REVIEW
Can DeepSeek Reason Like a Surgeon? An Empirical Evaluation for Vision-Language Understanding in Robotic-Assisted Surgery
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
The DeepSeek models have shown exceptional performance in general scene understanding, question-answering (QA), and text generation tasks, owing to their efficient training paradigm and strong reasoning capabilities. In this study, we investigate the dialogue capabilities of the DeepSeek model in robotic surgery scenarios, focusing on tasks such as Single Phrase QA, Visual QA, and Detailed Description. The Single Phrase QA tasks further include sub-tasks such as surgical instrument recognition, action understanding, and spatial position analysis. We conduct extensive evaluations using publicly available datasets, including EndoVis18 and CholecT50, along with their corresponding dialogue data. Our empirical study shows that, compared to existing general-purpose multimodal large language models, DeepSeek-VL2 performs better on complex understanding tasks in surgical scenes. Additionally, although DeepSeek-V3 is purely a language model, we find that when image tokens are directly inputted, the model demonstrates better performance on single-sentence QA tasks. However, overall, the DeepSeek models still fall short of meeting the clinical requirements for understanding surgical scenes. Under general prompts, DeepSeek models lack the ability to effectively analyze global surgical concepts and fail to provide detailed insights into surgical scenarios. Based on our observations, we argue that the DeepSeek models are not ready for vision-language tasks in surgical contexts without fine-tuning on surgery-specific datasets.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.