ClinicalBench C

AI benchmark · Biomedicine

Publisher
Paper Arxiv
Domains
Biomedicine Healthcare
Tier
C why
Snapshot

Full listing name: ClinicalBench: Stress-Testing Assertion-Aware Retrieval for Cross-Admission Clinical QA on MIMIC-IV

What is ClinicalBench?

Reasoning benchmarks measure clinical performance on clean inputs. We evaluate the step before reasoning: retrieval over real EHR notes, where negation, temporality, and family-versus-patient attribution can flip a correct answer to a wrong one. EpiKG carries an assertion label and a temporality tag with every fact in a patient knowledge graph, then routes retrieval by question intent. ClinicalBench is a 400-question test over 43 MIMIC-IV patients across 9 assertion-sensitive categories. A 7-condition ablation tests each piece of EpiKG across six LLMs (Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-OSS 20B, MedGemma 27B, Gemma 4 31B, MedGemma 1.5 4B, Qwen 3.5 35B). Three physicians blindly adjudicated 100 paired items. The author-blind primary endpoint, leave-author-out paired exact McNemar on 50 unanimous-strict items rated by two external physicians, yields +22.0 percentage points (95 percent Newcombe CI [+5.1, +31.5], p=0.0192). The architectural novelty, intent-aware KG-RAG over a Contriever dense-RAG baseline (C2b to C4g_kw on the change-excluded n=362 endpoint), is +8.84 percentage points (paired McNemar p=1.79e-3); +12.43 percentage points under oracle intent. Sensitivities agree directionally: three-rater physician majority +24.0 percentage points (subject to single-author circularity); deterministic keyword reproducibility proxy +39.5 percentage points. Across the six models, the gain shrinks as the LLM-alone baseline rises (beta=-1.123, r=-0.921, p=0.009). With n=6 this looks more like regression to the mean than encoding substituting for model size. Physician adjudication identified 56 percent of auto-generated reference answers as defective, a methodological finding indicating that NLP-pipeline clinical-QA benchmarks require physician adjudication to be usable. ClinicalBench, the frozen evaluator, three-rater adjudication data, and the EpiKG output stack are publicly released.

Tier C

C

Niche: a handful of models scored, or built by an RL vendor.

How much stands behind a tier: usage, who backs it, a confirmed line from its own site or paper, and a clear read on X. High with three of the four, medium with two, low otherwise.

  • 12 models scored
  • in curated RL directories (1 pt)
How we got to tier C
  1. Adoption: 12 models scored. Tier C.
  2. Not yet read on X.
  3. In curated RL directories: 1 point, a floor of none.
  4. Not yet confirmed by a line from its own site or paper.

A clear view on X moves a tier one step up or down; most entries don't move. How tiers work.

Not on the map yet: no line from its own site or paper places it in a domain.

More Biomedicine AI benchmarks

Next: browse all benchmarks. Entry from the RL Research daily scrape of public sources, 2026-10-11 snapshot.