Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

ReXVQA: A Large-scale Visual Question Answering Benchmark for Generalist Chest X-ray Understanding

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 2506.04353 v1 pith:QQYKMCIF submitted 2025-06-04 cs.CV cs.AIcs.CEcs.CLcs.LG

classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.CEcs.CLcs.LG
keywords humanrexvqachestperformancebenchmarkevaluationmodelsradiology
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We present ReXVQA, the largest and most comprehensive benchmark for visual question answering (VQA) in chest radiology, comprising approximately 696,000 questions paired with 160,000 chest X-rays studies across training, validation, and test sets. Unlike prior efforts that rely heavily on template based queries, ReXVQA introduces a diverse and clinically authentic task suite reflecting five core radiological reasoning skills: presence assessment, location analysis, negation detection, differential diagnosis, and geometric reasoning. We evaluate eight state-of-the-art multimodal large language models, including MedGemma-4B-it, Qwen2.5-VL, Janus-Pro-7B, and Eagle2-9B. The best-performing model (MedGemma) achieves 83.24% overall accuracy. To bridge the gap between AI performance and clinical expertise, we conducted a comprehensive human reader study involving 3 radiology residents on 200 randomly sampled cases. Our evaluation demonstrates that MedGemma achieved superior performance (83.84% accuracy) compared to human readers (best radiology resident: 77.27%), representing a significant milestone where AI performance exceeds expert human evaluation on chest X-ray interpretation. The reader study reveals distinct performance patterns between AI models and human experts, with strong inter-reader agreement among radiologists while showing more variable agreement patterns between human readers and AI models. ReXVQA establishes a new standard for evaluating generalist radiological AI systems, offering public leaderboards, fine-grained evaluation splits, structured explanations, and category-level breakdowns. This benchmark lays the foundation for next-generation AI systems capable of mimicking expert-level clinical reasoning beyond narrow pathology classification. Our dataset will be open-sourced at https://huggingface.co/datasets/rajpurkarlab/ReXVQA

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. CXR-ContraBench: Benchmarking Negated-Option Attraction in Medical VLMs

    cs.CV 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Medical VLMs frequently select negated options that contradict visible chest X-ray findings, achieving only ~30% accuracy on direct presence probes, but a post-hoc consistency verifier raises accuracy above 95%.

  2. CARE-X: Towards Clinically Useful Radiology VLMs with Auxiliary Supervision, Reward-Aligned Learning, and Tool-Augmented Measurement

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A chest X-ray VLM co-trained with classification and grounding heads, tuned with DAPO reinforcement learning, and augmented with deterministic measurement tools outperforms prior radiology VLMs on report generation, V...

  3. MedRCube: A Multidimensional Framework for Fine-Grained and In-Depth Evaluation of MLLMs in Medical Imaging

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    MedRCube is a new fine-grained evaluation framework that benchmarks 33 MLLMs on medical imaging, ranks Lingshu-32B highest, and finds a significant positive link between shortcut behaviors and diagnostic performance.

Pith tools