Background We compared the performance, confidence, and response consistency of five chatbots powered by large language models in solving European Diploma in Radiology (EDiR) text-based multiple-response questions. Methods ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-4o-mini, Copilot, Gemini, and Claude 3.5 Sonnet were tested using 52 text-based multiple-response questions from two previous EDiR sessions in two iterations. Chatbots were prompted to evaluate each answer as correct or incorrect and grade its confidence level on a scale of 0 (not confident at all) to 10 (most confident). Scores per question were calculated using a weighted formula that accounted for correct and incorrect answers (range 0.0–1.0). Results Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest score per question (0.84 ± 0.26, mean ± standard deviation) compared to ChatGPT-4o (0.76 ± 0.31), ChatGPT-4o-mini (0.64 ± 0.35), Copilot (0.62 ± 0.37), and Gemini (0.54 ± 0.39) (p < 0.001). A self-reported confidence in answering the questions was 9.0 ± 0.9 for Claude 3.5 Sonnet followed by ChatGPT-4o (8.7 ± 1.1), compared to ChatGPT-4o-mini (8.2 ± 1.3), Copilot (8.2 ± 2.2), and Gemini (8.2 ± 1.6, p < 0.001). Claude 3.5 Sonnet demonstrated superior consistency, changing responses in 5.4% of cases between the two iterations, compared to ChatGPT-4o (6.5%), ChatGPT-4o-mini (8.8%), Copilot (13.8%), and Gemini (18.5%). All chatbots outperformed human candidates from previous EDiR sessions, achieving a passing grade from this part of the examination. Conclusion Claude 3.5 Sonnet exhibited superior accuracy, confidence, and consistency, with ChatGPT-4o performing nearly as well. The variation in performance among the evaluated models was substantial. Relevance statement Variation in performance, consistency, and confidence among chatbots in solving EDiR test-based questions highlights the need for cautious deployment, particularly in high-stakes clinical and educational settings. Key Points <UnorderedList Mark="Bullet"> <ItemContent> Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperformed other chatbots in accuracy and response consistency. </ItemContent> <ItemContent> ChatGPT-4o ranked second, showing strong but slightly less reliable performance. </ItemContent> <ItemContent> All chatbots surpassed EDiR candidates in text-based EDiR questions. </ItemContent> </UnorderedList> Graphical Abstract

Five advanced chatbots solving European Diploma in Radiology (EDiR) text-based questions: differences in performance and consistency

期刊论文
出版模式：

开放获取
发表日期：

2025年8月19日

查看全文

Jakub Pristoupil,
Laura Oleaga,
Vanesa Junquero,
Cristina Merino,
Suha Sureyya Ozbek,
Lukas Lambert

摘要

Background

We compared the performance, confidence, and response consistency of five chatbots powered by large language models in solving European Diploma in Radiology (EDiR) text-based multiple-response questions.

Methods

ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-4o-mini, Copilot, Gemini, and Claude 3.5 Sonnet were tested using 52 text-based multiple-response questions from two previous EDiR sessions in two iterations. Chatbots were prompted to evaluate each answer as correct or incorrect and grade its confidence level on a scale of 0 (not confident at all) to 10 (most confident). Scores per question were calculated using a weighted formula that accounted for correct and incorrect answers (range 0.0–1.0).

Results

Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved the highest score per question (0.84 ± 0.26, mean ± standard deviation) compared to ChatGPT-4o (0.76 ± 0.31), ChatGPT-4o-mini (0.64 ± 0.35), Copilot (0.62 ± 0.37), and Gemini (0.54 ± 0.39) (p < 0.001). A self-reported confidence in answering the questions was 9.0 ± 0.9 for Claude 3.5 Sonnet followed by ChatGPT-4o (8.7 ± 1.1), compared to ChatGPT-4o-mini (8.2 ± 1.3), Copilot (8.2 ± 2.2), and Gemini (8.2 ± 1.6, p < 0.001). Claude 3.5 Sonnet demonstrated superior consistency, changing responses in 5.4% of cases between the two iterations, compared to ChatGPT-4o (6.5%), ChatGPT-4o-mini (8.8%), Copilot (13.8%), and Gemini (18.5%). All chatbots outperformed human candidates from previous EDiR sessions, achieving a passing grade from this part of the examination.

Conclusion

Claude 3.5 Sonnet exhibited superior accuracy, confidence, and consistency, with ChatGPT-4o performing nearly as well. The variation in performance among the evaluated models was substantial.

Relevance statement

Variation in performance, consistency, and confidence among chatbots in solving EDiR test-based questions highlights the need for cautious deployment, particularly in high-stakes clinical and educational settings.

Key Points

Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperformed other chatbots in accuracy and response consistency.

ChatGPT-4o ranked second, showing strong but slightly less reliable performance.

All chatbots surpassed EDiR candidates in text-based EDiR questions.

Graphical Abstract