{"title":"评估推理大型语言模型在日本放射学委员会考题中的表现。","authors":"Takeshi Nakaura, Hiroto Takamure, Naoki Kobayashi, Kaori Shiraishi, Naofumi Yoshida, Yasunori Nagayama, Hiroyuki Uetani, Masafumi Kidoh, Yoshinori Funama, Toshinori Hirai","doi":"10.1016/j.acra.2025.04.060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Rationale and objectives: </strong>This study evaluates the performance, cost, and processing time of OpenAI's reasoning large language models (LLMs) (o1-preview, o1-mini) and their base models (GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini) on Japanese radiology board examination questions.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 210 questions from the 2022-2023 official board examinations of the Japan Radiological Society were presented to each of the four LLMs. Performance was evaluated by calculating the percentage of correctly answered questions within six predefined radiology subspecialties. The total cost and processing time for each model were also recorded. The McNemar test was used to assess the statistical significance of differences in accuracy between paired model responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The o1-preview achieved the highest accuracy (85.7%), significantly outperforming GPT-4o (73.3%, P<.001). Similarly, o1-mini (69.5%) performed significantly better than GPT-4o-mini (46.7%, P<.001). Across all radiology subspecialties, o1-preview consistently ranked highest. However, reasoning models incurred substantially higher costs (o1-preview: $17.10, o1-mini: $2.58) compared to their base counterparts (GPT-4o: $0.496, GPT-4o-mini: $0.04), and their processing times were approximately 3.7 and 1.2 times longer, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reasoning LLMs demonstrated markedly superior performance in answering radiology board exam questions compared to their base models, albeit at a substantially higher cost and increased processing time.</p>","PeriodicalId":50928,"journal":{"name":"Academic Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Performance of Reasoning Large Language Models on Japanese Radiology Board Examination Questions.\",\"authors\":\"Takeshi Nakaura, Hiroto Takamure, Naoki Kobayashi, Kaori Shiraishi, Naofumi Yoshida, Yasunori Nagayama, Hiroyuki Uetani, Masafumi Kidoh, Yoshinori Funama, Toshinori Hirai\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acra.2025.04.060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Rationale and objectives: </strong>This study evaluates the performance, cost, and processing time of OpenAI's reasoning large language models (LLMs) (o1-preview, o1-mini) and their base models (GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini) on Japanese radiology board examination questions.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 210 questions from the 2022-2023 official board examinations of the Japan Radiological Society were presented to each of the four LLMs. Performance was evaluated by calculating the percentage of correctly answered questions within six predefined radiology subspecialties. The total cost and processing time for each model were also recorded. The McNemar test was used to assess the statistical significance of differences in accuracy between paired model responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The o1-preview achieved the highest accuracy (85.7%), significantly outperforming GPT-4o (73.3%, P<.001). Similarly, o1-mini (69.5%) performed significantly better than GPT-4o-mini (46.7%, P<.001). Across all radiology subspecialties, o1-preview consistently ranked highest. However, reasoning models incurred substantially higher costs (o1-preview: $17.10, o1-mini: $2.58) compared to their base counterparts (GPT-4o: $0.496, GPT-4o-mini: $0.04), and their processing times were approximately 3.7 and 1.2 times longer, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Reasoning LLMs demonstrated markedly superior performance in answering radiology board exam questions compared to their base models, albeit at a substantially higher cost and increased processing time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2025.04.060\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2025.04.060","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the Performance of Reasoning Large Language Models on Japanese Radiology Board Examination Questions.
Rationale and objectives: This study evaluates the performance, cost, and processing time of OpenAI's reasoning large language models (LLMs) (o1-preview, o1-mini) and their base models (GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini) on Japanese radiology board examination questions.
Materials and methods: A total of 210 questions from the 2022-2023 official board examinations of the Japan Radiological Society were presented to each of the four LLMs. Performance was evaluated by calculating the percentage of correctly answered questions within six predefined radiology subspecialties. The total cost and processing time for each model were also recorded. The McNemar test was used to assess the statistical significance of differences in accuracy between paired model responses.
Results: The o1-preview achieved the highest accuracy (85.7%), significantly outperforming GPT-4o (73.3%, P<.001). Similarly, o1-mini (69.5%) performed significantly better than GPT-4o-mini (46.7%, P<.001). Across all radiology subspecialties, o1-preview consistently ranked highest. However, reasoning models incurred substantially higher costs (o1-preview: $17.10, o1-mini: $2.58) compared to their base counterparts (GPT-4o: $0.496, GPT-4o-mini: $0.04), and their processing times were approximately 3.7 and 1.2 times longer, respectively.
Conclusion: Reasoning LLMs demonstrated markedly superior performance in answering radiology board exam questions compared to their base models, albeit at a substantially higher cost and increased processing time.
期刊介绍:
Academic Radiology publishes original reports of clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, image-guided interventions and related techniques. It also includes brief technical reports describing original observations, techniques, and instrumental developments; state-of-the-art reports on clinical issues, new technology and other topics of current medical importance; meta-analyses; scientific studies and opinions on radiologic education; and letters to the Editor.