Papers › Evaluating the Diagnostic Classification Ability of Multimodal Large Language Models:...

Evaluating the Diagnostic Classification Ability of Multimodal Large Language Models: Insights from the Osteoarthritis Initiative

5 Jan 2026arXiv:2601.02443added by Syntology

Li Wang, Xi Chen, XiangWen Deng, HuaHui Yi, ZeKun Jiang, Kang Li, Jian Li

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) show promising performance on medical visual question answering (VQA) and report generation, but these generation and explanation abilities do not reliably transfer to disease-specific classification. We evaluated MLLM architectures on knee osteoarthritis (OA) radiograph classification, which remains underrepresented in existing medical MLLM benchmarks, even though knee OA affects an estimated 300 to 400 million people worldwide. Through systematic ablation studies manipulating the vision encoder, the connector, and the large language model (LLM) across diverse training strategies, we measured each component's contribution to diagnostic accuracy. In our classification task, a trained vision encoder alone could outperform full MLLM pipelines in classification accuracy and fine-tuning the LLM provided no meaningful improvement over prompt-based guidance. And LoRA fine-tuning on a small, class-balanced dataset (500 images) gave better results than training on a much larger but class-imbalanced set (5,778 images), indicating that data balance and quality can matter more than raw scale for this task. These findings suggest that for domain-specific medical classification, LLMs are more effective as interpreters and report generators rather than as primary classifiers. Therefore, the MLLM architecture appears less suitable for medical image diagnostic classification tasks that demand high certainty. We recommend prioritizing vision encoder optimization and careful dataset curation when developing clinically applicable systems.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

12 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 11 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 12 of the 12 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from wanglihx/LLaVA-OA. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2601.02443, was issued in January 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections