Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2501.00199

GPT-4 on Clinic Depression Assessment: An LLM-Based Pilot Study

Giuliano Lorenzoni·Pedro Elkind Velmovitsky·Paulo Alencar·Donald Cowan
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Depression has impacted millions of people worldwide and has become one of the most prevalent mental disorders. Early mental disorder detection can lead to cost savings for public health agencies and avoid the onset of other major comorbidities. Additionally, the shortage of specialized personnel is a critical issue because clinical depression diagnosis is highly dependent on expert professionals and is time consuming. In this study, we explore the use of GPT-4 for clinical depression assessment based on transcript analysis. We examine the model's ability to classify patient interviews into binary categories: depressed and not depressed. A comparative analysis is conducted considering prompt complexity (e.g., using both simple and complex prompts) as well as varied temperature settings to assess the impact of prompt complexity and randomness on the model's performance. Results indicate that GPT-4 exhibits considerable variability in accuracy and F1-Score across configurations, with optimal performance observed at lower temperature values (0.0-0.2) for complex prompts. However, beyond a certain threshold (temperature >= 0.3), the relationship between randomness and performance becomes unpredictable, diminishing the gains from prompt complexity. These findings suggest that, while GPT-4 shows promise for clinical assessment, the configuration of the prompts and model parameters requires careful calibration to ensure consistent results. This preliminary study contributes to understanding the dynamics between prompt engineering and large language models, offering insights for future development of AI-powered tools in clinical settings.

Explore related subjects

cs.CLcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Giuliano Lorenzoni, Pedro Elkind Velmovitsky, Paulo Alencar, Donald Cowan. 2024-12-31. GPT-4 on Clinic Depression Assessment: An LLM-Based Pilot Study. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.00199

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

DA-Cramming: Enhancing Cost-Effective Language Model Pretraining with Dependency Agreement Integration

Pretraining language models is still a challenge for many researchers due to its substantial computational costs. As such, there is growing interest in developing more affordable pretraining methods. One notable advancement in this area is the Cramming technique (Geiping and Goldstein, 2022), which enables the pretraining of BERT-style language models using just one GPU in a single day. Building on this innovative approach, we introduce the Dependency Agreement Cramming (DA-Cramming), an efficient framework that integrates information about dependency agreements into the pretraining process. Unlike existing methods that leverage similar semantic information during finetuning, our approach represents a pioneering effort focusing on enhancing the foundational language understanding with semantic information during pretraining. We meticulously design a dual-stage pretraining work flow with four dedicated submodels to capture representative dependency agreements at the chunk level, effectively transforming these agreements into embeddings to benefit the pretraining. Extensive empirical results demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms previous methods across various tasks.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

BigO(Bench): Can LLMs Generate Code with Controlled Time and Space Complexity?

We introduce BigO(Bench), a novel coding benchmark designed to evaluate the capabilities of generative language models in understanding and generating code with specified time and space complexities. This benchmark addresses the gap in current evaluations that often overlook the ability of models to comprehend and produce code constrained by computational complexity. BigO(Bench) includes tooling to infer the algorithmic complexity of any Python function from profiling measurements, including human- or LLM-generated solutions. BigO(Bench) also includes of set of 3,105 coding problems and 1,190,250 solutions from Code Contests annotated with inferred (synthetic) time and space complexity labels from the complexity framework, as well as corresponding runtime and memory footprint values for a large set of input sizes. We present results from evaluating multiple state-of-the-art language models on this benchmark, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses in handling complexity requirements. In particular, token-space reasoning models are unrivaled in code generation but not in complexity understanding, hinting that they may not generalize well to tasks for which no reward was given at training time.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

SafetyFlow: An Agent-Flow System for Automated LLM Safety Benchmarking

The rapid proliferation of large language models (LLMs) has intensified the requirement for reliable safety evaluation to uncover model vulnerabilities. To this end, numerous LLM safety evaluation benchmarks are proposed. However, existing benchmarks generally rely on labor-intensive manual curation, which causes excessive time and resource consumption. They also exhibit significant redundancy and limited difficulty. To alleviate these problems, we introduce SafetyFlow, the first agent-flow system designed to automate the construction of LLM safety benchmarks. SafetyFlow can automatically build a comprehensive safety benchmark in only four days without any human intervention by orchestrating seven specialized agents, significantly reducing time and resource cost. Equipped with versatile tools, the agents of SafetyFlow ensure process and cost controllability while integrating human expertise into the automatic pipeline. The final constructed dataset, SafetyFlowBench, contains 23,446 queries with low redundancy and strong discriminative power. Our contribution includes the first fully automated benchmarking pipeline and a comprehensive safety benchmark. We evaluate the safety of 49 advanced LLMs on our dataset and conduct extensive experiments to validate our efficacy and efficiency.

cs.CL↗