To Generate or to Retrieve? On the Effectiveness of Artificial Contexts for Medical Open-Domain Question Answering
원문 초록
Medical open-domain question answering demands substantial access to specialized knowledge. Recent efforts have sought to decouple knowledge from model parameters, counteracting architectural scaling and allowing for training on common low-resource hardware. The retrieve-then-read paradigm has become ubiquitous, with model predictions grounded on relevant knowledge pieces from external repositories such as PubMed, textbooks, and UMLS. An alternative path, still under-explored but made possible by the advent of domain-specific large language models, entails constructing artificial contexts through prompting. As a result, "to generate or to retrieve" is the modern equivalent of Hamlet's dilemma. This paper presents MedGENIE, the first generate-then-read framework for multiple-choice question answering in medicine. We conduct extensive experiments on MedQA-USMLE, MedMCQA, and MMLU, incorporating a practical perspective by assuming a maximum of 24GB VRAM. MedGENIE sets a new state-of-the-art in the open-book setting of each testbed, allowing a small-scale reader to outcompete zero-shot closed-book 175B baselines while using up to 706$\times$ fewer parameters. Our findings reveal that generated passages are more effective than retrieved ones in attaining higher accuracy.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Instruction Tuning and CoT Prompting for Contextual Medical QA with LLMs
Training-free LLM Merging for Multi-task Learning
TableRAG: A Retrieval Augmented Generation Framework for Heterogeneous Document Reasoning
Med-REFL: Medical Reasoning Enhancement via Self-Corrected Fine-grained Reflection
ECoRAG: Evidentiality-guided Compression for Long Context RAG
Simulating Training Data Leakage in Multiple-Choice Benchmarks for LLM Evaluation
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.