The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2503.10486 · v2 · pith:JZRZ6A2D · submitted 2025-03-13 · cs.CL · cs.AI

LLMs in Disease Diagnosis: A Comparative Study of DeepSeek-R1 and O3 Mini Across Chronic Health Conditions

Reviewed by Pithpith:JZRZ6A2Dopen to challenge →

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords miniaccuracydeepseekdiseaseclassificationllmsclinicalconfidence
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are revolutionizing medical diagnostics by enhancing both disease classification and clinical decision-making. In this study, we evaluate the performance of two LLM- based diagnostic tools, DeepSeek R1 and O3 Mini, using a structured dataset of symptoms and diagnoses. We assessed their predictive accuracy at both the disease and category levels, as well as the reliability of their confidence scores. DeepSeek R1 achieved a disease-level accuracy of 76% and an overall accuracy of 82%, outperforming O3 Mini, which attained 72% and 75% respectively. Notably, DeepSeek R1 demonstrated exceptional performance in Mental Health, Neurological Disorders, and Oncology, where it reached 100% accuracy, while O3 Mini excelled in Autoimmune Disease classification with 100% accuracy. Both models, however, struggled with Respiratory Disease classification, recording accuracies of only 40% for DeepSeek R1 and 20% for O3 Mini. Additionally, the analysis of confidence scores revealed that DeepSeek R1 provided high-confidence predictions in 92% of cases, compared to 68% for O3 Mini. Ethical considerations regarding bias, model interpretability, and data privacy are also discussed to ensure the responsible integration of LLMs into clinical practice. Overall, our findings offer valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of LLM-based diagnostic systems and provide a roadmap for future enhancements in AI-driven healthcare.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Reasoning4Sciences: Bridging Reasoning Language Models to All Scientific Branches

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Survey of RLM adoption in 28 disciplines reveals maturity disparities via a new assessment framework, with focus on development, evaluation, and public resources.

  2. Reasoning4Sciences: Bridging Reasoning Language Models to All Scientific Branches

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A survey of RLM use in 28 disciplines reveals uneven adoption and introduces a maturity assessment framework showing larger gaps when limited to public resources.

  3. CLR-voyance: Reinforcing Open-Ended Reasoning for Inpatient Clinical Decision Support with Outcome-Aware Rubrics

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    CLR-voyance reformulates inpatient reasoning as POMDP with clinician-validated outcome rubrics, yielding an 8B model that outperforms larger frontier models on the authors' new benchmark.