The model is trained to reason inside <think>...</think> and answer inside
<answer>...</answer>, under this system prompt:
You are a medical reasoning assistant. Work through the clinical problem step by step inside <think>...</think>, grounding every step in established medical knowledge, then give the final, complete answer inside <answer>...</answer>.
Evaluation (historical, descriptive)
Same harness for base and fine-tune: greedy decoding, strict answer prompt, historical
max(head, tail) aggregate extraction with option-text and fuzzy fallbacks.
Table with columns: Benchmark, n (rows), HuatuoGPT-o1-8B (measured), BrainMed-8B-SFT, Difference (points)| Benchmark | n (rows) | HuatuoGPT-o1-8B (measured) | BrainMed-8B-SFT | Difference (points) |
|---|
| MedBullets op4 | 308 | 59.09 | 58.77 | -0.32 |
| MedBullets op5 | 308 | 55.19 | 56.82 | +1.63 |
| MedMCQA (val) | 4183 | 63.30 | 61.20 | -2.10 |
| MedQA 4 options | 1273 | 77.93 | 72.11 | -5.82 |
| MedXpertQA | 1449 | 17.05 | 18.08 | +1.03 |
| PubMedQA | 1000 | 80.20 | 77.10 | -3.10 |
| Macro6 | | 58.79 | 57.35 | -1.45 |
Rows are not independent cases (MedBullets op4/op5 share questions). Checkpoints were compared
on these same tasks; no independent test set was held out. No confidence intervals are
available because per-question predictions are not published here. The measured base is
+2.89 points above its published values on average under this harness, so these numbers must
not be ranked against scores transcribed from other papers.
A plausible, untested explanation for the regression: medical-o1 is part of the base model's
own training pipeline, and this run applies further SFT after the base's RL stage. No
controlled ablation has established the cause.
Full results, every archived run and limitations:
BrainHealthAI/BrainMed-8B — results/REPORT.md.
Data integrity
Training rows: 44,351. Rows overlapping the evaluation benchmarks were kept (upstream
setting). The overlap was measured and is declared below.
Table with columns: Benchmark, items, overlapping training rows| Benchmark | items | overlapping training rows |
|---|
| hle_med | 103 | 30 (29.13%) |
| medbullets_op4 | 308 | 35 (11.36%) |
| medbullets_op5 | 308 | 35 (11.36%) |
| medqa_4opt | 1273 | 1 (0.08%) |
| medqa_5opt | 1273 | 1 (0.08%) |
| medxpertqa | 1449 |
The "clean" score in the evaluation files excludes flagged items. It does not undo training
exposure, unknown base-model exposure or selection on these tasks, and is not an unbiased
estimate. This overlap originates upstream: the MedReason corpus derives reasoning traces from
MMLU-medical, MedXpertQA and Humanity's Last Exam.
Answer-format alignment was applied to 17,083 rows (38.52%): a canonical The answer is X. was
appended where the letter was unambiguously recoverable from options already present in the
question. This is a formatting transformation, not physician validation of the traces.
Intended use
Research on medical-model adaptation and evaluation methodology only. Not for clinical use,
decision support in care, or any decision about a real person.
Citation
@software{brainmed8b2026, title = {BrainMed-8B: medical reasoning adaptation and evaluation pipeline}, author = {BrainResearch}, year = {2026}, url = {https://github.com/BrainHealthAI/BrainMed-8B}}@misc{wu2025medreason, title={MedReason: Eliciting Factual Medical Reasoning Steps in LLMs via Knowledge Graphs}, author={Wu, Juncheng and others}, year={2025}, eprint={2504.00993}, archivePrefix={arXiv}}