This repository contains the code and resources for the MedLingua team's submission to the MedArabiQ2025 Shared Task (Track 2, Sub-Task 1: Multiple Choice Question Answering). Our approach centered on evaluating the zero-shot and few-shot capabilities of various Large Language Models (LLMs) on Arabic medical questions, as fine-tuning was not permitted.
We systematically tested a range of models, from general-purpose state-of-the-art LLMs like Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro to specialized medical models such as BiMediX2 and MedGemma. Our findings reveal that advanced, general-domain models significantly outperform specialized medical LLMs that are not optimized for Arabic. Our best-performing system, using Gemini 2.5 Pro, achieved an accuracy of 74% on the blind test set, securing the third-highest accuracy in the competition.
Our key contributions are as follows:
Our methodology was built entirely on in-context learning. The process follows five key stages: Input Data, Prompt Engineering, LLM Inference, Hierarchical Response Parsing, and Final Output. A key component of our strategy was the use of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, where we instructed models to perform step-by-step reasoning before providing a final answer.
The high-level architecture of our system is illustrated below:
A high-level overview of our data processing pipeline, from input data to the final parsed output.
Our experiments consistently showed that large, general-purpose LLMs outperformed specialized medical models. Our final submission, using Gemini 2.5 Pro, achieved 75% accuracy on the blind test set.
| Model | Test Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | 754 |
| colosseum 355b | 51% |
| palmyra-med-70b-32k | 49% |
| OpenBioLLM 8B | 49% |
| qwen3-235b-a22b | 41% |
| MedGemma | 38% |
| BioMistral | 37% |
| BiMediX2 | 37% |
| deepseek-r1-distill-llama-70b | 22% |
| Model's Name | Fill in the Blank | Multiple Choice | Multiple Choice w/ Bias |
|---|---|---|---|
| qwen/qwen2-32b | 83% | 69% | 67% |
| google/medgemma-27b-it | 76% | 55% | 46% |
| colosseum 355b | 75% | 50% | 45% |
This project is released under the MIT License. For more details, please refer to the LICENSE file.
⚠️ Warning! This work is intended for research purposes. It is not ready for clinical or commercial use. The outputs should not be used for medical diagnoses or treatment decisions without verification by a qualified healthcare professional.
If you use our work in your research, please cite our paper:
@inproceedings{elden2025medlingua,
title={{MedLingua at MedArabiQ2025: Zero- and Few-Shot Prompting of Large Language Models for Arabic Medical QA}},
author={Elden, Fatimah Mohamed Emad and Abukar, Mumina},
year={2025},
booktitle={Proceedings of the MedArabiQ2025 Shared Task},
eprint={25XX.XXXXX},
archivePrefix={arXiv},
primaryClass={cs.CL}
}
This repository contains the code and resources for the MedLingua team's submission to the MedArabiQ2025 Shared Task (Track 2, Sub-Task 1: Multiple Choice Question Answering). Our approach centered on evaluating the zero-shot and few-shot capabilities of various Large Language Models (LLMs) on Arabic medical questions, as fine-tuning was not permitted.
We systematically tested a range of models, from general-purpose state-of-the-art LLMs like Google's Gemini 2.5 Pro to specialized medical models such as BiMediX2 and MedGemma. Our findings reveal that advanced, general-domain models significantly outperform specialized medical LLMs that are not optimized for Arabic. Our best-performing system, using Gemini 2.5 Pro, achieved an accuracy of 74% on the blind test set, securing the third-highest accuracy in the competition.
Our key contributions are as follows:
Our methodology was built entirely on in-context learning. The process follows five key stages: Input Data, Prompt Engineering, LLM Inference, Hierarchical Response Parsing, and Final Output. A key component of our strategy was the use of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, where we instructed models to perform step-by-step reasoning before providing a final answer.
The high-level architecture of our system is illustrated below:
A high-level overview of our data processing pipeline, from input data to the final parsed output.
Our experiments consistently showed that large, general-purpose LLMs outperformed specialized medical models. Our final submission, using Gemini 2.5 Pro, achieved 75% accuracy on the blind test set.
| Model | Test Accuracy |
|---|---|
| Gemini 2.5 Pro | 754 |
| colosseum 355b | 51% |
| palmyra-med-70b-32k | 49% |
| OpenBioLLM 8B | 49% |
| qwen3-235b-a22b | 41% |
| MedGemma | 38% |
| BioMistral | 37% |
| BiMediX2 | 37% |
| deepseek-r1-distill-llama-70b | 22% |
| Model's Name | Fill in the Blank | Multiple Choice | Multiple Choice w/ Bias |
|---|---|---|---|
| qwen/qwen2-32b | 83% | 69% | 67% |
| google/medgemma-27b-it | 76% | 55% | 46% |
| colosseum 355b | 75% | 50% | 45% |
This project is released under the MIT License. For more details, please refer to the LICENSE file.
⚠️ Warning! This work is intended for research purposes. It is not ready for clinical or commercial use. The outputs should not be used for medical diagnoses or treatment decisions without verification by a qualified healthcare professional.
If you use our work in your research, please cite our paper:
@inproceedings{elden2025medlingua,
title={{MedLingua at MedArabiQ2025: Zero- and Few-Shot Prompting of Large Language Models for Arabic Medical QA}},
author={Elden, Fatimah Mohamed Emad and Abukar, Mumina},
year={2025},
booktitle={Proceedings of the MedArabiQ2025 Shared Task},
eprint={25XX.XXXXX},
archivePrefix={arXiv},
primaryClass={cs.CL}
}