analiza aiqbench
This benchmark exposes a critical flaw in current LLMs, where high surface-level accuracy masks catastrophic failures in maintaining logical consistency across complex medical reasoning tasks. The study highlights that even top-tier models suffer from severe error compounding when evaluating risk-of-bias in randomized controlled trials, necessitating rigorous white-box verification before clinical deployment.
Can LLMs Follow Medical Expert Logic? A Benchmark for Hierarchical Logical Consistency in Risk-of-Bias Assessment
arXiv:2609.11185v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evidence-based medicine demands strict logical consistency, yet current evaluations of large language models (LLMs) prioritize superficial label matching over genuine reasoning. We introduce LogiMed-RoB, a benchmark grounded in Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) 2.0 expert logic, comprising 860 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14,820 queries. It evaluates models under the Hierarchical Logical Consistency (HLC) framework across four dimensions: Atomic Consistency, Domain Consistency, Aggregation Consistency, and Evidential Faithfulness. Experiments on 10 state-of-the-art LLMs reveal a catastrophic Error Compounding Effect: despite the top model reaching 98.88% Atomic Consistency, its end-to-end consistency collapses to 45.13%, with several open-weight architectures plummeting to nearly 0%. We further uncover a systematic evidence-reasoning gap: even when models retrieve high-quality evidence, they fail to deduce correct outcomes in 18.63-40.05% of cases, while Blind Guess Rates reach 48.28%. LogiMed-RoB demonstrates that high outcome accuracy can conceal critical reasoning flaws, underscoring the necessity of white-box logical verification for clinical deployment.
Title:Can LLMs Follow Medical Expert Logic? A Benchmark for Hierarchical Logical Consistency in Risk-of-Bias Assessment
Abstract:Evidence-based medicine demands strict logical consistency, yet current evaluations of large language models (LLMs) prioritize superficial label matching over genuine reasoning. We introduce LogiMed-RoB, a benchmark grounded in Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) 2.0 expert logic, comprising 860 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14,820 queries. It evaluates models under the Hierarchical Logical Consistency (HLC) framework across four dimensions: Atomic Consistency, Domain Consistency, Aggregation Consistency, and Evidential Faithfulness. Experiments on 10 state-of-the-art LLMs reveal a catastrophic Error Compounding Effect: despite the top model reaching 98.88% Atomic Consistency, its end-to-end consistency collapses to 45.13%, with several open-weight architectures plummeting to nearly 0%. We further uncover a systematic evidence-reasoning gap: even when models retrieve high-quality evidence, they fail to deduce correct outcomes in 18.63-40.05% of cases, while Blind Guess Rates reach 48.28%. LogiMed-RoB demonstrates that high outcome accuracy can conceal critical reasoning flaws, underscoring the necessity of white-box logical verification for clinical deployment.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.11185 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.11185v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.11185 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 259 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Value Generalisation 2: The Missing Hole in AIs’ abilities
AI Alignment Forum · 29 iul. 2026

SOP-Bench: A new benchmark for evaluating AI agents on real business procedures
Amazon Science · 21 aug. 2026
EHRNote-ChatQA: A Benchmark for Evidence-Grounded Multi-Turn Clinical Question Answering over Longitudinal Discharge Summaries
arXiv · 17 iun. 2026
EHRNote-ChatQA: A Benchmark for Evidence-Grounded Multi-Turn Clinical Question Answering over Longitudinal Discharge Summaries
arXiv · 16 iun. 2026