CLExEval introduces a human-annotated evaluation framework on 40 rare cases that identifies verbosity bias, hidden knowledge paradox, and 68.6% reasoning-to-output mismatch in LLMs while showing LLM-as-a-Judge overestimates reliability.
eLife , volume =
2 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
2
Pith papers citing it
years
2026 2verdicts
UNVERDICTED 2representative citing papers
A survey of RLM use in 28 disciplines reveals uneven adoption and introduces a maturity assessment framework showing larger gaps when limited to public resources.
citing papers explorer
-
CLExEval: A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for Qualitative Evaluation of LLM Clinical Reasoning
CLExEval introduces a human-annotated evaluation framework on 40 rare cases that identifies verbosity bias, hidden knowledge paradox, and 68.6% reasoning-to-output mismatch in LLMs while showing LLM-as-a-Judge overestimates reliability.