Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Jonathan Ilgen

dblp:379/3594 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Question answering and dialogue systems · 50% Language models and text generation · 25% Trustworthy machine learning · 25%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Medical and health informatics · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
interactive question answering
0.812024
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning · NeurIPS 2024
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › trustworthy language model
large language model reliability
0.812024
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning · NeurIPS 2024
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
question asking
0.812024
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › uncertainty estimation
selective classification
0.812024
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning · NeurIPS 2024
Medical and health informatics › clinical decision support
diagnostic decision support
0.212024
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning · NeurIPS 2024
Medical and health informatics › clinical decision-making
medical reasoning
0.212024
MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning · NeurIPS 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

prompting · 1.5confidence estimation · 1.5abstention strategies · 1.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoning
abstract
Users typically engage with LLMs interactively, yet most existing benchmarks evaluate them in a static, single-turn format, posing reliability concerns in interactive scenarios. We identify a key obstacle towards reliability: LLMs are trained to answer any question, even with incomplete context or insufficient knowledge. In this paper, we propose to change the static paradigm to an interactive one, develop systems that proactively ask questions to gather more information and respond reliably, and introduce an benchmark—MEDIQ—to evaluate question-asking ability in LLMs. MEDIQ simulates clinical interactions consisting of a Patient System and an adaptive Expert System; with potentially incomplete initial information, the Expert refrains from making diagnostic decisions when unconfident, and instead elicits missing details via follow-up questions. We provide a pipeline to convert single-turn medical benchmarks into an interactive format. Our results show that directly prompting state-of-the-art LLMs to ask questions degrades performance, indicating that adapting LLMs to proactive information-seeking settings is nontrivial. We experiment with abstention strategies to better estimate model confidence and decide when to ask questions, improving diagnostic accuracy by 22.3%; however, performance still lags compared to an (unrealistic in practice) upper bound with complete information upfront. Further analyses show improved interactive performance with filtering irrelevant contexts and reformatting conversations. Overall, we introduce a novel problem towards LLM reliability, an interactive MEDIQ benchmark and a novel question-asking system, and highlight directions to extend LLMs’ information-seeking abilities in critical domains.
Shuyue Stella Li, Vidhisha Balachandran, Shangbin Feng, Jonathan Ilgen, Emma Pierson, Pang Wei W. Koh, Yulia Tsvetkov
NeurIPS4