arXiv preprint ·
Decision language models as affordable and rapid alternatives to LLM judges of clinical generative AI
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Automated judges of clinical artificial intelligence (AI) outputs are necessary, but large language model (LLM) judges are costly and slow at scale. We compared Jev, a decision language model that returns structured judgments, with frontier and open-weight LLM judges in four use cases. On 118 pediatric answers, Jev's agreement with physicians' ordinal quality ratings (Gwet's AC2 0.50; expected score 0.53) matched or exceeded that of seven of 12 LLM judges, including frontier models, Claude Opus 5.5 (0.49) and GPT-6 (0.38). On physician-graded binary HealthBench criteria, Jev matched or exceeded four of six LLM judges. On MedHELM's open-ended tasks, Jev's agreement with a three-LLM jury approached or exceeded the jurors' internal agreement. On HealthBench Professional, Jev matched the benchmark's reference judge, GPT-5.4, on 91% of criteria (other judges, 91-93%). Frontier judges cost 73-294 times more than Jev and took 7-57 times longer. Jev may enable efficient clinical AI evaluation at scale.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
KPHarness: Co-Evolving Knowledge and Probing for Long-Horizon Gaming Harnesses
VeriEvolve: Evaluator-First Evolution for Tool-Using Agents
The Router Already Knows
Enhancing Cross-Grade Generalization in Banana Variety Classification via Hybrid CNN-Transformers and Knowledge Self-Distillation
Harness Self-Evolution for Long-Horizon Terminal Agents
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.