ArticleScientific reports2026
Performance comparison of large language models in boron neutron capture therapy knowledge assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accelerator-based boron neutron capture therapy (BNCT) is a binary radiation therapy that has rapidly developed in recent years. This study systematically evaluated and compared the performance of four mainstream model families [ChatGPT, Bard (Gemini), Claude, and ERNIE Bot] in answering BNCT-related knowledge questions, providing a reference for exploring their potential in BNCT professional education. Forty-seven bilingual BNCT questions covering key concepts, clinical practice, and reasoning tasks were constructed. Four mainstream model families [ ChatGPT, Claude, Bard(Gemini), and ERNIE Bot] were tested across five rounds in two languages and question formats. The accuracy, reasoning ability, uncertainty expression, and version effects were analyzed. ChatGPT (72.8%) and Claude (70.4%) showed significantly higher overall accuracy rates than Bard(Gemini) (62.0%) and ERNIE Bot (55.6%) (p < 0.001). Both high-performance models performed significantly better on reasoning-based questions than on fact-based questions (p < 0.001). The average performance improvement from version updates (7.51 ± 8.46percentage points) was numerically higher than the changes during same-version maintenance (0.61 ± 8.68 percentage points, p = 0.126). Although language and questioning methods showed statistically significant effects, the effect sizes were minimal (η2p < 0.01). Uncertainty acknowledgment rates varied significantly among the model families (4.7%-23.7%, p = 0.003). ChatGPT can provide relatively accurate knowledge for the popularization of BNCT. However, existing general-purpose LLMs still cannot accurately answer all BNCT questions and show significant differences in uncertainty expression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.