MRI-Eval C

AI benchmark · Biomedicine

Publisher
Paper Arxiv
Domains
Biomedicine Healthcare
Tier
C why
Snapshot

What is MRI-Eval?

Background: Existing MRI LLM benchmarks rely mainly on review-book multiple-choice questions, where top proprietary models already score highly, limiting discrimination. No systematic benchmark has evaluated vendor-specific scanner operational knowledge central to research MRI practice. Purpose: We developed MRI-Eval, a tiered benchmark for relative model comparison on MRI physics and GE scanner operations knowledge using primary multiple-choice questions (MCQ), with stem-only and primed diagnostic conditions as complementary analyses. Methods: MRI-Eval includes 1365 scored items across nine categories and three difficulty tiers from textbooks, GE scanner manuals, programming course materials, and expert-generated questions. Five model families were evaluated (GPT-5.4, Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Llama 3.3 70B). MCQ was primary; stem-only removed options and used an independent LLM judge; primed stem-only tested responses to incorrect user claims. Results: Overall MCQ accuracy was 93.2% to 97.1%. GE scanner operations was the lowest category for every model (88.2% to 94.6%). In stem-only, frontier-model accuracy fell to 58.4% to 61.1%, and Llama 3.3 70B fell to 37.1%; GE scanner operations stem-only accuracy was 13.8% to 29.8%. Conclusion: High MCQ performance can mask weak free-text recall, especially for vendor-specific operational knowledge. MRI-Eval is most informative as a relative comparison benchmark rather than an absolute competency measure and supports caution in using raw LLM outputs for GE-specific protocol guidance.

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.

  • 5 models scored
  • in curated RL directories (1 pt)
How we got to tier C
  1. Adoption: 5 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.