ArticleGigaScience2026
Federated knowledge retrieval elevates large language model performance on biomedical benchmarks.
Article in GigaScience, 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLarge language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing in biomedical research; however, their reliance on implicit, statistical representations often results in factual inaccuracies or hallucinations, posing significant concerns in high-stakes biomedical contexts.
resultsTo overcome these limitations, we developed BioThings Explorer-Retrieval-Augmented Generation (BTE-RAG), a Retrieval-Augmented Generation framework that integrates the reasoning capabilities of advanced language models with explicit mechanistic evidence sourced from BTE, an API federation of more than sixty authoritative biomedical knowledge sources. We systematically evaluated BTE-RAG in comparison to traditional LLM-only methods across three benchmark datasets that we created from DrugMechDB. These datasets specifically targeted gene-centric mechanisms (798 questions), metabolite effects (201 questions), and drug-biological process relationships (842 questions). On the gene-centric task, BTE-RAG increased accuracy from 51 to 75.8% for GPT-4o mini and from 69.8 to 78.6% for GPT-4o. In metabolite-focused questions, the proportion of responses with cosine similarity scores of at least 0.90 rose by 82% for GPT-4o mini and 77% for GPT-4o. While overall accuracy was consistent in the drug-biological process benchmark, the retrieval method enhanced response concordance, producing a greater than 10% increase in high-agreement answers (from 129 to 144) using GPT-4o. We additionally evaluated BTE-RAG alongside GeneGPT-based models on the GeneTuring gene-disease association benchmark and on our mechanistic gene benchmark, demonstrating that the BTE-RAG layer consistently improves accuracy relative to alternative approaches.
conclusionFederated knowledge retrieval provides transparent improvements in accuracy for LLMs, establishing BTE-RAG as a valuable and practical tool for mechanistic exploration and translational biomedical research.
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.