Sequential Diagnosis with Language Models
Authors: Harsha Nori, Mayank Daswani, Christopher Kelly, Scott Lundberg, Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Marc Wilson, Xiaoxuan Liu, Viknesh Sounderajah, Jonathan Carlson, Matthew P Lungren, Bay Gross, Peter Hames, Mustafa Suleyman, Dominic King, Eric Horvitz
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- AI has the potential to revolutionize access to expert medical knowledge and reasoning in healthcare.
- Traditional evaluations of language models often fall short in capturing the complexity and nuance of evidence-based medicine in real-world scenarios.
- Researchers have introduced the Sequential Diagnosis Benchmark to bridge the gap between AI capabilities and clinical reality by transforming diagnostically challenging cases into stepwise diagnostic encounters.
- The MAI Diagnostic Orchestrator (MAI-DxO) adds sophistication to the diagnostic process by simulating a panel of physicians, suggesting likely differential diagnoses, and strategically selecting high-value, cost-effective tests.
- MAI-DxO achieves an impressive 80% diagnostic accuracy rate when combined with OpenAI's o3 model, significantly outperforming generalist physicians and traditional AI models.
- MAI-DxO reduces diagnostic costs by 20% compared to traditional physician-led approaches and by 70% compared to off-the-shelf AI models like o3.
- When configured for maximum accuracy, MAI-DxO achieves an outstanding 85.5% accuracy rate across various AI model families such as OpenAI, Gemini, Claude, Grok, DeepSeek, and Llama.
- The research highlights how AI systems can enhance diagnostic precision while improving cost-effectiveness in clinical care settings.
Abstract: Artificial intelligence holds great promise for expanding access to expert medical knowledge and reasoning. However, most evaluations of language models rely on static vignettes and multiple-choice questions that fail to reflect the complexity and nuance of evidence-based medicine in real-world settings. In clinical practice, physicians iteratively formulate and revise diagnostic hypotheses, adapting each subsequent question and test to what they've just learned, and weigh the evolving evidence before committing to a final diagnosis. To emulate this iterative process, we introduce the Sequential Diagnosis Benchmark, which transforms 304 diagnostically challenging New England Journal of Medicine clinicopathological conference (NEJM-CPC) cases into stepwise diagnostic encounters. A physician or AI begins with a short case abstract and must iteratively request additional details from a gatekeeper model that reveals findings only when explicitly queried. Performance is assessed not just by diagnostic accuracy but also by the cost of physician visits and tests performed. We also present the MAI Diagnostic Orchestrator (MAI-DxO), a model-agnostic orchestrator that simulates a panel of physicians, proposes likely differential diagnoses and strategically selects high-value, cost-effective tests. When paired with OpenAI's o3 model, MAI-DxO achieves 80% diagnostic accuracy--four times higher than the 20% average of generalist physicians. MAI-DxO also reduces diagnostic costs by 20% compared to physicians, and 70% compared to off-the-shelf o3. When configured for maximum accuracy, MAI-DxO achieves 85.5% accuracy. These performance gains with MAI-DxO generalize across models from the OpenAI, Gemini, Claude, Grok, DeepSeek, and Llama families. We highlight how AI systems, when guided to think iteratively and act judiciously, can advance diagnostic precision and cost-effectiveness in clinical care.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm compares the title and abstract of this paper with all the papers of the same arXiv category that we have summarized, and finds the closest ones. You can rerun it from time to time: the results improve as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.