English

MedQ-Deg: A Multidimensional Benchmark for Evaluating MLLMs Across Medical Image Quality Degradations

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2026-03-10 v1

Abstract

Despite impressive performance on standard benchmarks, multimodal large language models (MLLMs) face critical challenges in real-world clinical environments where medical images inevitably suffer various quality degradations. Existing benchmarks exhibit two key limitations: (1) absence of large-scale, multidimensional assessment across medical image quality gradients and (2) no systematic confidence calibration analysis. To address these gaps, we present MedQ-Deg, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating medical MLLMs under image quality degradations. MedQ-Deg provides multi-dimensional evaluation spanning 18 distinct degradation types, 30 fine-grained capability dimensions, and 7 imaging modalities, with 24,894 question-answer pairs. Each degradation is implemented at 3 severity degrees, calibrated by expert radiologists. We further introduce Calibration Shift metric, which quantifies the gap between a model's perceived confidence and actual performance to assess metacognitive reliability under degradation. Our comprehensive evaluation of 40 mainstream MLLMs reveals several critical findings: (1) overall model performance degrades systematically as degradation severity increases, (2) models universally exhibit the AI Dunning-Kruger Effect, maintaining inappropriately high confidence despite severe accuracy collapse, and (3) models display markedly differentiated behavioral patterns across capability dimensions, imaging modalities, and degradation types. We hope MedQ-Deg drives progress toward medical MLLMs that are robust and trustworthy in real clinical practice.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2603.07769,
  title  = {MedQ-Deg: A Multidimensional Benchmark for Evaluating MLLMs Across Medical Image Quality Degradations},
  author = {Jiyao Liu and Junzhi Ning and Chenglong Ma and Wanying Qu and Jianghan Shen and Siqi Luo and Jinjie Wei and Jin Ye and Pengze Li and Tianbin Li and Jiashi Lin and Hongming Shan and Xinzhe Luo and Xiaohong Liu and Lihao Liu and Junjun He and Ningsheng Xu},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.07769},
  year   = {2026}
}

Comments

29 pages, 11 figures