Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

RPRO:Ranked Preference Reinforcement Optimization for Enhancing Medical QA and Diagnostic Reasoning

Published 31 Aug 2025 in cs.CL | (2509.00974v1)

Abstract: Medical question answering requires advanced reasoning that integrates domain knowledge with logical inference. However, existing LLMs often generate reasoning chains that lack factual accuracy and clinical reliability. We propose Ranked Preference Reinforcement Optimization (RPRO), a novel framework that uniquely combines reinforcement learning with preference-driven reasoning refinement to enhance clinical chain-of-thought (CoT) performance. RPRO differentiates itself from prior approaches by employing task-adaptive reasoning templates and a probabilistic evaluation mechanism that aligns outputs with established clinical workflows, while automatically identifying and correcting low-quality reasoning chains. Unlike traditional pairwise preference methods, RPRO introduces a groupwise ranking optimization based on the Bradley-Terry model and incorporates KL-divergence regularization for stable training. Experiments on PubMedQA and MedQA-USMLE show consistent improvements over strong baselines. Remarkably, our 1.1B parameter model outperforms much larger 7B-13B models, including medical-specialized variants. These findings demonstrate that combining preference optimization with quality-driven refinement offers a scalable and effective approach to building more reliable, clinically grounded medical LLMs.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 5 likes about this paper.