Zhongjing: Enhancing the Chinese Medical Capabilities of Large Language Model through Expert Feedback and Real-world Multi-turn Dialogue
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:ZILGOU5Trecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable breakthroughs in understanding and responding to user intents. However, their performance lag behind general use cases in some expertise domains, such as Chinese medicine. Existing efforts to incorporate Chinese medicine into LLMs rely on Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) with single-turn and distilled dialogue data. These models lack the ability for doctor-like proactive inquiry and multi-turn comprehension and cannot align responses with experts' intentions. In this work, we introduce Zhongjing, the first Chinese medical LLaMA-based LLM that implements an entire training pipeline from continuous pre-training, SFT, to Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). Additionally, we construct a Chinese multi-turn medical dialogue dataset of 70,000 authentic doctor-patient dialogues, CMtMedQA, which significantly enhances the model's capability for complex dialogue and proactive inquiry initiation. We also define a refined annotation rule and evaluation criteria given the unique characteristics of the biomedical domain. Extensive experimental results show that Zhongjing outperforms baselines in various capacities and matches the performance of ChatGPT in some abilities, despite the 100x parameters. Ablation studies also demonstrate the contributions of each component: pre-training enhances medical knowledge, and RLHF further improves instruction-following ability and safety. Our code, datasets, and models are available at https://github.com/SupritYoung/Zhongjing.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Do No Harm? Hallucination and Actor-Level Abuse in Web-Deployed Medical Large Language Models
Evaluation of 6233 MedGPTs finds 25-30% with low factual accuracy, 33.6-54.3% violating operational thresholds, and 57% of action-enabled models lacking privacy disclosures.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.