Back to search

Article

Cardiology Knowledge Assessment of Retrieval-Augmented Open versus Proprietary Large Language Models

2025-09-12

Abstract excerpt

<h4>Objectives</h4> To evaluate the performance of open and proprietary LLMs, with and without Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), on cardiology board-style questions and benchmark them against the human average. <h4>Materials and Methods</h4> We tested 14 LLMs (6 open-weight, 8 proprietary) on 449 multiple-choice questions from the American College of Cardiology Self-Assessment Program (ACCSAP). Accuracy was...

Topics

Open a Topic to create a Post that cites this publication.

Identifiers and source

Literature Corpus work
225d3f3b-16c7-5ee0-9eaa-07e44701c87d
DOI
10.1101/2025.09.11.25335607
Open publication

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest
Interactive article relationship graphSelect a related publication card to move it into the centre and load its closest explainable connections. Solid lines are source-backed structured connections. Dashed lines are semantic discovery signals and are not scientific evidence.
Cardiology Knowledge Assessment of Retrieval-Augmented Open versus Proprietary Large Language ModelsDOI 10.1101/2025.09.11.25335607
Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.