Frontiers in medicine · 2026
Reasoning vs. conventional large language models for BI-RADS educational questions answering: a multi-model comparative evaluation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tang Yuxia, Liu Yuting, Liu Mengxuan, Ni Hao, Wang Siqi, Wang Shouju
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare reasoning vs. conventional large language models (LLMs) in generating answers with guideline-aligned explanations for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) educational questions.
METHODS: In this prospective study performed from February 6 to 12, 2025, 49 English-Chinese question pairs were extracted from BI-RADS Atlas Fifth Edition. Two reasoning LLMs (ChatGPT-o1, Deepseek-R1) and six conventional LLMs (Gemini2.0-Flash, Deepseek-V3, ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-3.5, Qwen-2.5, and WenXinYiYan-3.5) generated answers and explanations to the questions through structured prompts. Three radiologists specialized in breast imaging independently evaluated responses using a 5-point Likert scale, with reference to standard answers.
RESULTS: The reasoning LLMs significantly outperformed conventional models (median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 3.7 [2.7-4.0] vs. 2.7 [2.0-3.7], P < 0.001), with ChatGPT-o1 and Deepseek-R1 demonstrating peak performance. Both categories of LLMs exhibited significant score reductions in handling questions with multifaceted clinical scenarios (reasoning models: median 4.0 [2.7-4.3] vs. 2.7 [2.3-2.7], Δmedian = -1.3, P < 0.001; conventional models: 2.7 [2.0-3.7] vs. 2.3 [2.0-2.7], Δmedian = -0.4, P < 0.001). While question language showed no significant impact on reasoning LLMs (ChatGPT-o1 and Deepseek-R1), it affected some conventional models (ChatGPT-3.5, Deepseek-V3 and Gemini2.0-Flash). LLMs performance remained independent of question section and question type.
CONCLUSIONS: Reasoning LLMs show significant potential for BI-RADS guideline explanation and education, but require specific optimization for complex clinical scenario instruction.
METHODS: In this prospective study performed from February 6 to 12, 2025, 49 English-Chinese question pairs were extracted from BI-RADS Atlas Fifth Edition. Two reasoning LLMs (ChatGPT-o1, Deepseek-R1) and six conventional LLMs (Gemini2.0-Flash, Deepseek-V3, ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-3.5, Qwen-2.5, and WenXinYiYan-3.5) generated answers and explanations to the questions through structured prompts. Three radiologists specialized in breast imaging independently evaluated responses using a 5-point Likert scale, with reference to standard answers.
RESULTS: The reasoning LLMs significantly outperformed conventional models (median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 3.7 [2.7-4.0] vs. 2.7 [2.0-3.7], P < 0.001), with ChatGPT-o1 and Deepseek-R1 demonstrating peak performance. Both categories of LLMs exhibited significant score reductions in handling questions with multifaceted clinical scenarios (reasoning models: median 4.0 [2.7-4.3] vs. 2.7 [2.3-2.7], Δmedian = -1.3, P < 0.001; conventional models: 2.7 [2.0-3.7] vs. 2.3 [2.0-2.7], Δmedian = -0.4, P < 0.001). While question language showed no significant impact on reasoning LLMs (ChatGPT-o1 and Deepseek-R1), it affected some conventional models (ChatGPT-3.5, Deepseek-V3 and Gemini2.0-Flash). LLMs performance remained independent of question section and question type.
CONCLUSIONS: Reasoning LLMs show significant potential for BI-RADS guideline explanation and education, but require specific optimization for complex clinical scenario instruction.