CLExEval: A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for Qualitative Evaluation of LLM Clinical Reasoning
Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong results on many medical benchmarks, but their clinical reasoning remains difficult to evaluate reliably. A central risk is an evaluation illusion: fluent and well-structured explanations can appear clinically convincing even when the final diagnosis is incorrect. We introduce CLExEval, a human-in-the-loop framework for evaluating LLM clinical reasoning under progressive information masking. CLExEval combines 5,600 expert-physician annotations with 200 clinical reasoning traces derived from 40 rare diagnostic cases. Our analysis identifies three recur
Lineage graph
Paper → model → repo connections mined from source citations (Tier-1 exact match).
Why these links exist
Every edge carries a method, confidence, and the source snippet that justified it — so bad links are debuggable.
- LinkedLinked via unknownUsing AI to help physicians diagnose rare genetic diseases affecting children →
- LinkedLinked via unknownTowards AI-augmented decision making in psychiatry →
- FuzzySimilar title/name (fuzzy) · 59%rasbt/reasoning-from-scratch →
“Fuzzy title match (0.73): “CLExEval: A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for Qualitative Eval” ≈ “rasbt/reasoning-from-scratch””
- PossiblePossibly related (embedding) · 46%Open-weight 4B models approach o3-level medical question answering in Swedish [P] →
