Papers › CARES: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Trustworthiness in Medical Vision Language Models

CARES: A Comprehensive Benchmark of Trustworthiness in Medical Vision Language Models

10 Jun 2024arXiv:2406.06007archive 2025-07-28

Peng Xia, Ze Chen, Juanxi Tian, Yangrui Gong, Ruibo Hou, Yue Xu, Zhenbang Wu, Zhiyuan Fan, Yiyang Zhou, Kangyu Zhu, Wenhao Zheng, Zhaoyang Wang, Xiao Wang, Xuchao Zhang, Chetan Bansal, Marc Niethammer, Junzhou Huang, Hongtu Zhu, Yun Li, Jimeng Sun, ZongYuan Ge, Gang Li, James Zou, Huaxiu Yao

Artificial intelligence has significantly impacted medical applications, particularly with the advent of Medical Large Vision Language Models (Med-LVLMs), sparking optimism for the future of automated and personalized healthcare. However, the trustworthiness of Med-LVLMs remains unverified, posing significant risks for future model deployment. In this paper, we introduce CARES and aim to comprehensively evaluate the Trustworthiness of Med-LVLMs across the medical domain. We assess the trustworthiness of Med-LVLMs across five dimensions, including trustfulness, fairness, safety, privacy, and robustness. CARES comprises about 41K question-answer pairs in both closed and open-ended formats, covering 16 medical image modalities and 27 anatomical regions. Our analysis reveals that the models consistently exhibit concerns regarding trustworthiness, often displaying factual inaccuracies and failing to maintain fairness across different demographic groups. Furthermore, they are vulnerable to attacks and demonstrate a lack of privacy awareness. We publicly release our benchmark and code in https://cares-ai.github.io/.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2406.06007")

Code

Syntology Ran 5 of 5 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · violated contract; 2 ran · our draft was wrong.

By repository: official repository: 5 samples from 1 repository, 5 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

richard-peng-xia/cares officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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

5 samples harvested; 5 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 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.

2ran · honoured contract
1ran · violated contract
2ran · our draft was wrong

Licence: 5 of the 5 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 richard-peng-xia/CARES. “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.

find_most_similar_index richard-peng-xia/CARES/src/eval/eval_multichoice.py official repository ran · honoured contract CC-BY-4.0 · pointer only · 6a6b36d9f33ea64a · report
generate_responses richard-peng-xia/cares/src/eval/eval_uncertainty.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong fingerprinted CC-BY-4.0 · pointer only · a5a244faae7f3633 · report
is_refused_response richard-peng-xia/CARES/src/eval/eval_abs.py official repository ran · violated contract CC-BY-4.0 · pointer only · 66ac254ec06f36da · report
load_test_data richard-peng-xia/CARES/src/eval/eval_multichoice.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong CC-BY-4.0 · pointer only · ed60b77b1a3f750d · report
str_similarity richard-peng-xia/CARES/src/eval/eval_multichoice.py official repository ran · honoured contract fingerprinted CC-BY-4.0 · pointer only · 2f7829f62b92f768 · report

Tasks

Fairness

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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