Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

MultifacetEval: Multifaceted Evaluation to Probe LLMs in Mastering Medical Knowledge

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 2406.02919 v1 pith:GGPIPIH4 submitted 2024-06-05 cs.CL

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

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have excelled across domains, also delivering notable performance on the medical evaluation benchmarks, such as MedQA. However, there still exists a significant gap between the reported performance and the practical effectiveness in real-world medical scenarios. In this paper, we aim to explore the causes of this gap by employing a multifaceted examination schema to systematically probe the actual mastery of medical knowledge by current LLMs. Specifically, we develop a novel evaluation framework MultifacetEval to examine the degree and coverage of LLMs in encoding and mastering medical knowledge at multiple facets (comparison, rectification, discrimination, and verification) concurrently. Based on the MultifacetEval framework, we construct two multifaceted evaluation datasets: MultiDiseK (by producing questions from a clinical disease knowledge base) and MultiMedQA (by rephrasing each question from a medical benchmark MedQA into multifaceted questions). The experimental results on these multifaceted datasets demonstrate that the extent of current LLMs in mastering medical knowledge is far below their performance on existing medical benchmarks, suggesting that they lack depth, precision, and comprehensiveness in mastering medical knowledge. Consequently, current LLMs are not yet ready for application in real-world medical tasks. The codes and datasets are available at https://github.com/THUMLP/MultifacetEval.

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. LLM Sensitivity Evaluation Framework for Clinical Diagnosis

    cs.CL 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An evaluation framework and dataset show that GPT-4 and other LLMs frequently fail to adjust diagnoses when key patient information is perturbed, achieving only 5.28% accuracy on such changed cases.

Pith tools