SemioLLM: Evaluating Large Language Models for Diagnostic Reasoning from Unstructured Clinical Narratives in Epilepsy
Meghal Dani, Muthu Jeyanthi Prakash, Filip Rosa, Zeynep Akata, Stefanie Liebe
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to encode clinical knowledge. Many evaluations, however, rely on structured question-answer benchmarks, overlooking critical challenges of interpreting and reasoning about unstructured clinical narratives in real-world settings. In this study we task eight Large Language models including two medical models (GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Mixtral-8x7B, Qwen-72B, LlaMa2, LlaMa3, OpenBioLLM ...
, Med42) with a core diagnostic task in epilepsy: mapping seizure description phrases, after targeted filtering and standardization, to one of seven possible seizure onset zones using likelihood estimates. Most models yield results that often match the ground truth and even approach clinician-level performance after prompt engineering. Specifically, clinician-guided chain-of-thought reasoning leading to the most consistent improvements. Performance was further strongly modulated by clinical in-context impersonation, narrative length and language context (13.7%, 32.7% and 14.2% performance variation, respectively). However, expert analysis of reasoning outputs revealed that correct prediction can be based on hallucinated knowledge and inaccurate source citation, underscoring the need to improve interpretability of LLMs in clinical use. Overall, SemioLLM provides a scalable, domain-adaptable framework for evaluating LLMs in clinical disciplines where unstructured verbal descriptions encode diagnostic information. By identifying both the strengths and limitations of LLMs, our work contributes to testing the applicability of foundational AI systems for healthcare.
Results & Benchmarks
No concrete benchmark grounding is available yet. Treat the page as context or an implementation starting point only.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to encode clinical knowledge.
Implementation Evidence Summary
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Reproduction Risks
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence disclosure
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 40/100, grounding 58/100, status low.
Implementation Status
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Reproduction readiness
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
No verified implementation available
- · No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
No benchmark numbers could be verified. You will not be able to validate reproduction correctness against published numbers.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Natural Language Processing
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.