D-NLP at SemEval-2024 Task 2: Evaluating Clinical Inference Capabilities of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.04170v1
• Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 10:11:14 GMT
• Title: D-NLP at SemEval-2024 Task 2: Evaluating Clinical Inference Capabilities of Large Language Models
• Authors: Duygu Altinok,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have garnered significant attention and widespread usage due to their impressive performance in various tasks. However, they are not without their own set of challenges, including issues such as hallucinations, factual inconsistencies, and limitations in numerical-quantitative reasoning.
• Score: 5.439020425819001
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have garnered significant attention and widespread usage due to their impressive performance in various tasks. However, they are not without their own set of challenges, including issues such as hallucinations, factual inconsistencies, and limitations in numerical-quantitative reasoning. Evaluating LLMs in miscellaneous reasoning tasks remains an active area of research. Prior to the breakthrough of LLMs, Transformers had already proven successful in the medical domain, effectively employed for various natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. Following this trend, LLMs have also been trained and utilized in the medical domain, raising concerns regarding factual accuracy, adherence to safety protocols, and inherent limitations. In this paper, we focus on evaluating the natural language inference capabilities of popular open-source and closed-source LLMs using clinical trial reports as the dataset. We present the performance results of each LLM and further analyze their performance on a development set, particularly focusing on challenging instances that involve medical abbreviations and require numerical-quantitative reasoning. Gemini, our leading LLM, achieved a test set F1-score of 0.748, securing the ninth position on the task scoreboard. Our work is the first of its kind, offering a thorough examination of the inference capabilities of LLMs within the medical domain.

Related papers

• Quantifying the Reasoning Abilities of LLMs on Real-world Clinical Cases [48.87360916431396]
  We introduce MedR-Bench, a benchmarking dataset of 1,453 structured patient cases, annotated with reasoning references. We propose a framework encompassing three critical examination recommendation, diagnostic decision-making, and treatment planning, simulating the entire patient care journey. Using this benchmark, we evaluate five state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs, including DeepSeek-R1, OpenAI-o3-mini, and Gemini-2.0-Flash Thinking, etc.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T18:35:39Z)
• Benchmarking LLMs and SLMs for patient reported outcomes [0.0]
  This study benchmarks several SLMs against LLMs for summarizing patient-reported Q&A forms in the context of radiotherapy. Using various metrics, we evaluate their precision and reliability. The findings highlight both the promise and limitations of SLMs for high-stakes medical tasks, fostering more efficient and privacy-preserving AI-driven healthcare solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T19:01:25Z)
• Truth or Mirage? Towards End-to-End Factuality Evaluation with LLM-Oasis [78.07225438556203]
  We introduce LLM-Oasis, the largest resource for training end-to-end factuality evaluators. It is constructed by extracting claims from Wikipedia, falsifying a subset of these claims, and generating pairs of factual and unfactual texts. We then rely on human annotators to both validate the quality of our dataset and to create a gold standard test set for factuality evaluation systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-29T12:21:15Z)
• Understanding the Role of LLMs in Multimodal Evaluation Benchmarks [77.59035801244278]
  This paper investigates the role of the Large Language Model (LLM) backbone in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) evaluation. Our study encompasses four diverse MLLM benchmarks and eight state-of-the-art MLLMs. Key findings reveal that some benchmarks allow high performance even without visual inputs and up to 50% of error rates can be attributed to insufficient world knowledge in the LLM backbone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T07:49:13Z)
• IITK at SemEval-2024 Task 2: Exploring the Capabilities of LLMs for Safe Biomedical Natural Language Inference for Clinical Trials [4.679320772294786]
  Large Language models (LLMs) have demonstrated state-of-the-art performance in various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. This research investigates LLMs' robustness, consistency, and faithful reasoning when performing Natural Language Inference (NLI) on breast cancer Clinical Trial Reports (CTRs) We examine the reasoning capabilities of LLMs and their adeptness at logical problem-solving.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-06T05:44:53Z)
• FAC$^2$E: Better Understanding Large Language Model Capabilities by Dissociating Language and Cognition [56.76951887823882]
  Large language models (LLMs) are primarily evaluated by overall performance on various text understanding and generation tasks. We present FAC$2$E, a framework for Fine-grAined and Cognition-grounded LLMs' Capability Evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T21:05:37Z)
• Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity [61.54815512469125]
  This survey addresses the crucial issue of factuality in Large Language Models (LLMs) As LLMs find applications across diverse domains, the reliability and accuracy of their outputs become vital.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T14:18:03Z)
• TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large Language Models [52.734140807634624]
  Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety. Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs. We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z)
• Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
  We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools. Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions. Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z)
• Rethinking STS and NLI in Large Language Models [38.74393637449224]
  We try to rethink semantic textual similarity and natural language inference. We first evaluate the performance of STS and NLI in the clinical/biomedical domain. We then assess LLMs' predictive confidence and their capability of capturing collective human opinions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-16T11:58:39Z)
• Aligning Large Language Models for Clinical Tasks [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable adaptability, showcasing their capacity to excel in tasks for which they were not explicitly trained. We propose an alignment strategy for medical question-answering, known as 'expand-guess-refine' A preliminary analysis of this method demonstrated outstanding performance, achieving a score of 70.63% on a subset of questions sourced from the USMLE dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-06T10:20:06Z)
• A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models [87.60417393701331]
  Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry. This paper focuses on three key dimensions: what to evaluate, where to evaluate, and how to evaluate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T16:28:35Z)
• Are Large Language Models Ready for Healthcare? A Comparative Study on Clinical Language Understanding [12.128991867050487]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made significant progress in various domains, including healthcare. In this study, we evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs within the realm of clinical language understanding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-09T16:31:47Z)

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.