Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

MDDial: A Multi-turn Differential Diagnosis Dialogue Dataset with Reliability Evaluation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.08147 v1 pith:6YWCFUNG submitted 2023-08-16 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords dialoguediagnosismddialsymptomssystemsdatasetdifferentiallanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Dialogue systems for Automatic Differential Diagnosis (ADD) have a wide range of real-life applications. These dialogue systems are promising for providing easy access and reducing medical costs. Building end-to-end ADD dialogue systems requires dialogue training datasets. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no publicly available ADD dialogue dataset in English (although non-English datasets exist). Driven by this, we introduce MDDial, the first differential diagnosis dialogue dataset in English which can aid to build and evaluate end-to-end ADD dialogue systems. Additionally, earlier studies present the accuracy of diagnosis and symptoms either individually or as a combined weighted score. This method overlooks the connection between the symptoms and the diagnosis. We introduce a unified score for the ADD system that takes into account the interplay between symptoms and diagnosis. This score also indicates the system's reliability. To the end, we train two moderate-size of language models on MDDial. Our experiments suggest that while these language models can perform well on many natural language understanding tasks, including dialogue tasks in the general domain, they struggle to relate relevant symptoms and disease and thus have poor performance on MDDial. MDDial will be released publicly to aid the study of ADD dialogue research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Can You Trust LLM Judgments? Reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    LLM judges are often internally inconsistent across seed variations, with McDonald's omega reliability scores mostly below acceptable thresholds.

Pith tools