bioRxiv / medRxiv
open access
CC BY 4.0
When medical credentials conflict with stated accuracy: A factorial study of source credibility and answer revision in medical LLM interactions
Large language models perform well on medical examinations, but users routinely challenge their answers and invoke professional roles, and it is unclear what a system does when a medical credential and a stated task-specific accuracy point in opposite directions. In a factorial experiment on 480 ite
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
- Calibrated Epistemic Deference to Conversational AI in Mental Healthcare#92076
- How and why do doctors communicate diagnostic uncertainty: An experimental vignette study#467474
- From Uncertainty to Clinical Risk: Severity-Aware Conformal Planning for Interactive Medical Diagnosis#781133
- From Uncertainty to Clinical Risk: Severity-Aware Conformal Planning for Interactive Medical Diagnosis#779758
- Perspectives on Cross-Lingual Consistency in LLMs for Medical Questions#984592
Record · ID 1136706
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