arXiv:2609.27987v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have made substantial progress on medical question-answering, yet effective medical dialogue also requires learning to ask...
By Chenxuan Li, Jiayi Wan, Xinrong Chen, Zhongyu Zhao, Xuecheng Shang, Peixing Wan
arXiv:2607. 10275v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models achieve high scores on medical knowledge assessments, yet clinical reasoning requires actively deciding what to investigate under uncertainty.
By Krischan Braitsch, Laura K. Schmalbrock, Theresa Weltermann, Andrew F. Berdel, Isabella Miller, Kai Tran, Michael Heider, Sabrina Kraus, Florian Bassermann, Jacqueline Lammert, Sebastian Ziegelmayer, Marcus Makowski, Lisa C. Adams, Keno K. Bressem
LogiMed‑RoB is a new benchmark that tests large language models (LLMs) on hierarchical logical consistency in medical risk‑of‑bias assessments, using 860 randomized controlled trials and 14,820 queries based on Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 expert logic. The benchmark evaluates models across four dimensions—Atomic Consistency, Domain Consistency, Aggregation Consistency, and Evidential Faithfulness—revealing a catastrophic error‑compounding effect where high atomic accuracy does not translate to end‑to‑end consistency. Experiments on ten state‑of‑the‑art LLMs show that even top models can fail to deduce correct outcomes in a significant portion of cases, highlighting a gap between evidence retrieval and reasoning.
whyItMatters":"The study shows that high outcome accuracy can mask critical reasoning flaws, emphasizing the need for white‑box logical verification before deploying LLMs in clinical settings."
By Jiayu Huang, Zichen Tang, Qianhui Ling, Zemin Kuang, Haihong E
The paper introduces LogiMed‑RoB, a benchmark that tests large language models (LLMs) on hierarchical logical consistency in medical risk‑of‑bias assessments, using 860 randomized controlled trials and 14,820 queries based on Cochrane RoB 2.0 expert logic. It evaluates models across four dimensions—Atomic Consistency, Domain Consistency, Aggregation Consistency, and Evidential Faithfulness—revealing a severe Error Compounding Effect where high atomic accuracy does not translate to end‑to‑end consistency. Experiments on ten state‑of‑the‑art LLMs show that even top performers can collapse to 45.13% overall consistency, with some models nearly failing entirely, and that many models struggle to deduce correct outcomes from retrieved evidence.
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.
By Betty Xiong, Jillian Fisher, Benjamin Newman, Meng Hu, Shivangi Gupta, Yejin Choi, Lanyan Fang, Russ B Altman
arXiv:2608. 16831v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative pretraining established reusable task representations; later work on language-based task conditioning and in-context learning showed that a fixed model could adapt its behavior from instructions and demonstrations.
By Minh-Ha Nguyen, Cathy Shyr