# Evaluation of the phi-3-mini SLM for identification of texts related to medicine, health, and sports injuries

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.08764 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.08764/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 12 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 31 Mar 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phone](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14219/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.13138/) (2022)
- [A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03109/) (2023)
- [Adapted Large Language Models Can Outperform Medical Experts in Clinical Text Summarization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07430/) (2023)
- [Opportunities and Challenges for ChatGPT and Large Language Models in Biomedicine and Health](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.10070/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Towards Efficient Multi-LLM Inference: Characterization and Analysis of LLM Routing and Hierarchical Techniques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.06579/) (2025)
- [A Survey of Large Models in Sports](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.14377/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Small Language Models (SLMs) have potential to be used for automatically labelling and identifying aspects of text data for medicine/health-related purposes from documents and the web. As their resource requirements are significantly lower than Large Language Models (LLMs), these can be deployed potentially on more types of devices. SLMs often are benchmarked on health/medicine-related tasks, such as MedQA, although performance on these can vary especially depending on the size of the model in terms of number of parameters. Furthermore, these test results may not necessarily reflect real-world performance regarding the automatic labelling or identification of texts in documents and the web. As a result, we compared topic-relatedness scores from Microsofts phi-3-mini-4k-instruct SLM to the topic-relatedness scores from 7 human evaluators on 1144 samples of medical/health-related texts and 1117 samples of sports injury-related texts. These texts were from a larger dataset of about 9 million news headlines, each of which were processed and assigned scores by phi-3-mini-4k-instruct. Our sample was selected (filtered) based on 1 (low filtering) or more (high filtering) Boolean conditions on the phi-3 SLM scores. We found low-moderate significant correlations between the scores from the SLM and human evaluators for sports injury texts with low filtering (rho = 0.3413, p < 0.001) and medicine/health texts with high filtering (rho = 0.3854, p < 0.001), and low significant correlation for medicine/health texts with low filtering (rho = 0.2255, p < 0.001). There was negligible, insignificant correlation for sports injury-related texts with high filtering (rho = 0.0318, p = 0.4466).