Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Evaluating Large Language Models on Aerospace Medicine Principles
1
Zitationen
4
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
, ChatGPT-4 had a mean reader score from 4.23 to 5.00 (Likert scale of 1-5) across chapters, whereas Gemini Advanced and the RAG LLM scored 3.30 to 4.91 and 4.69 to 5.00, respectively. When queried with 20 multiple-choice aerospace medicine board questions provided by the American College of Preventive Medicine, ChatGPT-4 and Gemini Advanced responded correctly 70% and 55% of the time, respectively, while the RAG LLM answered 85% correctly. Despite this quantitative measure of high performance, the LLMs tested still exhibited gaps in factual knowledge that potentially could be harmful, a degree of clinical reasoning that may not pass the aerospace medicine board exam, and some inconsistency when answering self-generated questions.ConclusionThere is considerable promise for LLM use in autonomous medical operations in spaceflight given the anticipated continued rapid pace of development, including advancements in model training, data quality, and fine-tuning methods.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.545 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.436 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.935 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.589 Zit.