Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2504.21191

Small or Large? Zero-Shot or Finetuned? Guiding Language Model Choice for Specialized Applications in Healthcare

Abstract

This study aims to guide language model selection by investigating: 1) the necessity of finetuning versus zero-shot usage, 2) the benefits of domain-adjacent versus generic pretrained models, 3) the value of further domain-specific pretraining, and 4) the continued relevance of Small Language Models (SLMs) compared to Large Language Models (LLMs) for specific tasks. Using electronic pathology reports from the British Columbia Cancer Registry (BCCR), three classification scenarios with varying difficulty and data size are evaluated. Models include various SLMs and an LLM. SLMs are evaluated both zero-shot and finetuned; the LLM is evaluated zero-shot only. Finetuning significantly improved SLM performance across all scenarios compared to their zero-shot results. The zero-shot LLM outperformed zero-shot SLMs but was consistently outperformed by finetuned SLMs. Domain-adjacent SLMs generally performed better than the generic SLM after finetuning, especially on harder tasks. Further domain-specific pretraining yielded modest gains on easier tasks but significant improvements on the complex, data-scarce task. The results highlight the critical role of finetuning for SLMs in specialized domains, enabling them to surpass zero-shot LLM performance on targeted classification tasks. Pretraining on domain-adjacent or domain-specific data provides further advantages, particularly for complex problems or limited finetuning data. While LLMs offer strong zero-shot capabilities, their performance on these specific tasks did not match that of appropriately finetuned SLMs. In the era of LLMs, SLMs remain relevant and effective, offering a potentially superior performance-resource trade-off compared to LLMs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Lovedeep Gondara, Jonathan Simkin, Graham Sayle, Shebnum Devji, Gregory Arbour, Raymond Ng. 2025-09-24. Small or Large? Zero-Shot or Finetuned? Guiding Language Model Choice for Specialized Applications in Healthcare. https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21191

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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

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