Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 69 references

Current vision-language models recognize findings on panoramic dental X-rays far better than they can localize or count them, and DentiAsk is the first benchmark that scores those three skills separately.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-13 07:14 UTC pith:ETLNLMC6

load-bearing objection Useful three-tier dental VQA benchmark with a real multi-model gap; single-annotator labels and coarse regions soften how clinical the gap is, but the resource still deserves referee time. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.08790 v1 pith:ETLNLMC6 submitted 2026-06-29 q-bio.QM

DentiAsk: A VQA Benchmark for Multimodal Reasoning in Panoramic Dental Radiographs

Debesh Jha , Tapas Kumar Dutta , Roshan Paudel , Onkar Kishor Susladkar , Aashish Ghimire , Anupam Dhakal , Sabin Adhikari , Nand Kumar Yadav
show 4 more authors
Deepak Ranjan Nayak Pravin Pawar William C. W. Chen Glenda Reynolds
This is my paper
classification q-bio.QM
keywords dental VQApanoramic radiographsmultimodal reasoningvision-language modelsmedical imaging benchmarkspatial localizationnumerical countingperiapical radiolucency
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

DentiAsk is a visual question-answering benchmark built from 1,000 high-resolution panoramic dental radiographs and 10,000 closed-form clinician-curated question-answer pairs. For each image it asks three kinds of questions about the same three common pathologies (periapical radiolucency, impacted teeth, and caries): whether the finding is present, which of six arch regions contain it, and how many teeth are affected. Ten leading vision-language models answer presence questions reasonably well yet drop sharply on exact multi-region localization and integer counting. The paper treats this graded drop as evidence of a perception-reasoning gap that earlier medical VQA sets never isolated. A reader who cares about clinical usefulness will note that real panoramic interpretation is query-driven and multi-step; a model that only detects disease is not yet ready for that work.

Core claim

DentiAsk is the first dental VQA benchmark to treat descriptive recognition, region-level localization, and numerical counting as separately scored closed-form tasks over the same panoramic radiograph for three high-prevalence pathologies. Under this protocol, ten state-of-the-art vision-language models perform better on descriptive queries and degrade sharply on spatial localization and counting, exposing a gap between visual recognition and clinically meaningful multi-step reasoning that model scale and transfer from simpler tiers do not close.

What carries the argument

The three-tier closed-form evaluation framework (L1 descriptive recognition, L2 six-region multi-label localization, L3 integer counting) applied to the same image and pathologies. Expert segmentations are converted into directly verifiable answers so recognition can be scored independently of spatial and quantitative reasoning.

Load-bearing premise

A single dentist’s segmentations plus a coarse six-region arch grid are reliable enough ground truth that poor localization and counting scores can be read as model reasoning failure rather than annotation noise or coarseness.

What would settle it

If independent multi-dentist re-annotation produces substantially different region and count labels that erase the measured L2/L3 gap, or if a model reaches near-zero counting error and high exact-region match on a multi-institution held-out set after only recognition-style training, the claimed perception-reasoning gap would not hold.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Recognition accuracy alone is an incomplete measure of clinical multimodal competence; localization and counting must be scored separately.
  • Training on lower-complexity tiers transfers some skill to harder tiers but does not close the gap to full in-tier supervision.
  • Future medical VLMs will need explicit multi-step and compositional mechanisms beyond scale or standard instruction tuning.
  • The six-region localization scheme offers a practical alternative to tooth-level indexing when dentition is incomplete or partially visible.
  • DentiAsk can serve as a controlled testbed for progress toward query-conditioned diagnostic reasoning in dental radiology.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same tiered closed-form scoring could expose an analogous perception-reasoning gap in other multi-instance medical images such as chest CT or whole-slide pathology.
  • Best counting MAE near 1.4 suggests free-form language generation may be a poor fit for instance-level enumeration and that object-centric or set-prediction heads may be required.
  • If later multi-rater studies show high noise on subtle PARL boundaries, part of the reported gap may be label-limited, motivating multi-annotator extensions of the benchmark.
  • Cross-scanner and cross-population external validation would distinguish whether the gap is architectural or driven by domain shift from a single-institution source.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. DentiAsk is a panoramic dental VQA benchmark of 1,000 high-resolution radiographs and 10,000 closed-form QA pairs spanning three high-prevalence pathologies (PARL, impacted teeth, dental caries) and three separately scored reasoning tiers: descriptive recognition (L1), six-region localization (L2), and integer counting (L3). QA pairs are generated from clinician-defined templates over expert segmentations (DentiMap). The authors fine-tune and evaluate ten VLMs (LLaVA variants, Qwen-VL, InternVL2, LLaVA-Med) under an 80/20 image split and report a graded perception–reasoning gap: best L1 accuracy 0.7562 (InternVL2-8B), best L2 subset accuracy 0.4283, best L3 MAE 1.4150. Cross-complexity transfer experiments on InternVL2-8B show modest gains from L1/L2 supervision to harder held-out tiers, and Grad-CAM visualizations are used to illustrate attention overlap with annotated pathology.

Significance. If the labels and evaluation protocol are reliable, this is a useful, evaluation-focused contribution: it is the first dental VQA resource to score categorical, spatial, and quantitative reasoning as distinct closed-form tasks over the same panoramic radiograph, with public data and code. The multi-model tables and cross-complexity protocol give a clear, falsifiable picture of where current VLMs fail (exact multi-region match and counting). Strengths include closed-form verifiability, a clinically motivated six-region scheme that avoids unreliable tooth indexing, and explicit release of dataset and evaluation code. The work is incremental relative to other 2025 dental VLM corpora but fills a genuine evaluation gap rather than another open-ended instruction set.

major comments (4)
  1. Annotation protocol and §5.3: All 10,000 QA targets are derived from a single licensed dentist’s segmentations, with no inter-annotator agreement (IAA) reported. L2 subset accuracy and L3 MAE/RMSE treat those labels as exact clinical ground truth. Without IAA (or at least dual review on a held-out subset of images for region sets and counts), the reported perception–reasoning gap cannot be cleanly attributed to model failure versus label noise or systematic coarseness. This is load-bearing for the central clinical claim. Please report IAA on a stratified subset for presence, region sets, and counts, or substantially qualify the gap as relative to this single-annotator standard.
  2. Abstract / Introduction vs. Task and question design (Table 2): The paper criticizes prior medical VQA for “simplified classification or templated queries,” yet DentiAsk itself uses 10 fixed templates with closed answer spaces. The multi-tier separation is a real contribution, but the framing overstates the leap toward “clinically meaningful interpretation.” Please rephrase claims so that the novelty is the separately scored L1–L3 structure over the same image, not open-ended clinical reasoning, and acknowledge that closed templates remain a deliberate evaluation choice rather than a full clinical dialogue surrogate.
  3. §5.1 Tables 3–5 and Discussion §5.3: L1 accuracy (up to 0.7562) is presented as evidence that “recognition is comparatively tractable,” but macro-F1 remains low (best 0.4687). That gap indicates class imbalance or majority-class success rather than reliable detection. The perception–reasoning narrative should be restated with macro-F1 (and per-pathology breakdowns) as primary L1 evidence; otherwise the graded difficulty story is partly an artifact of accuracy on imbalanced Yes/No labels.
  4. Data collection / Limitations §5.3: Images come from one institution and two scanners only. For a benchmark whose purpose is to measure generalization of multimodal reasoning, at least a small external or leave-one-device-out probe (even zero-shot) is needed to show that the L1>L2>L3 ordering is not site-specific. If external data cannot be added, the abstract and conclusion should not present the gap as a general property of “current multimodal systems” without that caveat made primary rather than terminal.
minor comments (6)
  1. Table 1: “Human-verified 10,000” for DentiAsk should be clarified—segmentations are single-expert; four annotators generated QA pairs from those labels. Align wording with the Annotation protocol paragraph.
  2. Figure 1(D) caption claims “largest L3 gain from combined L1+L2,” but Table 7 shows only a small MAE drop (2.55→2.46). Soften the figure caption to match the modest numerical effect.
  3. §5.2 Grad-CAM: Attention maps on instruction-tuned VLMs are known to be unstable; state the layer/method used and avoid implying that VQA supervision alone yields reliable localization without quantitative grounding metrics (e.g., pointing-game or mask overlap).
  4. Experimental Setup: Report LoRA rank, learning rate, epochs, and batch size for reproducibility; free hyperparameters are currently underspecified relative to the ten-model comparison.
  5. Typos / consistency: “LLaV A” spacing throughout; arXiv ID year “2607” vs. table “2026”; abstract lists five model families while body says ten models—align counts.
  6. Related Works: DENT_VQA / DentalGPT / MMOral / DentVLM comparisons would benefit from one sentence on whether any of those corpora already contain counting or multi-region items even if not scored as separate tiers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Empirical VQA benchmark with no circular derivation: QA targets come from expert labels via fixed templates; model scores are held-out measurements, not predictions forced by construction.

full rationale

DentiAsk is a dataset-and-benchmark paper, not a first-principles derivation. Closed-form answers are built from clinician segmentations and ten fixed templates (Table 2); L1/L2/L3 metrics are then computed on an 80/20 image-level held-out split against those labels. That is ordinary supervised evaluation, not a claim that reduces a predicted quantity to a fitted input. The DentiMap citation supplies the segmentation source used to instantiate QA pairs; it does not define or force the reported perception–reasoning gap (Tables 3–5) or the cross-complexity transfer numbers (Tables 6–7), which are independent empirical runs of external VLMs. There is no uniqueness theorem, no ansatz smuggled in as a theorem, no parameter fit renamed as a prediction, and no self-definitional loop equating a result to its inputs. Residual concerns about single-annotator labels or six-region coarseness affect correctness/reliability of the ground truth, not circularity of the evaluation chain. Score 0 is therefore appropriate.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

As a benchmark paper, load-bearing content is mostly design choices and domain assumptions rather than fitted physical constants. The central claim rests on treating expert single-annotator segmentations as ground truth, on the six-region localization ontology, on closed-form answer spaces as proxies for clinical reasoning, and on LoRA fine-tuning plus constrained prompts as a fair VLM evaluation protocol. No new physical entities are postulated; DentiAsk and the L1–L3 taxonomy are evaluation constructs.

free parameters (3)
  • train/test image split ratio (80/20)
    Partition size is a design choice that affects reported generalization; not derived from data theory in the paper.
  • LoRA adapter ranks / training hyperparameters
    Fine-tuning configuration is not fully enumerated in the manuscript; absolute metric levels depend on these choices.
  • brightness/contrast augmentation (±5%, p=0.5)
    Hand-chosen augmentation schedule used during training; can shift absolute scores.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Closed-form binary/subtype, multi-region, and integer-count answers are adequate proxies for clinically meaningful diagnostic reasoning on panoramas.
    Stated as design goal and task design; open-ended clinical narrative is deliberately excluded.
  • domain assumption A six-region dental-arch grid is a robust substitute for tooth-level indexing when teeth are missing or partially visible.
    Region-based spatial localization section; trades precision for annotation reliability.
  • domain assumption Single licensed dentist segmentations (plus four trained QA generators checked for consistency) are sufficiently accurate ground truth for benchmark scoring.
    Annotation protocol; no IAA reported in Limitations.
  • ad hoc to paper LoRA fine-tuning with task-specific answer-format prompts is a fair comparative protocol across heterogeneous VLMs.
    Experimental Setup; full fine-tuning and unconstrained decoding are not compared.
  • standard math Standard multi-label and regression metrics (F1/Jaccard/Subset Accuracy; MAE/RMSE) correctly rank clinical reasoning quality for L2/L3.
    Metrics section; conventional ML evaluation choices.
invented entities (2)
  • DentiAsk three-tier (L1/L2/L3) closed-form dental VQA benchmark independent evidence
    purpose: Separately score descriptive recognition, region localization, and counting on the same panoramic image for three pathologies.
    Core contribution; evaluation construct rather than a physical entity. Independent use depends on public dataset uptake.
  • Six-region dental-arch localization ontology (UL/UC/UR/LL/LC/LR) no independent evidence
    purpose: Provide multi-label spatial answers robust to missing/partial teeth.
    Paper-specific spatial scheme; not a standard universal numbering system. Clinical validity outside this benchmark is assumed, not independently measured here.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 17811 in / 3364 out tokens · 35100 ms · 2026-07-13T07:14:06.487480+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Accurate interpretation of panoramic dental radiographs requires the integration of multiple reasoning capabilities: detection, spatial localization, and quantitative assessment. Despite recent advances in multimodal learning, existing medical visual question answering (VQA) benchmarks do not fully capture this complexity, often reducing the task to simplified classification or templated queries. As a result, they provide limited coverage of the diverse reasoning processes required for clinically meaningful interpretation. We introduce DentiAsk, a large-scale dental VQA benchmark that pairs high-resolution panoramic dental radiographs with clinician-validated question-answer pairs spanning three reasoning tiers: descriptive recognition, spatial localization, and numerical quantification across three high-prevalence pathologies: periapical radiolucency (PARL), impacted teeth, and dental caries. DentiAsk comprises 1,000 high-resolution radiographs annotated with 10,000 expert-curated QA pairs. To our knowledge, it is the first dental VQA benchmark to unify categorical, spatial, and quantitative reasoning as separately scored tasks within a single evaluation framework. We benchmark 10 state-of-the-art vision-language models, including LLaVA-v1.5, LLaVA-v1.6, Qwen-VL, InternVL2, and LLaVA-Med, and find that models achieve stronger performance on descriptive queries, whereas they degrade sharply on spatial localization and counting, exposing limitations in compositional, multi-step reasoning. These findings reveal a gap between visual recognition and clinically meaningful reasoning, establishing DentiAsk as a challenging benchmark for advancing multimodal reasoning in medical imaging.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08790 by Aashish Ghimire, Anupam Dhakal, Debesh Jha, Deepak Ranjan Nayak, Glenda Reynolds, Nand Kumar Yadav, Onkar Kishor Susladkar, Pravin Pawar, Roshan Paudel, Sabin Adhikari, Tapas Kumar Dutta, William C. W. Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of DentiAsk. (A) Construction pipeline: 1,000 panoramic radiographs are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Three target dental conditions in DentiAsk: impacted teeth, periapical radiolucency (PARL), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Demonstration of the six-region grid employed for localization tasks. Since tooth level [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Taxonomy of the 10 DentiAsk diagnostic question templates (T1–T10; Table 2). The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative comparison of expert-annotation and model-generated attention heatmaps on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 11 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    2022 , url =

    World Health Organization , title =. 2022 , url =

    2022

  2. [2]

    Scientific Data , volume=

    A multi-modal dental dataset for semi-supervised deep learning image segmentation , author=. Scientific Data , volume=

  3. [3]

    Scientific data , volume=

    A multimodal dental dataset facilitating machine learning research and clinic services , author=. Scientific data , volume=

  4. [4]

    Cureus , volume=

    Prevalence of periapical radiolucency and conventional root canal treatment in adults: a systematic review of cross-sectional studies , author=. Cureus , volume=

  5. [5]

    International conference on machine learning , pages=

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=

  6. [6]

    2023 , booktitle =

    Li, Chunyuan and Wong, Cliff and Zhang, Sheng and Usuyama, Naoto and Liu, Haotian and Yang, Jianwei and Naumann, Tristan and Poon, Hoifung and Gao, Jianfeng , title =. 2023 , booktitle =

    2023

  7. [7]

    , author=

    Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. , author=. Iclr , volume=

  8. [8]

    2023 , url=

    Qwen-VL: A Versatile Vision-Language Model for Understanding, Localization, Text Reading, and Beyond , author=. 2023 , url=

    2023

  9. [9]

    LLaVA-NeXT: Improved reasoning, OCR, and world knowledge , url=

    Liu, Haotian and Li, Chunyuan and Li, Yuheng and Li, Bo and Zhang, Yuanhan and Shen, Sheng and Lee, Yong Jae , month=. LLaVA-NeXT: Improved reasoning, OCR, and world knowledge , url=

  10. [10]

    Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuning , year=

    Liu, Haotian and Li, Chunyuan and Li, Yuheng and Lee, Yong Jae , booktitle=. Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuning , year=

  11. [11]

    Peterson’s principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery , pages=

    Impacted teeth , author=. Peterson’s principles of oral and maxillofacial surgery , pages=

  12. [12]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.11558 , year=

    DentalGPT: Incentivizing Multimodal Complex Reasoning in Dentistry , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.11558 , year=

    arXiv

  13. [13]

    Machine learning for health (ML4H) , pages=

    Med-flamingo: a multimodal medical few-shot learner , author=. Machine learning for health (ML4H) , pages=

  14. [14]

    2024 5th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Application (ICCEA) , pages=

    Enhanced Qwen-VL 7B model via instruction finetuning on Chinese medical dataset , author=. 2024 5th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Application (ICCEA) , pages=

    2024

  15. [15]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    Internvl: Scaling up vision foundation models and aligning for generic visual-linguistic tasks , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

  16. [16]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Llava-med: Training a large language-and-vision assistant for biomedicine in one day , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

  17. [17]

    Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971-) , volume=

    GPT-4: a new era of artificial intelligence in medicine , author=. Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971-) , volume=

    1971

  18. [18]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.06794 , year=

    Pali: A jointly-scaled multilingual language-image model , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.06794 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  19. [19]

    Medical Image Analysis , volume=

    CLIP in medical imaging: A survey , author=. Medical Image Analysis , volume=

  20. [20]

    Kamer, A. R. and Craig, R. G. and Dasanayake, A. P. and Brys, M. and Glodzik-Sobanska, L. and de Leon, M. J. , title =. Alzheimer's & Dementia , volume =

  21. [21]

    Scientific Reports , volume=

    Clinical application of deep learning for enhanced multistage caries detection in panoramic radiographs , author=. Scientific Reports , volume=

  22. [22]

    Dental Clinics , volume=

    Radiology in endodontics , author=. Dental Clinics , volume=

  23. [23]

    Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

    Learn to explain: Multimodal reasoning via thought chains for science question answering , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

  24. [24]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

    Gqa: A new dataset for real-world visual reasoning and compositional question answering , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

  25. [25]

    Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval , pages=

    OVQA: A clinically generated visual question answering dataset , author=. Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval , pages=

  26. [26]

    Medical Imaging with Deep Learning , year=

    LLaMA32-Med: Parameter-Efficient Adaptation of Multimodal LLMs for Medical Visual Question Answering , author=. Medical Imaging with Deep Learning , year=

  27. [27]

    Journal of Dental Research , pages=

    MetaDent: Labeling Clinical Images for Vision-Language Models in Dentistry , author=. Journal of Dental Research , pages=

  28. [28]

    PRS-MED: Position Reasoning Segmentation in Medical Imaging , author=

  29. [29]

    MICCAI Workshop on Data Engineering in Medical Imaging , pages=

    Kvasir-vqa-x1: A multimodal dataset for medical reasoning and robust medvqa in gastrointestinal endoscopy , author=. MICCAI Workshop on Data Engineering in Medical Imaging , pages=

  30. [30]

    Heliyon , volume=

    Teeth segmentation and carious lesions segmentation in panoramic X-ray images using CariSeg, a networks' ensemble , author=. Heliyon , volume=

  31. [31]

    Scientific Data , volume=

    A dataset for medical instructional video classification and question answering , author=. Scientific Data , volume=

  32. [32]

    2025 IEEE/ACS 22nd International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA) , pages=

    Methodological Framework for Building DENT\_VQA: A Dental Panoramic X-ray Dataset for Medical VQA Systems , author=. 2025 IEEE/ACS 22nd International Conference on Computer Systems and Applications (AICCSA) , pages=

    2025

  33. [33]

    Scientific Data , volume=

    Children’s dental panoramic radiographs dataset for caries segmentation and dental disease detection , author=. Scientific Data , volume=

  34. [34]

    and Macpherson, Lorna M

    Peres, Marco A. and Macpherson, Lorna M. D. and Weyant, Robert J. and Daly, Blánaid and Venturelli, Rodrigo and Mathur, Manu R. and others , title =. The Lancet , volume =

  35. [35]

    Global Health Observatory Data Repository: Health Workforce Density , year =

  36. [36]

    Irmak, E. and G. Deep learning applications in dental radiology: A review , journal =

  37. [37]

    Han, Y. W. and Wang, X. , title =. Nature Reviews Microbiology , volume =

  38. [38]

    2020 , url =

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) , title =. 2020 , url =

    2020

  39. [39]

    Kamer, A. R. and Craig, R. G. and Dasanayake, A. P. and Brys, M. and Glodzik-Sobanska, L. , title =. Alzheimer's & Dementia , volume =

  40. [40]

    and Marco del Castillo, A

    Sanz, M. and Marco del Castillo, A. and Jepsen, S. and Gonzalez‐Juanatey, J. R. and D’Aiuto, F. and Bouchard, P. and Dietrich, T. , title =. Journal of Clinical Periodontology , volume =

  41. [41]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.14198 , year=

    Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.14198 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02469 , year=

    Vision-Language Models for Medical Report Generation and Visual Question Answering: A Review , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02469 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  43. [43]

    NeurIPS Workshop on Multimodal Representation Learning for Health , year=

    Are Large Vision-Language Models Truly Grounded in Medical Visual Question Answering? , author=. NeurIPS Workshop on Multimodal Representation Learning for Health , year=

  44. [44]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16192 , year=

    Fusion of Domain-Adapted Vision and Language Models for Medical Visual Question Answering , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16192 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  45. [45]

    NeurIPS , year=

    Visual Instruction Tuning , author=. NeurIPS , year=

  46. [46]

    NeurIPS , year=

    InstructBLIP: Towards General-purpose Vision-Language Models with Instruction Tuning , author=. NeurIPS , year=

  47. [47]

    NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks Track , year=

    CARES: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Trustworthiness in Medical Vision-Language Models , author=. NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks Track , year=

  48. [48]

    2016 26th International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL) , pages=

    Resource efficient real-time processing of contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization , author=. 2016 26th International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL) , pages=

    2016

  49. [49]

    and Samek, W

    Schwendicke, F. and Samek, W. and Krois, J. , title =. Journal of Dental Research , volume =

  50. [50]

    Lee, J. H. and Kim, D. H. and Jeong, S. N. and Choi, S. H. , title =. Journal of Dentistry , volume =

  51. [51]

    and Newton, T

    Casalegno, F. and Newton, T. and Daher, R. and Rezende, D. , title =. International Journal of Oral Science , volume =

  52. [52]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.01860 , year =

    Srivastava, Yash and Murali, Vaishnav and Dubey, Shiv Ram and Mukherjee, Snehasis , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.01860 , year =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1909

  53. [53]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15189 , year=

    Med-Flamingo: a Multimodal Medical Few-shot Learner , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15189 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  54. [54]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14334 , year=

    Towards Generalist Biomedical AI , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14334 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  55. [55]

    Scientific Data , volume=

    A dataset of clinically generated visual questions and answers about radiology images , author=. Scientific Data , volume=

  56. [56]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.10286 , year=

    PathVQA: 30000+ Questions for Medical Visual Question Answering , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.10286 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  57. [57]

    IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) , year=

    SLAKE: A Semantically-Labeled Knowledge-Enhanced Dataset for Medical Visual Question Answering , author=. IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) , year=

  58. [58]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10415 , year=

    PMC-VQA: Visual Instruction Tuning for Medical Visual Question Answering , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10415 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  59. [59]

    IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , year=

    OmniMedVQA: A New Large-Scale Comprehensive Evaluation Benchmark for Medical LVLM , author=. IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , year=

  60. [60]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , year=

    GMAI-MMBench: A Comprehensive Multimodal Evaluation Benchmark Towards General Medical AI , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , year=

  61. [61]

    Labelbox (Version 2024) [Software] , year =

    2024

  62. [62]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20421 , year=

    Worse than Random? An Embarrassingly Simple Probing Evaluation of Large Multimodal Models in Medical VQA , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20421 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  63. [63]

    Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Vision-Language Models for Biomedical Applications , pages=

    Kvasir-vqa: A text-image pair gi tract dataset , author=. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Vision-Language Models for Biomedical Applications , pages=

  64. [64]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.19112 , year=

    DENTEX: Dental Enumeration and Tooth Pathosis Detection Benchmark for Panoramic X-ray , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.19112 , year=

    arXiv

  65. [65]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18277 , year=

    3DTeethSeg'22: 3D teeth scan segmentation and labeling challenge , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18277 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  66. [66]

    Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , year=

    PRS-MED: Position Reasoning Segmentation in Medical Imaging , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , year=

  67. [67]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), Datasets and Benchmarks Track , year=

    Towards Better Dental AI: A Multimodal Benchmark and Instruction Dataset for Panoramic X-ray Analysis , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), Datasets and Benchmarks Track , year=

  68. [68]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.23344 , year=

    DentVLM: A Multimodal Vision-Language Model for Comprehensive Dental Diagnosis and Enhanced Clinical Practice , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.23344 , year=

    arXiv

  69. [69]

    2026 , archivePrefix =

    DentiMap: A Panoramic X-Ray Dataset for Multiclass Segmentation of Caries, PARL, and Impacted Teeth , author =. 2026 , archivePrefix =

    2026