Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Overview of TREC 2024 Biomedical Generative Retrieval (BioGen) Track

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 2411.18069 v2 pith:SRN4E2CY submitted 2024-11-27 cs.IR

Overview of TREC 2024 Biomedical Generative Retrieval (BioGen) Track

classification cs.IR
keywords biomedicalllmsstatementsansweringsourcesbarrierclinicalevaluation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

With the advancement of large language models (LLMs), the biomedical domain has seen significant progress and improvement in multiple tasks such as biomedical question answering, lay language summarization of the biomedical literature, clinical note summarization, etc. However, hallucinations or confabulations remain one of the key challenges when using LLMs in the biomedical and other domains. Inaccuracies may be particularly harmful in high-risk situations, such as medical question answering, making clinical decisions, or appraising biomedical research. Studies on the evaluation of the LLMs abilities to ground generated statements in verifiable sources have shown that models perform significantly worse on lay-user-generated questions, and often fail to reference relevant sources. This can be problematic when those seeking information want evidence from studies to back up the claims from LLMs. Unsupported statements are a major barrier to using LLMs in any applications that may affect health. Methods for grounding generated statements in reliable sources along with practical evaluation approaches are needed to overcome this barrier. Towards this, in our pilot task organized at TREC 2024, we introduced the task of reference attribution as a means to mitigate the generation of false statements by LLMs answering biomedical questions.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. DoGMaTiQ: Automated Generation of Question-and-Answer Nuggets for Report Evaluation

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    DoGMaTiQ automates creation of QA-based nuggets via document-grounded generation, paraphrase clustering, and quality subselection, producing report evaluations that correlate strongly with human judgments on cross-lin...

  2. DoGMaTiQ: Automated Generation of Question-and-Answer Nuggets for Report Evaluation

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DoGMaTiQ automates QA-nugget creation via document-grounded generation, paraphrase clustering, and quality-based subselection, yielding strong rank correlations with human judgments on cross-lingual TREC tasks.

  3. Attribution, Citation, and Quotation: A Survey of Evidence-based Text Generation with Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-08 accept novelty 5.0

    A systematic survey that analyzes 134 papers, proposes a unified taxonomy for evidence-based LLM text generation, and examines 300 evaluation metrics across seven dimensions.