VERT: Reliable LLM Judges for Radiology Report Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03376v1
• Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2026 18:10:21 GMT
• Title: VERT: Reliable LLM Judges for Radiology Report Evaluation
• Abstract summary: We conduct a correlation analysis between expert and LLM-based ratings.<n>VERT improves correlation with radiologist judgments by up to 11.7% relative to GREEN.<n>Fine-tuning Qwen3 30B yield gains of up to 25% using only 1,300 training samples.
• Score: 4.257039323799664
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Current literature on radiology report evaluation has focused primarily on designing LLM-based metrics and fine-tuning small models for chest X-rays. However, it remains unclear whether these approaches are robust when applied to reports from other modalities and anatomies. Which model and prompt configurations are best suited to serve as LLM judges for radiology evaluation? We conduct a thorough correlation analysis between expert and LLM-based ratings. We compare three existing LLM-as-a-judge metrics (RadFact, GREEN, and FineRadScore) alongside VERT, our proposed LLM-based metric, using open- and closed-source models (reasoning and non-reasoning) of different sizes across two expert-annotated datasets, RadEval and RaTE-Eval, spanning multiple modalities and anatomies. We further evaluate few-shot approaches, ensembling, and parameter-efficient fine-tuning using RaTE-Eval. To better understand metric behavior, we perform a systematic error detection and categorization study to assess alignment of these metrics against expert judgments and identify areas of lower and higher agreement. Our results show that VERT improves correlation with radiologist judgments by up to 11.7% relative to GREEN. Furthermore, fine-tuning Qwen3 30B yield gains of up to 25% using only 1,300 training samples. The fine-tuned model also reduces inference time up to 37.2 times. These findings highlight the effectiveness of LLM-based judges and demonstrate that reliable evaluation can be achieved with lightweight adaptation.

Related papers

• NovGauge: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Diagnosing LLMs' Capability in Paper Novelty Assessment [54.4265627247104]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in peer review at major AI conferences.<n>Existing benchmarks assess novelty as a single holistic score.<n>We present NovGauge, a human-anchored benchmark for fine-grained novelty assessment diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T08:34:56Z)
• Beyond Scalar Scores: Exploring LLM-based Metrics for Clinical Significance Evaluation in Radiology Reports [49.5225801722164]
  Existing metrics obscure this requirement by reducing report quality to a medically ungrounded scalar.<n>We study this boundary using ReEvalMed benchmark as testbed and evaluate metric-level clinical significance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T08:10:30Z)
• Semantic Similarity in Radiology Reports via LLMs and NER [1.2489632787815885]
  Radiology report evaluation is a crucial part of radiologists' training and plays a key role in ensuring diagnostic accuracy.<n>Identifying semantic differences between preliminary and final reports is essential for junior doctors, both as a training tool and to help uncover gaps in clinical knowledge.<n>While AI in radiology is a rapidly growing field, the application of large language models (LLMs) remains challenging due to the need for specialised domain knowledge.<n>We propose Llama-EntScore, a semantic similarity scoring method using a combination of Llama 3.1 and NER with tunable weights to emphasise or de-emphasise specific types of differences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-03T15:31:11Z)
• ChestX-Reasoner: Advancing Radiology Foundation Models with Reasoning through Step-by-Step Verification [57.22053411719822]
  ChestX-Reasoner is a radiology diagnosis MLLM designed to leverage process supervision mined directly from clinical reports.<n>Our two-stage training framework combines supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning guided by process rewards to better align model reasoning with clinical standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-29T16:48:23Z)
• Pairwise or Pointwise? Evaluating Feedback Protocols for Bias in LLM-Based Evaluation [57.380464382910375]
  We show that the choice of feedback protocol for evaluation can significantly affect evaluation reliability and induce systematic biases.<n>We find that generator models can flip preferences by embedding distractor features.<n>We offer recommendations for choosing feedback protocols based on dataset characteristics and evaluation objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-20T19:05:59Z)
• Assessing Judging Bias in Large Reasoning Models: An Empirical Study [99.86300466350013]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) like DeepSeek-R1 and OpenAI-o1 have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities.<n>We present a benchmark comparing judging biases between LLMs and LRMs across both subjective preference-alignment datasets and objective fact-based datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-14T07:14:27Z)
• GEMA-Score: Granular Explainable Multi-Agent Scoring Framework for Radiology Report Evaluation [7.838068874909676]
  Granular Explainable Multi-Agent Score (GEMA-Score) conducts both objective and subjective evaluation through a large language model-based multi-agent workflow.<n>GEMA-Score achieves the highest correlation with human expert evaluations on a public dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T11:42:22Z)
• LLMs Can Patch Up Missing Relevance Judgments in Evaluation [56.51461892988846]
  We use large language models (LLMs) to automatically label unjudged documents. We simulate scenarios with varying degrees of holes by randomly dropping relevant documents from the relevance judgment in TREC DL tracks. Our method achieves a Kendall tau correlation of 0.87 and 0.92 on an average for Vicuna-7B and GPT-3.5 Turbo respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-08T00:32:19Z)
• MRScore: Evaluating Radiology Report Generation with LLM-based Reward System [39.54237580336297]
  This paper introduces MRScore, an automatic evaluation metric tailored for radiology report generation by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) To address this challenge, we collaborated with radiologists to develop a framework that guides LLMs for radiology report evaluation, ensuring alignment with human analysis. Our experiments demonstrate MRScore's higher correlation with human judgments and superior performance in model selection compared to traditional metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-27T04:42:45Z)
• LLM-RadJudge: Achieving Radiologist-Level Evaluation for X-Ray Report Generation [37.20505633019773]
  evaluating generated radiology reports is crucial for the development of radiology AI. This study proposes a novel evaluation framework using large language models (LLMs) to compare radiology reports for assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-01T09:02:12Z)

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.