arXiv Computation and Language October 9, 2026 By Krithik Vishwanath, Haitong Lin, Anton Alyakin, Jin Vivian Lee, D. Brock Hewitt, Jie J. Yao, William Robert Small, Hammad A. Khan, Cordelia Orillac, Aakaash Varma, Brandon Ye, Daniel Alexander Alber, Gustavo Stolovitzky, Batia Wiesenfeld, Oded Nov, Wei Wu, Kang Zhang, Yindalon Aphinyanaphongs, Tim Requarth, Eric Karl Oermann, The International Digital Twin Consortium in Healthcare, Medicine

Clinician use of language models diverges from how the models are evaluated

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

Large language model assistants are being deployed to clinicians, but their readiness is judged mainly by benchmark scores that are based on examination questions or curated cases. This study analyzed 127,833 queries from 6,342 healthcare professionals across 35 specialties, finding that most requests were for documentation, administration, and knowledge retrieval, with a significant portion of queries unanswerable. When compared to 58 public benchmarks, the median benchmark lacked documentation requests and only shared 31% of the real task mix, indicating that current benchmarks poorly reflect actual clinical use.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

arXiv AI

Jul 22

MEDIC: Comprehensive Evaluation of Leading Indicators for LLM Safety and Utility in Clinical Applications

arXiv:2409. 07314v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve superhuman performance on standardized medical licensing exams, these static benchmarks have become saturated and increasingly disconnected from the functional requirements of clinical workflows.

By Praveenkumar Kanithi, Cl\'ement Christophe, Marco AF Pimentel, Tathagata Raha, Prateek Munjal, Nada Saadi, Hamza A Javed, Svetlana Maslenkova, Nasir Hayat, Ronnie Rajan, Shadab Khan

llms fine-tuning benchmarks safety data-engineering

arXiv AI

Jul 28

OpenAIs HealthBench in Action: Evaluating an LLM-Based Medical Assistant on Realistic Clinical Queries

arXiv:2509. 02594v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on their ability to generate high-quality, accurate, situationally aware answers to clinical questions requires going beyond conventional benchmarks to assess how these systems behave in complex, high-stakes clinical scenarios.

By Sandhanakrishnan Ravichandran, Shivesh Kumar, Rogerio Corga Da Silva, Miguel Romano, Reinhard Berkels, Michiel van der Heijden, Olivier Fail, Valentine Emmanuel Gnanapragasam

llms rag agents benchmarks

arXiv AI

Aug 13

A corpus-specific clinical RAG system matches or outperforms newer frontier LLMs on HealthBench

arXiv:2608. 12138v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: General-purpose large language models (LLMs) have recently been reported to match or exceed specialized clinical AI tools on medical benchmarks, but such comparisons draw on a narrow set of systems and on benchmarks developed largely in high-income settings.

By Praveen Reddy, Charuta Mandke, Suvrankar Datta, Sarah Khan, Siddharth Reddy Anthireddy, Shitij Arora, Vishal Singh

llms rag benchmarks

arXiv AI

Oct 1

KlinikeBench: Evaluating Language Models Beyond Diagnostic Accuracy

arXiv:2609.38480v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Most clinical benchmarks evaluate language models (LMs) on diagnosis using complete case descriptions. In clinical practice, however, patients presen...

By Xueting Fang, Zehui Li, Yang Yang, Camilla Giovino, Shubh K. Patel, Shailly Prajapati, Vallijah Subasri, Caihua Shan

llms agents benchmarks

arXiv Machine Learning

Jul 17

Addressing Benchmarking Gaps in Large Language Models for Health and Medicine with Dynamic Red-Teaming

arXiv:2508. 00923v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to answer health-related questions and support healthcare workflows, yet evidence for their safety still relies heavily on static benchmarks that can rapidly become obsolete or be optimized against.

By Jiazhen Pan (Cherise), Bailiang Jian (Cherise), Paul Hager (Cherise), Yundi Zhang (Cherise), Che Liu (Cherise), Friederike Jungmann (Cherise), Hongwei Bran Li (Cherise), Julian Canisius (Cherise), Chenyu You (Cherise), Junde Wu (Cherise), Jiayuan Zhu (Cherise), Fenglin Liu (Cherise), Yuyuan Liu (Cherise), Niklas Bubeck (Cherise), Moritz Knolle (Cherise), Chen (Cherise), Chen (Cherise), Christian Wachinger, Zhenyu Gong, Cheng Ouyang, Georgios Kaissis, Benedikt Wiestler, Daniel Rueckert

llms agents benchmarks safety

arXiv AI

Jun 30

Expert Evaluation of Clinical AI Tools on Real Point-of-Care Clinical Queries

arXiv:2606. 28960v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Physicians now pose millions of clinical questions to AI tools each week, yet these tools are evaluated largely on hypothetical or exam-style questions, not those actually asked in practice.

By Jean Feng, Vishal Patel, Patrick Heagerty, Yifan Mai, Venkatesh Sivaraman, Patrick Vossler, Jialin Ouyang, Anupam B. Jena

llms benchmarks

One email a morning, machine-written

Related stories

MEDIC: Comprehensive Evaluation of Leading Indicators for LLM Safety and Utility in Clinical Applications

OpenAIs HealthBench in Action: Evaluating an LLM-Based Medical Assistant on Realistic Clinical Queries

A corpus-specific clinical RAG system matches or outperforms newer frontier LLMs on HealthBench

KlinikeBench: Evaluating Language Models Beyond Diagnostic Accuracy

Addressing Benchmarking Gaps in Large Language Models for Health and Medicine with Dynamic Red-Teaming

Expert Evaluation of Clinical AI Tools on Real Point-of-Care Clinical Queries