arXiv:2607. 06641v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve promising results on medical question answering benchmarks, yet their use in public health is constrained by hallucinations and the rapid evolution of official guidance.
arXiv:2603. 03292v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit high reasoning capacity in medical question-answering, but their tendency to produce hallucinations and outdated knowledge poses critical risks in healthcare fields.
arXiv:2608.29582v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current evaluations of large language models (LLMs) primarily focus on factual knowledge retrieval, overlooking the fundamental challenge of navigati...
arXiv:2606. 15735v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Discharge summaries are crucial clinical documents containing the context of a patient's overall hospital stay, and are routinely reviewed by medical experts for patient readmission, ongoing care, and diagnostic decision-making.
MedRAGChecker is a claim-level verification framework designed for biomedical retrieval‑augmented generation (RAG). It decomposes generated answers into atomic claims and assesses each claim’s support by combining evidence‑grounded natural language inference with biomedical knowledge‑graph consistency signals. The aggregated claim decisions provide diagnostics that distinguish retrieval and generation failures, such as faithfulness, under‑evidence, contradiction, and safety‑critical errors, and the system is distilled into compact models for scalable evaluation.
arXiv:2607. 06452v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Biomedical question answering requires not only accurate extraction of information from scientific literature but also reliable integration of evidence across multiple documents.
The paper "Medical Causal Hypothesis Verification with Large Language Models" reports a small-scale study evaluating eight LLMs on 17 medical causal hypotheses. The authors introduce an evaluation framework and annotate 1,067 evidence points across six criteria, using nine metrics to assess performance. Results show that while LLMs have strong recall, they frequently fail to provide valid scientific articles, evidence, or reject unsupported hypotheses, revealing a critical limitation for their use in healthcare.
FDARxBench is an expert‑curated benchmark designed to evaluate document‑grounded question answering on FDA drug label documents, focusing on generic drug assessment. It features a multi‑stage pipeline that generates high‑quality QA examples covering factual, multi‑hop, and refusal tasks, and includes protocols for both open‑book and closed‑book reasoning. Experiments with various language models show significant gaps in factual grounding, long‑context retrieval, and safe refusal behavior, highlighting the challenge of regulatory‑grade label comprehension.
arXiv:2607. 02983v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent reasoning-centric Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant strides, yet they predominantly operate on a passive-inference pattern that assumes complete information.
arXiv:2505. 14107v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The emergence of groundbreaking large language models capable of performing complex reasoning tasks holds significant promise for addressing various scientific challenges, including those arising in complex clinical scenarios.
arXiv:2603. 22327v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) are a demanding and high-stakes form of scientific knowledge synthesis that remains underspecified as an evaluation setting for large language models (LLMs).
arXiv:2608.21948v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Complex clinical reasoning requires models to update diagnostic hypotheses as new evidence emerges and to coordinate different medical specialities und...