Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

OmniMedVQA: A New Large-Scale Comprehensive Evaluation Benchmark for Medical LVLM

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.09181 v2 pith:DM4YT2LE submitted 2024-02-14 eess.IV cs.CV

classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords medicalbenchmarklvlmsimageslvlmanatomicalcomprehensivedataset
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in various multimodal tasks. However, their potential in the medical domain remains largely unexplored. A significant challenge arises from the scarcity of diverse medical images spanning various modalities and anatomical regions, which is essential in real-world medical applications. To solve this problem, in this paper, we introduce OmniMedVQA, a novel comprehensive medical Visual Question Answering (VQA) benchmark. This benchmark is collected from 73 different medical datasets, including 12 different modalities and covering more than 20 distinct anatomical regions. Importantly, all images in this benchmark are sourced from authentic medical scenarios, ensuring alignment with the requirements of the medical field and suitability for evaluating LVLMs. Through our extensive experiments, we have found that existing LVLMs struggle to address these medical VQA problems effectively. Moreover, what surprises us is that medical-specialized LVLMs even exhibit inferior performance to those general-domain models, calling for a more versatile and robust LVLM in the biomedical field. The evaluation results not only reveal the current limitations of LVLM in understanding real medical images but also highlight our dataset's significance. Our code with dataset are available at https://github.com/OpenGVLab/Multi-Modality-Arena.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. MedRealMM: A Real-World Multimodal Benchmark for Chinese Online Medical Consultation

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    On a new benchmark of 5,620 real multimodal online consultations, top LLMs trail the original physicians mainly because they trigger more unsafe or unsupported negative criteria.

  2. CLIR-Bench: Benchmarking Multimodal Question Answering over Irregular Clinical Time Series

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CLIR-Bench shows generalist and time-series LLMs struggle to ground clinical answers in sparse irregular ICU evidence, with top accuracy near 50% and weak causal evidence use.

  3. RA-QA: A Benchmarking System for Respiratory Audio Question Answering Under Real-World Heterogeneity

    cs.SD 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RA-QA converts 11 public respiratory-audio datasets into 9M template-generated QA pairs and shows current audio-language models score near zero on clinical task accuracy.

  4. MedBookVQA: A Systematic and Comprehensive Medical Benchmark Derived from Open-Access Book

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MedBookVQA is a new 5,000-question, textbook-derived multimodal benchmark for testing medical AI systems, with labels for imaging modality, body anatomy, and clinical specialty.

  5. Objective-Aligned Direct Answer SFT for Robust Multi-Frame Medical VQA

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Direct answer-only supervised fine-tuning is the most robust adaptation family on MedFrameQA, beating frozen baselines by ~6 points and outperforming complex variants on seed stability.

  6. Inference-Time Agentic Decision Rules Beat Longer Evolving Search for Multi-Image Medical Reasoning

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    On MedFrameQA, order-vote (57.89%) beats fixed prompting (52.73%) and order-rerank (55.79%), and a single 100-generation run drops final-test accuracy to 56.02%.

Pith tools