Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchCercetare AI

analiza aiqbench

This arXiv paper surveys open-weight LLMs and foundation models for clinical tasks and benchmarks them on synthetic personalized-prescription cases against a proprietary model, with and without retrieval augmentation. The accuracy gains from open models are small and their confidence intervals overlap, and blinded rater scores did not track the accuracy results. Readers should treat the findings as preliminary, since they rely on 100 synthetic profiles and two raters.
Surse care acoperăarXiv, Salesforce Blog
Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

Open Foundation Models in Healthcare: Challenges, Paradoxes, and Opportunities with GenAI Driven Personalized Prescription

arXiv3 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2502.04356v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In response to the success of proprietary Large Language Models (LLMs), there is a growing interest in developing open, non-proprietary LLMs and AI foundation models (AIFMs) for transparent use in academic, scientific, and non-commercial applications. Open models have substantial potential to improve healthcare applications. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive survey and a taxonomy of state-of-the-art open LLMs and AIFMs for clinical tasks. In addition, we empirically evaluate open-weight LLMs on a personalized-prescription task and compare them with a proprietary model with and without Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). Across 100 synthetic patient profiles, the open-weight models matched or exceeded the proprietary baseline on overall suitability accuracy without retrieval augmentation (0.810--0.850 versus 0.780), although the confidence intervals overlap; with retrieval augmentation, every model improved, and the ranking closed to within 0.04. Gains from RAG were field-dependent rather than uniform. To highlight the clinical relevance of LLM-driven personalized prescriptions, we also conduct a subjective evaluation in which two raters, blinded to model and condition, scored responses independently of each other. Their ratings did not follow the accuracy gains: retrieval raised overall suitability accuracy for every model while lowering the two-rater means for two of the four on all five dimensions. Finally, we outline the ethical implications and potential risks associated with the misuse of advanced LLMs and AIFMs, highlighting the importance of responsible and transparent deployment in healthcare contexts. \textit{Data and code used in the paper will be released upon publication.

Abstract:In response to the success of proprietary Large Language Models (LLMs), there is a growing interest in developing open, non-proprietary LLMs and AI foundation models (AIFMs) for transparent use in academic, scientific, and non-commercial applications. Open models have substantial potential to improve healthcare applications. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive survey and a taxonomy of state-of-the-art open LLMs and AIFMs for clinical tasks. In addition, we empirically evaluate open-weight LLMs on a personalized-prescription task and compare them with a proprietary model with and without Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). Across 100 synthetic patient profiles, the open-weight models matched or exceeded the proprietary baseline on overall suitability accuracy without retrieval augmentation (0.810--0.850 versus 0.780), although the confidence intervals overlap; with retrieval augmentation, every model improved, and the ranking closed to within 0.04. Gains from RAG were field-dependent rather than uniform. To highlight the clinical relevance of LLM-driven personalized prescriptions, we also conduct a subjective evaluation in which two raters, blinded to model and condition, scored responses independently of each other. Their ratings did not follow the accuracy gains: retrieval raised overall suitability accuracy for every model while lowering the two-rater means for two of the four on all five dimensions. Finally, we outline the ethical implications and potential risks associated with the misuse of advanced LLMs and AIFMs, highlighting the importance of responsible and transparent deployment in healthcare contexts. \textit{Data and code used in the paper will be released upon publication.

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2502.04356 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2502.04356v2 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.04356 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

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 · 338 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe