consensus. Finally, Section 3.4 reuses the same $M_{s}$ across subsequent queries.

Global Survey and Coordinate Normalization. To capture slide-level contextual cues and facilitate global morphological measurements, such as tumor size and disease extent, we first construct a global thumbnail. For pyramidal WSIs, we use the lowest-resolution level; for non-pyramidal or single-resolution slides, we construct an equivalent bounded thumbnail via chunk-wise subsampling. All spatial coordinates identified on the thumbnail are proportionally mapped back to the level-0 coordinate system of the source WSI. Foreground tissue is separated from the glass background using HSV thresholding, and the valid tissue area is partitioned into a non-overlapping $384\times 384$ grid. Each tile is characterized using handcrafted morphological statistics and foreground occupancy, and assigned to one of five coarse tissue classes: tumor, necrosis, adipose, stroma, or other. When physical pixel spacing is available, we additionally estimate the maximum Feret diameter and principal axis of the primary tumor candidate. These slide-level observations, including the natural-language summary, tissue-composition statistics, and geometric diagnostics, are stored in a global record $G_{s}$ for slide $s$.

Coarse-to-fine Agentic Sampling. Tiles are first ranked according to coarse diagnostic priority, triage confidence, and tissue coverage, and retained under a category-aware budget that allocates more samples to suspicious regions while preserving coverage of the remaining tissue classes. Sampling then proceeds through recursive $4\times 4$ refinement. For each selected tile, the agent scores all 16 cells of its downsampled representation to propose anchor regions. Within each anchor region, the same procedure is repeated to identify informative $20\times$ and $10\times$ patches. At both stages, scoring is guided by a fixed set of pathology-derived cues provided in the prompt (prompts used throughout SlideBank are provided in Appendix).

Multi-Scale Visual–Textual Observations. The resulting hierarchy separates coarse triage from fine-grained evidence: tiles provide the coarse sampling prior, whereas anchor regions and their associated patches provide the observed morphological evidence. For each patch $p$, a pathology-specific VLM generates a concise morphological description $d_{p}$, together with a self-reported confidence score and a quality-control flag, conditioned on the patch image and its magnification. Descriptions with confidence below a predefined threshold or invalid quality-control flags are discarded.

For each retained anchor region $a$, the descriptions of its multi-magnification patches are collected as

where $\mathcal{P}_{a}$ denotes the patches associated with anchor $a$. This anchor-level textual observation summarizes complementary morphology across magnifications while retaining links to the originating patches and their WSI coordinates. We write $\mathcal{A}_{s}$ for the set of anchor regions retained for slide $s$, and $\mathcal{P}_{s}=\bigcup_{a\in\mathcal{A}_{s}}\mathcal{P}_{a}$ for all multi-scale patch views collected under them; each $p\in\mathcal{P}_{s}$ stores its image, magnification, level-0 coordinates, and description $d_{p}$.

Pathology Signal Grounding. Free-form descriptions may express the same finding in different ways. We therefore map $\mathcal{D}_{a}$ to a predefined vocabulary of localized pathology signals, such as marked nuclear pleomorphism, high mitotic activity, low tubule formation, and tumor necrosis. For each applicable signal $k$, we store

where $y_{a,k}\in\{\mathrm{present},\mathrm{absent},\mathrm{unknown}\}$ is the inferred status, $\rho_{a,k}$ is its confidence, and $\mathcal{P}^{+}_{a,k}\subseteq\mathcal{P}_{a}$ contains the patch views supporting a positive assessment. This standardized signal layer preserves links to the underlying descriptions, images, and WSI locations.

Persistent Hierarchical Storage. The signal records across all anchors are collected as

where $\mathcal{K}_{a}$ is the set of signals applicable to anchor $a$. We also define an ontology $\Omega$ that maps each coarse pathology concept $c\in\mathcal{C}$ to a set of relevant signals $\mathcal{K}(c)$. The slide bank is then represented as

comprising the global record, the retained anchor regions, their multi-scale patch views, the grounded signal records, and the concept-to-signal ontology. The complete pathology concept vocabulary, concept-to-signal mapping and evidence-bank schema are provided in Appendix.

Question-to-Concept Routing and Signal Retrieval. A pathology concept represents the coarse intent of a question, such as tumor grading, necrosis assessment, or margin status, whereas a pathology signal represents a localized image-derived finding. Given a question $q$ and its options $O$, a deterministic router $\psi$ returns the top-$n$ pathology concepts

$\psi$ is based on lexical rules over the pathology concept vocabulary $\mathcal{C}$ (details in Appendix). We use $n=3$ by default, sensitivity to n is analyzed in Sec. 4.3. The target signals are then used to retrieve

For each target signal, SlideBank selects the anchor regions in which that signal is most strongly supported. Records labeled as present are preferred over uncertain or absent records, and records with the same status are ranked by confidence. The associated anchor images, patch views, and morphological descriptions are then retrieved as the question-specific evidence $E(q)=(G_{s},\mathcal{A}_{q},\mathcal{P}_{q},\mathcal{S}_{q})$.

Evidence-Conditioned Branch Predictions. The question-specific evidence $E(q)=(G_{s},\mathcal{A}_{q},\mathcal{P}_{q},\mathcal{S}_{q})$ is organized into three complementary branches $\ell\in\{G,A,P\}$. The global branch captures slide-wide context, the anchor branch represents regional architecture, and the patch branch provides localized morphology. Anchor and patch inputs include their stored morphological descriptions, whereas the global branch uses the slide thumbnail without a local description.

Each evidence item is evaluated independently by the inference VLM. Let $\mathcal{O}$ denote the answer-option set and $z_{\ell,i}(o)$ the logit assigned to option $o\in\mathcal{O}$ for item $i$ from branch $\ell$. Its option probability is

The corresponding prediction and confidence are

Within the anchor and patch branches, candidates are ranked by $\gamma_{\ell,i}$, and the top-$m$ candidates are retained as $\mathcal{T}_{\ell}(q)$.

Level-Weighted Answer CSonsensus. For each local branch $\ell\in\{A,P\}$, the retained candidates are aggregated by majority voting. The resulting support for option $o$ is

For the global branch, the option probabilities are used directly:

The three branches are combined using

and the final answer is

We use $\lambda_{G}=0.2$, $\lambda_{A}=0.4$, and $\lambda_{P}=0.4$, placing greater emphasis on localized morphological evidence while retaining regional and global context. The retained candidates, signal records, and spatial evidence links provide a trace from the final answer to its supporting WSI regions.

SlideBank constructs the evidence bank $M_{s}$ once and reuses it across all turns. For each question $q_{t}$, the reader performs question-dependent routing to obtain evidence $E(q_{t})$ from the bank and predicts the answer with the evidence, avoiding repeated WSI exploration and reducing evidence drift. Routing depends only on the current question, so the retrieved evidence for a given question is identical whether it is asked in isolation or within a conversation.

To preserve conversational continuity without accumulating a long history, the reader carries only the previous question–answer pair,

which is supplied to the inference VLM alongside the retrieved evidence. The visual evidence therefore always comes from the persistent bank, while $H_{t}$ provides bounded dialogue context.

Table 1 evaluates whether the question-independent evidence bank preserves sufficient slide information for downstream WSI reasoning. Despite requiring no task-specific training, SlideBank achieves strong performance on both benchmarks. On SlideBench-BCNB, SlideBank with Quilt-LLaVA obtains 89.82% accuracy on tumor typing and the highest overall average of 50.92%, substantially improving over the thumbnail-only Quilt-LLaVA backbone. On WSI-VQA, SlideBank with Patho-R1 reaches 52.77%, outperforming its thumbnail-only counterpart by 8.49 percentage points and achieving the best performance among the evaluated methods. These results show that organizing gigapixel WSI observations into a reusable structured evidence bank preserves and can improve standard single-query reasoning performance.

Multi-scale Hierarchy. We first examine how different levels of the evidence hierarchy contribute to WSI reasoning. As shown in Table 2, local evidence is substantially more informative than the global thumbnail alone. On WSI-VQA, the anchor and patch branches achieve 51.98% and 51.45% accuracy, respectively, compared with 48.55% using only global evidence. A similar trend is observed on SlideBench-BCNB, where anchor-level evidence provides the strongest single-level performance at 50.23%. Combining global, anchor, and patch evidence shows the best overall results on both benchmarks, reaching 52.77% on WSI-VQA and 50.36% on SlideBench-BCNB.

Signal-guided Access. We next show whether the gain arises from structured evidence access rather than simply exposing the model to more evidence. Using the same constructed evidence bank, we replace signal-guided retrieval with uniformly sampling 32 patches at random while keeping other settings unchanged. Signal-guided retrieval improves accuracy from 50.13% to 52.77% on WSI-VQA and from 49.62% to 50.36% on SlideBench-BCNB. The improvement shows the benefit of organizing and accessing slide evidence through pathology signals compared to random sampling.

Sensitivity of the Number of Concepts.

We study the sensitivity to the number of pathology concepts used for concept-routed retrieval. As shown in Fig. 2, accuracy increases from 49.9% with a single concept to a peak of 52.8% with three concepts, and then gradually decreases as additional concepts are included. This reflects a trade-off between evidence coverage and retrieval noise: too few concepts may omit relevant pathology signals, whereas overly broad routing introduces less informative evidence. Performance remains above random sampling across a broad range of 2–6 concepts, indicating that the method is not sensitive to a narrowly tuned setting. We therefore use three concepts by default.

Qualitative Example. Figure 3 illustrates the complete evidence trace for a representative grading question. The query is first routed to grade-related signals, which retrieve their linked regions and multi-magnification patches. This example demonstrates how SlideBank preserves an explicit path from the final prediction back to the pathology signals and their supporting visual evidence.

Rephrased-QSuery Stability. We evaluate whether a persistent slide-specific evidence bank provides a stable basis for answering repeated questions about the same WSI. We group all WSI-VQA questions associated with each slide into a single sequence, leading to 29 questions per WSI on average, and present each question in a rephrased form with shuffled options. As shown in Table 3, several baselines suffer substantial accuracy degradation compared with independent single-query inference. In contrast, SlideBank shows only modest drops of 1.38 and 3.83 percentage points with Quilt-LLaVA and Patho-R1, respectively, while achieving 99.47% and 99.21% consistency across semantically equivalent question formulations. Since routing depends only on the current question, these small drops arise from question rephrasing and the bounded dialogue context rather than from re-exploring the slide like baselines.

Amortized Efficiency. Figure 4 evaluates the computational benefit of reusing the same evidence bank across repeated queries. Although bank construction introduces a one-time cost, this cost is progressively amortized as more questions are asked about the same slide. The average runtime decreases from 94.3 s for a single query to 5.9 s per query over the question sequence, approaching an online reasoning cost of 2.73 s per query. We restrict the comparison to generative VLMs and WSI assistants with comparable conversational inference interfaces; representation-oriented models such as TITAN and agentic methods whose multi-round computation occurs internally within a single query are excluded. As shown in Fig. 4(b), SlideBank has higher consistency and lower runtime than baselines.