Papers › MultifacetEval: Multifaceted Evaluation to Probe LLMs in Mastering Medical Knowledge

MultifacetEval: Multifaceted Evaluation to Probe LLMs in Mastering Medical Knowledge

5 Jun 2024arXiv:2406.02919archive 2025-07-28

Yuxuan Zhou, Xien Liu, Chen Ning, Ji Wu

Large language models (LLMs) have excelled across domains, also delivering notable performance on the medical evaluation benchmarks, such as MedQA. However, there still exists a significant gap between the reported performance and the practical effectiveness in real-world medical scenarios. In this paper, we aim to explore the causes of this gap by employing a multifaceted examination schema to systematically probe the actual mastery of medical knowledge by current LLMs. Specifically, we develop a novel evaluation framework MultifacetEval to examine the degree and coverage of LLMs in encoding and mastering medical knowledge at multiple facets (comparison, rectification, discrimination, and verification) concurrently. Based on the MultifacetEval framework, we construct two multifaceted evaluation datasets: MultiDiseK (by producing questions from a clinical disease knowledge base) and MultiMedQA (by rephrasing each question from a medical benchmark MedQA into multifaceted questions). The experimental results on these multifaceted datasets demonstrate that the extent of current LLMs in mastering medical knowledge is far below their performance on existing medical benchmarks, suggesting that they lack depth, precision, and comprehensiveness in mastering medical knowledge. Consequently, current LLMs are not yet ready for application in real-world medical tasks. The codes and datasets are available at https://github.com/THUMLP/MultifacetEval.

Code

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

24 samples harvested; 20 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 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: 0 of the 24 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 thumlp/multifaceteval. “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 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