REVIEW 5 cited by
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning
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
read the original abstract
Users typically engage with LLMs interactively, yet most existing benchmarks evaluate them in a static, single-turn format, posing reliability concerns in interactive scenarios. We identify a key obstacle towards reliability: LLMs are trained to answer any question, even with incomplete context or insufficient knowledge. In this paper, we propose to change the static paradigm to an interactive one, develop systems that proactively ask questions to gather more information and respond reliably, and introduce an benchmark - MediQ - to evaluate question-asking ability in LLMs. MediQ simulates clinical interactions consisting of a Patient System and an adaptive Expert System; with potentially incomplete initial information, the Expert refrains from making diagnostic decisions when unconfident, and instead elicits missing details via follow-up questions. We provide a pipeline to convert single-turn medical benchmarks into an interactive format. Our results show that directly prompting state-of-the-art LLMs to ask questions degrades performance, indicating that adapting LLMs to proactive information-seeking settings is nontrivial. We experiment with abstention strategies to better estimate model confidence and decide when to ask questions, improving diagnostic accuracy by 22.3%; however, performance still lags compared to an (unrealistic in practice) upper bound with complete information upfront. Further analyses show improved interactive performance with filtering irrelevant contexts and reformatting conversations. Overall, we introduce a novel problem towards LLM reliability, an interactive MediQ benchmark and a novel question-asking system, and highlight directions to extend LLMs' information-seeking abilities in critical domains.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Mind the Sim2Real Gap in User Simulation for Agentic Tasks
On τ-bench, LLM user simulators are more cooperative, more verbose, and more lenient than real human users, so agent benchmarks that rely on them overstate real-world performance.
-
MedRealMM: A Real-World Multimodal Benchmark for Chinese Online Medical Consultation
A real multimodal Chinese online-consultation benchmark of 5,620 cases finds frontier LLMs below physicians, with safety-sensitive error avoidance as the main gap.
-
MedRealMM: A Real-World Multimodal Benchmark for Chinese Online Medical Consultation
On a new benchmark of 5,620 real multimodal online consultations, top LLMs trail the original physicians mainly because they trigger more unsafe or unsupported negative criteria.
-
CA-BED: Conversation-Aware Bayesian Experimental Design
CA-BED uses Bayesian experimental design and simulated conversation trees with LLM likelihoods to optimize multi-turn question selection, reporting 21.8% higher success rates than direct prompting on entity-deduction ...
-
Bridging the Detection-to-Abstention Gap in Reasoning Models under Insufficient Information
JTS trains reasoning models via supervised warm-up and missing-premise RL to make an explicit answerability commitment that triggers early termination on unanswerable inputs, raising Abstention@Detection near saturation.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.