← Back to all news
arXiv AI By Zaifu Zhan, Shuang Zhou, Rui Zhang

Let Large Language Models Judge Each Other: Multi-Agent Peer-Reviewed Reasoning for Medical Question Answering

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper introduces a multi-agent peer‑reviewed reasoning approach for medical question answering, where several large language models independently generate chain‑of‑thought explanations and then evaluate each other’s reasoning for factual correctness and logical soundness. The highest‑rated reasoning chain is used to produce the final answer. Experiments with five state‑of‑the‑art LLMs on three benchmark datasets show that this method consistently outperforms single‑model chain‑of‑thought reasoning and majority voting ensembles, achieving an average accuracy of 0.820 versus 0.777 for the best single model.

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 AI.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Aug 20

Adaptive Memory and Reflection Multi-Agent System for Medical Question Answering

The paper introduces an adaptive memory and reflection (AMR) multi‑agent system for medical question answering. Each agent has dedicated memory and uses reflection‑based feedback to retrieve relevant prior cases, improving reasoning. The system routes questions through solo, collaborative, or escalated workflows and includes consensus and ethical overseer modules, achieving strong performance on MedQA and MedMCQA datasets.

By Pradeep Murugesan, Luoxiao Yang, Xueli Chen, Xinqi Fan
agentsnlpbenchmarks
More like this →
arXiv AI
Sep 4

Medical Reasoning in the Era of LLMs: A Systematic Review of Enhancement Techniques and Applications

The paper reviews how Large Language Models (LLMs) are being adapted for medical reasoning, moving beyond single-step answers to systems that can systematically, transparently, and verifiably reason. It introduces a taxonomy of enhancement techniques, split into training-time methods such as supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning, and test-time methods like prompt engineering and multi‑agent systems. The review examines their application across text, image, and code modalities in key clinical areas—diagnosis, education, and treatment planning—and tracks the shift in evaluation benchmarks from simple accuracy to more nuanced assessments of reasoning quality and visual interpretability.

By Zizhan Ma, Wenxuan Wang, Meidan Ding, Shiyi Zheng, Shengyuan Liu, Jie Liu, Jiaming Ji, Linlin Shen, Yixuan Yuan, Wenting Chen
llmsagentsreinforcement-learningfine-tuningmultimodalbenchmarkssafety
More like this →
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
llmsragagentsbenchmarks
More like this →