Skip to content

1 paper indexed here

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Open access Aug 2026

Reasoning vs. conventional large language models for BI-RADS educational questions answering: a multi-model comparative evaluation

To compare reasoning vs. conventional large language models (LLMs) in generating answers with guideline-aligned explanations for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) educational questions. In this prospective study performed from February 6 to 12, 2025, 49 English-Chinese question pairs were extracted from BI-RADS Atlas Fifth Edition. Two reasoning LLMs (ChatGPT-o1, Deepseek-R1) and six conventional LLMs (Gemini2.0-Flash, Deepseek-V3, ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-3.5, Qwen-2.5, and WenXinYiYan-3.5) generated answers and explanations to the questions through structured prompts. Three radiologists specialized in breast imaging independently evaluated responses using a 5-point Likert scale, with reference to standard answers. The reasoning LLMs significantly outperformed conventional models (median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 3.7 [2.7–4.0] vs. 2.7 [2.0–3.7], P  < 0.001), with ChatGPT-o1 and Deepseek-R1 demonstrating peak performance. Both categories of LLMs exhibited significant score reductions in handling questions with multifaceted clinical scenarios (reasoning models: median 4.0 [2.7–4.3] vs. 2.7 [2.3–2.7], Δ median = −1.3, P  < 0.001; conventional models: 2.7 [2.0–3.7] vs. 2.3 [2.0–2.7], Δ median = −0.4, P  < 0.001). While question language showed no significant impact on reasoning LLMs (ChatGPT-o1 and Deepseek-R1), it affected some conventional models (ChatGPT-3.5, Deepseek-V3 and Gemini2.0-Flash). LLMs performance remained independent of question section and question type. Reasoning LLMs show significant potential for BI-RADS guideline explanation and education, but require specific optimization for complex clinical scenario instruction.

Yu-Xia Tang, Yu-Ting Liu, Meng-Xuan Liu et al. · 0 citations