arXiv AI By Zaifu Zhan, Shuang Zhou, Rui Zhang

Let LLMs Judge Each Other: Multi-Agent Peer-Reviewed Reasoning for Medical Question Answering

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2606. 15419v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Objective: To enhance the accuracy, interpretability, and robustness of large language models (LLMs) in medical question answering (MedQA).

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.

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
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
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
arXiv AI
Sep 1

Scoring, Reasoning, and Selecting the Best! Ensembling Large Language Models via a Peer-Review Process

The paper introduces LLM‑PeerReview, an unsupervised ensemble method that selects the best response from multiple LLM-generated candidates by scoring each answer with several LLMs, aggregating those scores via averaging or a graphical model, and choosing the highest-scoring response. The approach is peer‑review inspired, transparent, and interpretable, and it outperforms the Smoothie‑Global model by 6.9%–7.3% across factual recall QA, math reasoning, and instruction‑following tasks. The authors also provide a curated benchmark suite of 12 ensemble methods evaluated on four datasets and three task families to aid reproducibility.

By Zhijun Chen, Zeyu Ji, Qianren Mao, Hao Wu, Jinhuan Song, Junhang Cheng, Bangjie Qin, Zhuoran Li, Jingzheng Li, Kai Sun, Zizhe Wang, Yikun Ban, Zhu Sun, Xiangyang Ji, Hailong Sun, Xiao Huang