Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

From Medprompt to o1: Exploration of Run-Time Strategies for Medical Challenge Problems and Beyond

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 2411.03590 v1 pith:SGPMRMN6 submitted 2024-11-06 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords medprompto1-previewperformancerun-timestrategiesbenchmarksmedicalmodel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Run-time steering strategies like Medprompt are valuable for guiding large language models (LLMs) to top performance on challenging tasks. Medprompt demonstrates that a general LLM can be focused to deliver state-of-the-art performance on specialized domains like medicine by using a prompt to elicit a run-time strategy involving chain of thought reasoning and ensembling. OpenAI's o1-preview model represents a new paradigm, where a model is designed to do run-time reasoning before generating final responses. We seek to understand the behavior of o1-preview on a diverse set of medical challenge problem benchmarks. Following on the Medprompt study with GPT-4, we systematically evaluate the o1-preview model across various medical benchmarks. Notably, even without prompting techniques, o1-preview largely outperforms the GPT-4 series with Medprompt. We further systematically study the efficacy of classic prompt engineering strategies, as represented by Medprompt, within the new paradigm of reasoning models. We found that few-shot prompting hinders o1's performance, suggesting that in-context learning may no longer be an effective steering approach for reasoning-native models. While ensembling remains viable, it is resource-intensive and requires careful cost-performance optimization. Our cost and accuracy analysis across run-time strategies reveals a Pareto frontier, with GPT-4o representing a more affordable option and o1-preview achieving state-of-the-art performance at higher cost. Although o1-preview offers top performance, GPT-4o with steering strategies like Medprompt retains value in specific contexts. Moreover, we note that the o1-preview model has reached near-saturation on many existing medical benchmarks, underscoring the need for new, challenging benchmarks. We close with reflections on general directions for inference-time computation with LLMs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Teaching large language models to reason like expert diagnosticians

    cs.AI 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An LLM agent and a 10-task benchmark built from 7,102 NEJM clinicopathologic cases push medical AI evaluation beyond final diagnosis accuracy.

  2. A Japanese Language Model and Three New Evaluation Benchmarks for Pharmaceutical NLP

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A continually pretrained 7B Japanese pharmaceutical LLM outperforms open medical models on new Japanese pharma benchmarks, while all models, including GPT-4o, fail at cross-sentence consistency checks.

  3. DiagnosisArena: Benchmarking Diagnostic Reasoning for Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DiagnosisArena, a 1,113-case benchmark from top journals, shows state-of-the-art LLMs achieve at most 51% top-1 diagnostic accuracy, far below clinical-level competence.

Pith tools