MedHarnessBench: A Unified Benchmark for Healthcare Agent Evaluation
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2605.16679v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: End-to-end automation of realistic healthcare operations stresses three capabilities underrepresented in current benchmarks: policy density,...
arXiv:2609.13543v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents are predominantly benchmarked on short, single-task trajectories, yet real deployments run for hours under contention, surfacing a different...
arXiv:2608.23397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Interactive clinical agents must gather decisive evidence and convert it into grounded actions under partial observability. A correct final diagnosis a...
arXiv:2606. 11702v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: To make clinically grounded decisions, medical AI agents are expected to go beyond simple recognition and be capable of tool retrieval, evidence acquisition, and integration.
The paper introduces a benchmark of 400 synthetic healthcare workflow episodes to evaluate large language model (LLM) agents’ reliability in escalating care when evidence is missing or conflicting. It finds that while clean decision accuracy is high (0.97), models miss a large proportion of necessary escalations (32–97%) under uncertainty, and even the largest 9.7B model’s performance drops to 0.78 in conflict scenarios. A workflow-aware controller improves utility and reduces missed escalations, but its effectiveness is limited by lexical generalization failures.
arXiv:2606. 01961v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous agents are increasingly expected to support end-to-end medical-AI research workflows, moving beyond isolated prediction tasks or short-form clinical question answering.