MetaMedQA benchmark code
Open accessAbstract
No description provided.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The use of Guidance with constrained decoding ensured that models selected only from allowed choices (A/B/C/D/E/F) and provided confidence scores (1/2/3/4/5).
“We used Python 3.12 and Guidance, a Python library designed to enforce model adherence to specific instructions through constrained decoding45, ensuring the models selected only from the allowed choices (A/B/C/D/E/F) and provided confidence scores (1/2/3/4/5)46.”
From Large Language Models lack essential metacognition for reliable medical reasoning (2025) · cites this paper as [46]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Large Language Models lack essential metacognition for reliable medical reasoning
Griot, M., Hemptinne, C., Vanderdonckt, J., & Yuksel, D. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-55628-6 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Griot, M., Hemptinne, C., Vanderdonckt, J., & Yuksel, D.
- Venue
- Zenodo
- Publisher
- Zenodo
- Published
- 2024-11-18
- OpenAlex
- W6949540243
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1
- Type
- software
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Keywords
- benchmark, question answering, medical question answering
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
