International dental journal · 2025
Image-Based Diagnostic Performance of LLMs vs CNNs for Oral Lichen Planus: Example-Guided and Differential Diagnosis.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Rewthamrongsris Paak, Burapacheep Jirayu, Phattarataratip Ekarat, Kulthanaamondhita Promphakkon, Tichy Antonin, Schwendicke Falk, Osathanon Thanaphum, Sappayatosok Kraisorn
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The overlapping characteristics of oral lichen planus (OLP), a chronic oral mucosal inflammatory condition, with those of other oral lesions, present diagnostic challenges. Large language models (LLMs) with integrated computer-vision capabilities and convolutional neural networks (CNNs) constitute an alternative diagnostic modality. We evaluated the ability of seven LLMs, including both proprietary and open-source models, to detect OLP from intraoral images and generate differential diagnoses.
METHODS: Using a dataset with 1,142 clinical photographs of histopathologically confirmed OLP, non-OLP lesions, and normal mucosa. The LLMs were tested using three experimental designs: zero-shot recognition, example-guided recognition, and differential diagnosis. Performance was measured using accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and discounted cumulative gain (DCG). Furthermore, the performance of LLMs was compared with three previously published CNN-based models for OLP detection on a subset of 110 photographs, which were previously used to test the CNN models.
RESULTS: Gemini 1.5 Pro and Flash demonstrated the highest accuracy (69.69%) in zero-shot recognition, whereas GPT-4o ranked first in the F1 score (76.10%). With example-guided prompts, which improved consistency and reduced refusal rates, Gemini 1.5 Flash achieved the highest accuracy (80.53%) and F1-score (84.54%); however, Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest DCG score of 0.63. Although the proprietary models generally excelled, the open-source Llama model demonstrated notable strengths in ranking relevant diagnoses despite moderate performance in detection tasks. All LLMs were outperformed by the CNN models.
CONCLUSION: The seven evaluated LLMs lack sufficient performance for clinical use. CNNs trained to detect OLP outperformed the LLMs tested in this study.
METHODS: Using a dataset with 1,142 clinical photographs of histopathologically confirmed OLP, non-OLP lesions, and normal mucosa. The LLMs were tested using three experimental designs: zero-shot recognition, example-guided recognition, and differential diagnosis. Performance was measured using accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and discounted cumulative gain (DCG). Furthermore, the performance of LLMs was compared with three previously published CNN-based models for OLP detection on a subset of 110 photographs, which were previously used to test the CNN models.
RESULTS: Gemini 1.5 Pro and Flash demonstrated the highest accuracy (69.69%) in zero-shot recognition, whereas GPT-4o ranked first in the F1 score (76.10%). With example-guided prompts, which improved consistency and reduced refusal rates, Gemini 1.5 Flash achieved the highest accuracy (80.53%) and F1-score (84.54%); however, Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest DCG score of 0.63. Although the proprietary models generally excelled, the open-source Llama model demonstrated notable strengths in ranking relevant diagnoses despite moderate performance in detection tasks. All LLMs were outperformed by the CNN models.
CONCLUSION: The seven evaluated LLMs lack sufficient performance for clinical use. CNNs trained to detect OLP outperformed the LLMs tested in this study.