[A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Performance of Large Language Models on the Japanese National Examination for Radiological Technologists].

Taku Kuramoto, Shinya Takarabe, Rikito Katsuda, Nao Ichikawa, Hiroyuki Tsushima
{"title":"[A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Performance of Large Language Models on the Japanese National Examination for Radiological Technologists].","authors":"Taku Kuramoto, Shinya Takarabe, Rikito Katsuda, Nao Ichikawa, Hiroyuki Tsushima","doi":"10.6009/jjrt.26-1639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the performance of several large language models (LLMs) on the Japanese National Examination for Radiological Technologists and to characterize their performance profiles.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We utilized a dataset comprising questions from 12 consecutive years of the national examination (the 65th to the 76th iterations), excluding items that were officially retracted or deemed inappropriate. 5 distinct LLMs (ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Copilot, and Claude Sonnet 4) were prompted to answer these questions. The accuracy of each LLM was calculated for the entire question set and for subsets categorized by question format.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across the entire examination and within numerous subject areas, Gemini 2.5 Pro achieved the highest accuracy. An analysis by question format revealed a general trend: most LLMs demonstrated superior performance on text-based questions, followed by calculation-based and then image-based questions. However, some models exhibited notably strong performance specifically on calculation-based problems.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While LLMs demonstrate considerable proficiency in answering questions from the National Examination for Radiological Technologists, our findings also reveal significant limitations, particularly in their capacity to interpret image-based problems. This study highlights both the potential utility and the current challenges of leveraging LLMs as supplementary learning tools for this professional certification examination.</p>","PeriodicalId":74309,"journal":{"name":"Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi","volume":"82 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.26-1639","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of several large language models (LLMs) on the Japanese National Examination for Radiological Technologists and to characterize their performance profiles.

Methods: We utilized a dataset comprising questions from 12 consecutive years of the national examination (the 65th to the 76th iterations), excluding items that were officially retracted or deemed inappropriate. 5 distinct LLMs (ChatGPT-3.5, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Copilot, and Claude Sonnet 4) were prompted to answer these questions. The accuracy of each LLM was calculated for the entire question set and for subsets categorized by question format.

Results: Across the entire examination and within numerous subject areas, Gemini 2.5 Pro achieved the highest accuracy. An analysis by question format revealed a general trend: most LLMs demonstrated superior performance on text-based questions, followed by calculation-based and then image-based questions. However, some models exhibited notably strong performance specifically on calculation-based problems.

Conclusion: While LLMs demonstrate considerable proficiency in answering questions from the National Examination for Radiological Technologists, our findings also reveal significant limitations, particularly in their capacity to interpret image-based problems. This study highlights both the potential utility and the current challenges of leveraging LLMs as supplementary learning tools for this professional certification examination.

[大型语言模型在日本国家放射技师考试中的综合评价]。
目的:本研究旨在评估几个大型语言模型(llm)在日本国家放射技师考试中的表现,并描述其表现概况。方法:我们使用的数据集包括连续12年的国家考试(第65次至第76次)的问题,不包括正式撤回或被认为不合适的项目。5个不同的法学硕士(ChatGPT-3.5、Gemini 2.5 Flash、Gemini 2.5 Pro、Copilot和Claude Sonnet 4)被要求回答这些问题。每个LLM的准确性是为整个问题集和按问题格式分类的子集计算的。结果:在整个考试和众多学科领域中,Gemini 2.5 Pro达到了最高的准确性。对题目格式的分析揭示了一个总体趋势:大多数法学硕士在基于文本的问题上表现优异,其次是基于计算的问题,然后是基于图像的问题。然而,一些模型在基于计算的问题上表现出了显著的强大性能。结论:虽然法学硕士在回答国家放射技师考试的问题上表现得相当熟练,但我们的研究结果也揭示了显著的局限性,特别是在解释基于图像的问题方面。这项研究强调了利用法学硕士作为专业认证考试的补充学习工具的潜在效用和当前的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书