Aniket Kumar Singh

Aniket Kumar Singh, Suman Devkota, Bishal Lamichhane et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have acquired ubiquitous attention for their performances across diverse domains. Our study here searches through LLMs' cognitive abilities and confidence dynamics. We dive deep into understanding the alignment between their self-assessed confidence and actual performance. We exploit these models with diverse sets of questionnaires and real-world scenarios and extract how LLMs exhibit confidence in their responses. Our findings reveal intriguing instances where models demonstrate high confidence even when they answer incorrectly. This is reminiscent of the Dunning-Kruger effect observed in human psychology. In contrast, there are cases where models exhibit low confidence with correct answers revealing potential underestimation biases. Our results underscore the need for a deeper understanding of their cognitive processes. By examining the nuances of LLMs' self-assessment mechanism, this investigation provides noteworthy revelations that serve to advance the functionalities and broaden the potential applications of these formidable language models.

Gaurav Kumar Gupta, Pranal Pande, Nirajan Acharya et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are revolutionizing medical diagnostics by enhancing both disease classification and clinical decision-making. In this study, we evaluate the performance of two LLM- based diagnostic tools, DeepSeek R1 and O3 Mini, using a structured dataset of symptoms and diagnoses. We assessed their predictive accuracy at both the disease and category levels, as well as the reliability of their confidence scores. DeepSeek R1 achieved a disease-level accuracy of 76% and an overall accuracy of 82%, outperforming O3 Mini, which attained 72% and 75% respectively. Notably, DeepSeek R1 demonstrated exceptional performance in Mental Health, Neurological Disorders, and Oncology, where it reached 100% accuracy, while O3 Mini excelled in Autoimmune Disease classification with 100% accuracy. Both models, however, struggled with Respiratory Disease classification, recording accuracies of only 40% for DeepSeek R1 and 20% for O3 Mini. Additionally, the analysis of confidence scores revealed that DeepSeek R1 provided high-confidence predictions in 92% of cases, compared to 68% for O3 Mini. Ethical considerations regarding bias, model interpretability, and data privacy are also discussed to ensure the responsible integration of LLMs into clinical practice. Overall, our findings offer valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of LLM-based diagnostic systems and provide a roadmap for future enhancements in AI-driven healthcare.

Uttam Dhakal, Aniket Kumar Singh, Suman Devkota et al.

This study investigates GPT-4's assessment of its performance in healthcare applications. A simple prompting technique was used to prompt the LLM with questions taken from the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) questionnaire and it was tasked to evaluate its confidence score before posing the question and after asking the question. The questionnaire was categorized into two groups-questions with feedback (WF) and questions with no feedback(NF) post-question. The model was asked to provide absolute and relative confidence scores before and after each question. The experimental findings were analyzed using statistical tools to study the variability of confidence in WF and NF groups. Additionally, a sequential analysis was conducted to observe the performance variation for the WF and NF groups. Results indicate that feedback influences relative confidence but doesn't consistently increase or decrease it. Understanding the performance of LLM is paramount in exploring its utility in sensitive areas like healthcare. This study contributes to the ongoing discourse on the reliability of AI, particularly of LLMs like GPT-4, within healthcare, offering insights into how feedback mechanisms might be optimized to enhance AI-assisted medical education and decision support.