A systematic evaluation of large language models for biomedical natural language processing: benchmarks, baselines, and recommendations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16326v4
• Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 03:11:04 GMT
• Title: A systematic evaluation of large language models for biomedical natural language processing: benchmarks, baselines, and recommendations
• Authors: Qingyu Chen, Yan Hu, Xueqing Peng, Qianqian Xie, Qiao Jin, Aidan Gilson, Maxwell B. Singer, Xuguang Ai, Po-Ting Lai, Zhizheng Wang, Vipina Kuttichi Keloth, Kalpana Raja, Jiming Huang, Huan He, Fongci Lin, Jingcheng Du, Rui Zhang, W. Jim Zheng, Ron A. Adelman, Zhiyong Lu, Hua Xu,
• Abstract summary: We present a systematic evaluation of four representative Large Language Models (LLMs) across 12 BioNLP datasets. The evaluation is conducted under four settings: zero-shot, static few-shot, dynamic K-nearest few-shot, and fine-tuning. We compare these models against state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches that fine-tune (domain-specific) BERT or BART models.
• Score: 22.668383945059762
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The biomedical literature is rapidly expanding, posing a significant challenge for manual curation and knowledge discovery. Biomedical Natural Language Processing (BioNLP) has emerged as a powerful solution, enabling the automated extraction of information and knowledge from this extensive literature. Recent attention has been directed towards Large Language Models (LLMs) due to their impressive performance. However, there remains a critical gap in understanding the effectiveness of LLMs in BioNLP tasks and their broader implications for method development and downstream users. Currently, there is a lack of baseline performance data, benchmarks, and practical recommendations for using LLMs in the biomedical domain. To address this gap, we present a systematic evaluation of four representative LLMs: GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (closed-source), LLaMA 2 (open-sourced), and PMC LLaMA (domain-specific) across 12 BioNLP datasets covering six applications (named entity recognition, relation extraction, multi-label document classification, question answering, text summarization, and text simplification). The evaluation is conducted under four settings: zero-shot, static few-shot, dynamic K-nearest few-shot, and fine-tuning. We compare these models against state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches that fine-tune (domain-specific) BERT or BART models, which are well-established methods in BioNLP tasks. The evaluation covers both quantitative and qualitative evaluations, where the latter involves manually reviewing collectively hundreds of thousands of LLM outputs for inconsistencies, missing information, and hallucinations in extractive and classification tasks. The qualitative review also examines accuracy, 1 completeness, and readability in text summarization tasks. Additionally, a cost analysis of closed-source GPT models is conducted.

Related papers

• Benchmarking Large Language Models on Multiple Tasks in Bioinformatics NLP with Prompting [17.973195066083797]
  Large language models (LLMs) have become important tools in solving biological problems. We introduce a comprehensive prompting-based benchmarking framework, termed Bio-benchmark. We evaluate six mainstream LLMs, including GPT-4o and Llama-3.1-70b, using 0-shot and few-shot Chain-of-Thought settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T02:01:59Z)
• Making LLMs Reason? The Intermediate Language Problem in Neurosymbolic Approaches [49.567092222782435]
  We introduce the intermediate language problem, which is the problem of choosing a suitable formal language representation for neurosymbolic approaches. We show a maximum difference in overall-accuracy of 53.20% and 49.26% in execution-accuracy. When using the GPT4o-mini LLM we beat the state-of-the-art in overall-accuracy on the ProntoQA dataset by 21.20% and by 50.50% on the ProofWriter dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-24T14:49:52Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• MME-Survey: A Comprehensive Survey on Evaluation of Multimodal LLMs [97.94579295913606]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have garnered increased attention from both industry and academia. In the development process, evaluation is critical since it provides intuitive feedback and guidance on improving models. This work aims to offer researchers an easy grasp of how to effectively evaluate MLLMs according to different needs and to inspire better evaluation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-22T18:59:54Z)
• NeuroSym-BioCAT: Leveraging Neuro-Symbolic Methods for Biomedical Scholarly Document Categorization and Question Answering [0.14999444543328289]
  We introduce a novel approach that integrates an optimized topic modelling framework, OVB-LDA, with the BI-POP CMA-ES optimization technique for enhanced scholarly document abstract categorization. We employ the distilled MiniLM model, fine-tuned on domain-specific data, for high-precision answer extraction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T14:45:12Z)
• THaMES: An End-to-End Tool for Hallucination Mitigation and Evaluation in Large Language Models [0.0]
  Hallucination, the generation of factually incorrect content, is a growing challenge in Large Language Models. This paper introduces THaMES, an integrated framework and library addressing this gap. THaMES offers an end-to-end solution for evaluating and mitigating hallucinations in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T16:55:25Z)
• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• Q*: Improving Multi-step Reasoning for LLMs with Deliberative Planning [53.6472920229013]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capability in many natural language tasks. LLMs are prone to produce errors, hallucinations and inconsistent statements when performing multi-step reasoning. We introduce Q*, a framework for guiding LLMs decoding process with deliberative planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T13:08:09Z)
• Detecting Hallucinations in Large Language Model Generation: A Token Probability Approach [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) produce inaccurate outputs, also known as hallucinations. This paper introduces a supervised learning approach employing only four numerical features derived from tokens and vocabulary probabilities obtained from other evaluators. The method yields promising results, surpassing state-of-the-art outcomes in multiple tasks across three different benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T03:00:47Z)
• Comparative Analysis of Open-Source Language Models in Summarizing Medical Text Data [5.443548415516227]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated superior performance in question answering and summarization tasks on unstructured text data. We propose an evaluation approach to analyze the performance of open-source LLMs for medical summarization tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T16:16:22Z)
• BiomedRAG: A Retrieval Augmented Large Language Model for Biomedicine [19.861178160437827]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have swiftly emerged as vital resources for different applications in the biomedical and healthcare domains. textscBiomedRAG attains superior performance across 5 biomedical NLP tasks. textscBiomedRAG outperforms other triple extraction systems with micro-F1 scores of 81.42 and 88.83 on GIT and ChemProt corpora, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T12:01:39Z)
• An Evaluation of Large Language Models in Bioinformatics Research [52.100233156012756]
  We study the performance of large language models (LLMs) on a wide spectrum of crucial bioinformatics tasks. These tasks include the identification of potential coding regions, extraction of named entities for genes and proteins, detection of antimicrobial and anti-cancer peptides, molecular optimization, and resolution of educational bioinformatics problems. Our findings indicate that, given appropriate prompts, LLMs like GPT variants can successfully handle most of these tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T11:27:31Z)
• Zero-shot Generative Large Language Models for Systematic Review Screening Automation [55.403958106416574]
  This study investigates the effectiveness of using zero-shot large language models for automatic screening. We evaluate the effectiveness of eight different LLMs and investigate a calibration technique that uses a predefined recall threshold.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T01:54:08Z)
• Supervised Knowledge Makes Large Language Models Better In-context Learners [94.89301696512776]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit emerging in-context learning abilities through prompt engineering. The challenge of improving the generalizability and factuality of LLMs in natural language understanding and question answering remains under-explored. We propose a framework that enhances the reliability of LLMs as it: 1) generalizes out-of-distribution data, 2) elucidates how LLMs benefit from discriminative models, and 3) minimizes hallucinations in generative tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-26T07:24:46Z)
• Diversifying Knowledge Enhancement of Biomedical Language Models using Adapter Modules and Knowledge Graphs [54.223394825528665]
  We develop an approach that uses lightweight adapter modules to inject structured biomedical knowledge into pre-trained language models. We use two large KGs, the biomedical knowledge system UMLS and the novel biochemical OntoChem, with two prominent biomedical PLMs, PubMedBERT and BioLinkBERT. We show that our methodology leads to performance improvements in several instances while keeping requirements in computing power low.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T14:26:57Z)
• BioInstruct: Instruction Tuning of Large Language Models for Biomedical Natural Language Processing [10.698756010878688]
  We created the BioInstruct, comprising 25,005 instructions to instruction-tune large language models (LLMs) The instructions were created by prompting the GPT-4 language model with three-seed samples randomly drawn from an 80 human curated instructions. We evaluated these instruction-tuned LLMs on several BioNLP tasks, which can be grouped into three major categories: question answering(QA), information extraction(IE), and text generation(GEN)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T19:38:50Z)
• A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models on Benchmark Biomedical Text Processing Tasks [2.5027382653219155]
  This paper aims to evaluate the performance of Large Language Models (LLM) on benchmark biomedical tasks. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that conducts an extensive evaluation and comparison of various LLMs in the biomedical domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-06T14:16:28Z)
• Self-Verification Improves Few-Shot Clinical Information Extraction [73.6905567014859]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to accelerate clinical curation via few-shot in-context learning. They still struggle with issues regarding accuracy and interpretability, especially in mission-critical domains such as health. Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using self-verification, which leverages the LLM to provide provenance for its own extraction and check its own outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T22:05:11Z)
• Multilingual Machine Translation with Large Language Models: Empirical Results and Analysis [103.89753784762445]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable potential in handling multilingual machine translation (MMT) This paper systematically investigates the advantages and challenges of LLMs for MMT. We thoroughly evaluate eight popular LLMs, including ChatGPT and GPT-4.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-10T15:51:30Z)
• Evaluation of ChatGPT Family of Models for Biomedical Reasoning and Classification [6.163540203358258]
  This study investigates the performance of large language models (LLMs) in biomedical tasks beyond question-answering. Because no patient data can be passed to the OpenAI API public interface, we evaluated model performance with over 10000 samples. We found that fine-tuning for two fundamental NLP tasks remained the best strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-05T15:11:25Z)
• PAL: Program-aided Language Models [112.94785609781503]
  We present Program-Aided Language models (PaL) to understand natural language problems. PaL offloads the solution step to a programmatic runtime such as a Python interpreter. We set new state-of-the-art results in all 12 benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-18T18:56:13Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.