Measuring the practice of shared-decision making (OPTION12): An Investigation into Open-sourced Smaller LLMs (OS-sLLMs) for Better Privacy and Sustainability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.06127v2
• Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 11:02:03 GMT
• Title: Measuring the practice of shared-decision making (OPTION12): An Investigation into Open-sourced Smaller LLMs (OS-sLLMs) for Better Privacy and Sustainability
• Abstract summary: We present the first study of open-source smaller language models (OS-sLLMs) for automated assessment of shared decision making (SDM) using the Observer OPTION12 framework.<n>We evaluate three general-domain and two medical-domain OS-sLLMs during a development-phase pilot study.<n>Results show that general-domain models outperform medical-domain models, which exhibit substantial hallucination and instruction-following failures.
• Score: 9.69093422708825
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: We present LLM4SDM, the first study of open-source smaller language models (OS-sLLMs) for automated assessment of shared decision making (SDM) using the Observer OPTION12 framework. Unlike previous work that relies on large commercial models and the shorter OPTION5 instrument, our study focuses on privacy-preserving locally deployable models and Dutch melanoma consultation transcripts. Using expert-annotated clinical consultations, we evaluate three general-domain and two medical-domain OS-sLLMs during a development-phase pilot study. Results show that general-domain models outperform medical-domain models, which exhibit substantial hallucination and instruction-following failures. Gemma3:12b achieves the strongest agreement with human annotations (Pearson r=0.51, Spearman \r{ho}=0.59). Item-level and qualitative analyses reveal systematic challenges related to temporal discourse reasoning, conversational role attribution, and evidence grounding. We further introduce a Judge-LLM consensus framework designed to support disagreement resolution among multiple models. Our findings suggest that while current OS-sLLMs cannot replace human annotators, they offer a promising foundation for privacy-preserving human-in-the-loop SDM assessment.

Related papers

• MedAlign: A Synergistic Framework of Multimodal Preference Optimization and Federated Meta-Cognitive Reasoning [52.064286116035134]
  We develop MedAlign, a framework to ensure visually accurate LVLM responses for Medical Visual Question Answering (Med-VQA)<n>We first propose a multimodal Direct Preference Optimization (mDPO) objective to align preference learning with visual context.<n>We then design a Retrieval-Aware Mixture-of-Experts (RA-MoE) architecture that utilizes image and text similarity to route queries to a specialized and context-augmented LVLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T02:11:05Z)
• How can we assess human-agent interactions? Case studies in software agent design [52.953425368394306]
  We make two major steps towards the rigorous assessment of human-agent interactions.<n>We propose PULSE, a framework for more efficient human-centric evaluation of agent designs.<n>We deploy the framework on a large-scale web platform built around the open-source software agent OpenHands.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-10T19:04:28Z)
• Causal-SAM-LLM: Large Language Models as Causal Reasoners for Robust Medical Segmentation [4.286815457787583]
  We introduce Causal-SAM-LLM, a novel framework that elevates Large Language Models (LLMs) to the role of causal reasoners.<n>First, Linguistic Adrial Disentanglement (LAD) employs a Vision-Language Model to generate rich, textual descriptions of confounding image styles.<n>Second, Test-Time Causal Intervention (TCI) provides an interactive mechanism where an LLM interprets a clinician's natural language command to modulate the segmentation decoder's features in real-time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-04T13:52:16Z)
• The Hidden Link Between RLHF and Contrastive Learning [56.45346439723488]
  We show that Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and the simple Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) can be interpreted from the perspective of mutual information (MI)<n>Within this framework, both RLHF and DPO can be interpreted as methods that performing contrastive learning based on the positive and negative samples derived from base model.<n>We propose the Mutual Information Optimization (MIO) to mitigate the late-stage decline in chosen-likelihood observed in DPO.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-27T18:51:25Z)
• HiddenBench: Assessing Collective Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLMs via Hidden Profile Tasks [12.203366267017737]
  We introduce HiddenBench, the first benchmark for evaluating collective reasoning in multi-agent LLMs.<n>To ground the benchmark, we formalize the paradigm with custom tasks and show that GPT-4.1 groups fail to integrate distributed knowledge.<n>We then construct the full benchmark, spanning 65 tasks drawn from custom designs, prior human studies, and automatic generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T19:22:54Z)
• LLM-based Agent Simulation for Maternal Health Interventions: Uncertainty Estimation and Decision-focused Evaluation [30.334268991701727]
  Agent-based simulation is crucial for modeling complex human behavior.<n>Traditional approaches require extensive domain knowledge and large datasets.<n>Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising alternative by leveraging broad world knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T20:24:47Z)
• LlaMADRS: Prompting Large Language Models for Interview-Based Depression Assessment [75.44934940580112]
  This study introduces LlaMADRS, a novel framework leveraging open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate depression severity assessment.<n>We employ a zero-shot prompting strategy with carefully designed cues to guide the model in interpreting and scoring transcribed clinical interviews.<n>Our approach, tested on 236 real-world interviews, demonstrates strong correlations with clinician assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-07T08:49:04Z)
• Distilling Large Language Models for Matching Patients to Clinical Trials [3.4068841624198942]
  The recent success of large language models (LLMs) has paved the way for their adoption in the high-stakes domain of healthcare. This study presents the first systematic examination of the efficacy of both proprietary (GPT-3.5, and GPT-4) and open-source LLMs (LLAMA 7B,13B, and 70B) for the task of patient-trial matching. Our findings reveal that open-source LLMs, when fine-tuned on this limited and synthetic dataset, demonstrate performance parity with their proprietary counterparts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T17:11:07Z)
• L-Eval: Instituting Standardized Evaluation for Long Context Language Models [91.05820785008527]
  We propose L-Eval to institute a more standardized evaluation for long context language models (LCLMs) We build a new evaluation suite containing 20 sub-tasks, 508 long documents, and over 2,000 human-labeled query-response pairs. Results show that popular n-gram matching metrics generally can not correlate well with human judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T17:59:41Z)
• Leveraging Expert Consistency to Improve Algorithmic Decision Support [62.61153549123407]
  We explore the use of historical expert decisions as a rich source of information that can be combined with observed outcomes to narrow the construct gap. We propose an influence function-based methodology to estimate expert consistency indirectly when each case in the data is assessed by a single expert. Our empirical evaluation, using simulations in a clinical setting and real-world data from the child welfare domain, indicates that the proposed approach successfully narrows the construct gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-24T05:40:29Z)

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.