mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

MS-Exam-Gen: An Automatic Benchmark Construction Toolkit for Evaluating LLMs on Multiple Sclerosis-MRI Imaging Knowledge

arXiv 2610.06170 ↗First posted 5 Oct 2026cs.AI cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Biomedical large language model (LLM) evaluation requires auditable assessment of narrow, evolving, source-grounded subspecialty knowledge. Multiple sclerosis MRI (MS-MRI) provides a high-stakes textual-knowledge test case because correct reasoning requires current diagnostic criteria, standardized acquisition and reporting knowledge, longitudinal monitoring concepts, lesion morphology, and recognition of difficult mimics. We present MS-Exam-Gen, a reproducible framework for constructing and auditing a text-based multiple-choice question (MCQ) benchmark for MS-MRI knowledge; it does not evaluate direct MRI image interpretation. MS-Exam-Gen targets source-grounded criteria, protocols, reporting, and differential diagnosis. The framework combines expert-source indexing, exam-oriented topic induction, evidence-grounded MCQ generation, automated quality audits, a same-family consistency screen, and empirical calibration. From a 66-source corpus indexed into 4,289 retrieval chunks, the pipeline produced a locked 3,058-item candidate benchmark spanning 16 topics and 53 subtopics. Evaluation across 12 primary LLM endpoints yielded 36,696 item-level predictions and separated performance over a 42.8-percentage-point accuracy range (89.7% to 46.9%). Across these endpoints, 25.5% of items were missed by at least four. Post-generation audits showed that refreshed construction reduced measurable answer cues, while option-order testing showed that absolute MCQ scores remain position-sensitive. Generated construction labels remain metadata rather than validated psychometric categories. Because expert adjudication and full option-order counterbalancing remain future work, MS-Exam-Gen is not a clinically certified examination. It should be interpreted as an automatically filtered, source-grounded candidate benchmark and reproducible audit workflow for item-level and topic-specific LLM evaluation.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Oct 2026.

Builds on

13 of 22 references.

References · 13

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  2. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  3. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  4. 2022Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledgecited by 1,830
  5. 2020What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Examscited by 1,356
  6. 2019PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answeringcited by 1,288
  7. 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 836
  8. 2023Capabilities of GPT-4 on Medical Challenge Problemscited by 638
  9. 2022MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answeringcited by 543
  10. 2023Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectorscited by 486
  11. 2024Judging the Judges: A Systematic Study of Position Bias in LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 269
  12. 2024Large Language Model Benchmarks in Medical Taskscited by 17
1 more
  1. 2024Argus: Benchmarking and Enhancing Vision-Language Models for 3D Radiology Report Generationcited by 10

Built on by

Not cited yet.