Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Evaluating AI Models: Performance Validation Using Formal Multiple-Choice Questions in Neuropsychology
6
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2024
Jahr
Abstract
High-quality and accessible education is crucial for advancing neuropsychology. A recent study identified key barriers to board certification in clinical neuropsychology, such as time constraints and insufficient specialized knowledge. To address these challenges, this study explored the capabilities of advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) language models, GPT-3.5 (free-version) and GPT-4.0 (under-subscription version), by evaluating their performance on 300 American Board of Professional Psychology in Clinical Neuropsychology-like questions. The results indicate that GPT-4.0 achieved a higher accuracy rate of 80.0% compared to GPT-3.5's 65.7%. In the "Assessment" category, GPT-4.0 demonstrated a notable improvement with an accuracy rate of 73.4% compared to GPT-3.5's 58.6% (p = 0.012). The "Assessment" category, which comprised 128 questions and exhibited the highest error rate by both AI models, was analyzed. A thematic analysis of the 26 incorrectly answered questions revealed 8 main themes and 17 specific codes, highlighting significant gaps in areas such as "Neurodegenerative Diseases" and "Neuropsychological Testing and Interpretation."
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.245 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.100 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.466 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.429 Zit.