The Value of System 1 Models in Medicine
Read the original on Hugging Face Trending Papers →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
The study evaluates four zero‑shot System 1 models on 86 public clinical tasks across 14 domains and 20 languages, measuring performance via AUROC. The best models achieved high AUROC scores—0.94 for medical knowledge, 0.93 for text understanding, 0.83 for clinical judgement from text, 0.89 for image perception, 0.84 for 2D image findings, and 0.69 for volumetric findings—yet performed worse on imaging tasks and varied significantly with language. System 1 models were fast (0.34–0.44 s) and energy‑efficient (24–81 J) but lagged behind clinicians on triage and were outperformed by generative models in some metrics.
The study evaluated the accuracy and calibration of several Decision and System One models on rheumatology specialty‑training exam questions and diagnostic vignettes. On the RheumaMIR exam dataset, Jev achieved 93.0% accuracy in Spanish and 91.9% in English, while GPT‑6 Sol reached 99.4%. On the RheumBench diagnostic vignettes, GPT‑6 Sol again led with 76.9% accuracy, with Jev and other System One models scoring significantly lower (50.0%–59.6%).
arXiv:2610.15239v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Most benchmarks for large language models in medicine are built from licensing examinations and theoretical questions. The few that draw on real clinic...
arXiv:2609.13238v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Maxillofacial report generation from cone beam computed tomography is scored here by a composite objective placing 80% of its weight on a large languag...
arXiv:2610.32478v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models used for decisions in histopathology rarely return calibrated probabilities over the candidates a user cares about. Decision-nat...
MedJev is an open System One model that answers medical questions in a single forward pass without generating text, enabling fast, local clinical decision support. Across ten medical benchmarks, MedJev achieves competitive accuracies—72.5 % on MedQA, 75.4 % on USMLE, and 80.1 % on NEJM—while maintaining well‑calibrated confidence estimates. On patient‑level tasks, it attains an AUROC of 0.926 for in‑hospital mortality, surpassing XGBoost, and introduces a lightweight two‑parameter recalibration method that reduces miscalibration from 0.286 to 0.007 using only 50–200 labeled examples.