Papers › Integrating Physician Diagnostic Logic into Large Language Models: Preference Learning...

Integrating Physician Diagnostic Logic into Large Language Models: Preference Learning from Process Feedback

11 Jan 2024arXiv:2401.05695archive 2025-07-28

Chengfeng Dou, Zhi Jin, Wenpin Jiao, Haiyan Zhao, Yongqiang Zhao, Zhenwei Tao

The use of large language models in medical dialogue generation has garnered significant attention, with a focus on improving response quality and fluency. While previous studies have made progress in optimizing model performance for single-round medical Q&A tasks, there is a need to enhance the model's capability for multi-round conversations to avoid logical inconsistencies. To address this, we propose an approach called preference learning from process feedback~(PLPF), which integrates the doctor's diagnostic logic into LLMs. PLPF involves rule modeling, preference data generation, and preference alignment to train the model to adhere to the diagnostic process. Experimental results using Standardized Patient Testing show that PLPF enhances the diagnostic accuracy of the baseline model in medical conversations by 17.6%, outperforming traditional reinforcement learning from human feedback. Additionally, PLPF demonstrates effectiveness in both multi-round and single-round dialogue tasks, showcasing its potential for improving medical dialogue generation.

PaperPDFCode

Code

chengfeng-dou/sptesting officialmentioned in paper 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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

DiagnosticDialogue Generation

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Focus

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