Japanese Stroke LLM Evaluation: A Conversational Benchmark for Safe Stroke Care in Japanese Using Large Language Models
cs.CL
Submitted: 2026-09-15
Updated: 2026-09-15
Code: https://github.com/imy2929/Japanese
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Background: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved physician-comparable performance on multiple-choice medical knowledge examinations, but their capabilities in clinical history taking, urgency
Terminology
Abstract
Background: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved physician-comparable performance on multiple-choice medical knowledge examinations, but their capabilities in clinical history taking, urgency assessment, and safety remain insufficiently evaluated. We proposed Japanese Stroke LLM Evaluation, a multi-turn conversational benchmark for stroke care in Japanese, and evaluated LLM performance and safety under practice-oriented conditions. Methods: We created 10 stroke and related-condition cases and evaluated LLMs in multi-turn Japanese conversations. The LLM acted as physician, while a board-certified neurosurgeon acted as simulated patient and evaluator. Each case comprised history-taking and action phases scored using pre-specified criteria. Errors that could directly threaten life were defined as critical mistakes. The safety threshold was at least 80% overall with zero critical mistakes. Eighteen models were evaluated in October 2025 and June 2026. Results: Claude Fable 5 achieved the highest score (87.4%) with zero critical mistakes, followed by Claude Opus 4.7 (80.3%) and GLM-5.2 (75.6%). Two leaders met the safety threshold. Eleven models made 17 critical mistakes, including failure to confirm laboratory results or blood glucose before t-PA, surgery before airway stabilization, omission of cervical vascular evaluation, and t-PA outside its indication. History-taking question count correlated with history-taking score (r = 0.648, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Japanese Stroke LLM Evaluation provides a benchmark for LLM performance under practice-oriented conditions, including a cap on history-taking questions. Cases and evaluations were created by neurosurgical specialists rather than using an LLM-as-judge approach. Performance improved across cloud-based and on-premise models in 2026, with some exceeding the safety threshold. Further evaluation using real-world cases is required.
Sources
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding
- HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Health
- JMedEthicBench: A Multi-Turn Conversational Benchmark for Evaluating Medical Safety in Japanese Large Language Models
- Active Evidence-Seeking and Diagnostic Reasoning in Large Language Models for Clinical Decision Support
- Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judges
- Filling in the Clinical Gaps in Benchmark: Case for HealthBench for the Japanese medical system
- AgentClinic: a multimodal agent benchmark to evaluate AI in simulated clinical environments
Related papers
- Exploring Solution Divergence and Its Effect on Large Language Model Problem Solving
- Ishigaki-IDS-Bench: A Benchmark for Generating Information Delivery Specification from BIM Information Requirements
- Subliminal Steering: Stronger Encoding of Hidden Signals
- MedStruct-S: A Benchmark for Key Discovery, Key-Conditioned QA and Semi-Structured Extraction from OCR Clinical Reports
- The End of Transformers? On Challenging Attention and the Rise of Sub-Quadratic Architectures
- Untangling the Mechanisms of Misleading Context in Medical Question Answering