arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
​通知:联邦节假日调休:哥伦布日 / 原住民日(Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day),今日(13日)无更新。
arXiv 2504.15330cs.IRcs.AIcs.CL

Med-CoDE:基于医学批评的分歧评估框架

Med-CoDE: Medical Critique based Disagreement Evaluation Framework

Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology Delhi, India(印度德里印度信息技术研究所);National Institute of Informatics, Tokyo, Japan(日本东京信息机构)

Mohit Gupta, Akiko Aizawa, Rajiv Ratn Shah

AI总结:

提出Med-CoDE评估框架,基于医学批评量化模型输出与金标准的分歧,综合评估医疗大语言模型的准确性与可靠性。

摘要:

大型语言模型(LLM)的出现显著影响了包括医疗保健在内的众多领域,增强了自动化系统处理和生成类人文本的能力。然而,尽管取得了进步,LLM在医学语境中的可靠性和准确性仍然是关键问题。当前的评估方法往往缺乏稳健性,无法对LLM性能提供全面评估,从而在临床环境中带来潜在风险。在这项工作中,我们提出了Med-CoDE,一个专门为医学LLM设计的评估框架,以应对这些挑战。该框架利用基于批评的方法,定量衡量模型生成的响应与既定医学金标准之间的分歧程度。该框架在医学环境中同时捕捉准确性和可靠性。所提出的评估框架旨在通过提供一种系统的方法来评估医学LLM的质量和可信度,从而填补LLM评估中现有的空白。通过大量实验和案例研究,我们展示了我们的框架在提供全面且可靠的医学LLM评估方面的实用性。

英文摘要:

The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has significantly influenced numerous fields, including healthcare, by enhancing the capabilities of automated systems to process and generate human-like text. However, despite their advancements, the reliability and accuracy of LLMs in medical contexts remain critical concerns. Current evaluation methods often lack robustness and fail to provide a comprehensive assessment of LLM performance, leading to potential risks in clinical settings. In this work, we propose Med-CoDE, a specifically designed evaluation framework for medical LLMs to address these challenges. The framework leverages a critique-based approach to quantitatively measure the degree of disagreement between model-generated responses and established medical ground truths. This framework captures both accuracy and reliability in medical settings. The proposed evaluation framework aims to fill the existing gap in LLM assessment by offering a systematic method to evaluate the quality and trustworthiness of medical LLMs. Through extensive experiments and case studies, we illustrate the practicality of our framework in providing a comprehensive and reliable evaluation of medical LLMs.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑