arXiv (All)
open access
A rubric-based controlled comparison of frontier language models on expert-authored clinical reasoning tasks
Multiple-choice medical benchmarks are increasingly saturated, and recent rubric-based evaluations such as HealthBench have shown that open-ended clinical performance is far from solved - its "Hard" subset top score remains 32%. We present a small, deliberately difficult evaluation dataset of five c
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- A Structured Debate-Mixture-of-Agents Framework for Complex Clinical Diagnostic Decision Support#972021
- BioBERT: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining#6200
- Co-FactChecker: A Framework for Human-AI Collaborative Claim Verification Using Large Reasoning Models#1061700
- FLY-EVAL++: An Evidence-Driven Evaluation Protocol for Safety-Constrained Flight Prediction with Large Language Models#926871
- TeichAI/claude-4.5-opus-high-reasoning-250x#786603
Record · ID 1063959
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive