MIMIC-CXR report generation
Models write the findings of a radiology report for a MIMIC-CXR chest X-ray. Scored against the radiologist's report, most often by RadGraph F1.
Google reports RadGraph F1 on a 912-image test set from Tanno et al. (2024). Other reports use other splits and metrics, so check the split before comparing.
In the authors’ words
Chest radiography is an extremely powerful imaging modality, allowing for a detailed inspection of a patient's thorax, but requiring specialized training for proper interpretation. With the advent of high performance general purpose computer vision algorithms, the accurate automated analysis of chest radiographs is becoming increasingly of interest to researchers. However, a key challenge in the development of these techniques is the lack of sufficient data. Here we describe MIMIC-CXR-JPG v2.0.0, a large dataset of 377,110 chest x-rays associated with 227,827 imaging studies sourced from the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center between 2011 - 2016. Images are provided with 14 labels derived from two natural language processing tools applied to the corresponding free-text radiology reports. MIMIC-CXR-JPG is derived entirely from the MIMIC-CXR database, and aims to provide a convenient processed version of MIMIC-CXR, as well as to provide a standard reference for data splits and image labels. All images have been de-identified to protect patient privacy. The dataset is made freely available to facilitate and encourage a wide range of research in medical computer vision.
- Level
- Expert Specialists with years of training, often over hours of work
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
No scores here yet
No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for MIMIC-CXR report generation yet.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
More in Law, finance and medicine
- HealthBench Professional In use 525 physician-authored tasks from real clinician chats (care consult, documentation, research) with physician-adjudicated rubrics. Claude Sonnet 5.5 69.2%
- MedXpertQA-MM In use Models answer expert-level medical exam questions that combine images with clinical records and test results. Scoring is accuracy.
Qwen 3.8 Max 80.4% - HealthBench In use 5,000 realistic health conversations graded against physician-written rubrics. A length-adjusted variant penalizes verbosity. GPT-5 67.2%
- KBL In use Models answer Korean legal knowledge and reasoning tasks and Korean bar exam questions. It has 7 knowledge tasks, 4 reasoning tasks and 2,510 bar exam items.
Solar Pro 4 77.5% - KorMedMCQA In use Models answer 7,469 multiple-choice questions from Korean licensing exams for doctors, nurses, pharmacists and dentists, held from 2012 to 2024. Solar Pro 4 93.2%
- PRBench In use Model answers 1,100 expert-written law and finance questions. LLM judge grades against weighted expert rubrics of 10-30 criteria each.
Muse Spark 1.3 61.6%