Shu Zhao
Publications
A Vision-Language Foundation Model for Zero-shot Clinical Collaboration and Automated Concept Discovery in Dermatology
Medical foundation models have shown promise in controlled benchmarks, yet widespread deployment remains hindered by reliance on task-specific fine-tuning. Here, we introduce DermFM-Zero, a dermatology vision-language foundation model trained via masked latent modelling and contrastive learning on over 4 million multimodal data points. We evaluated DermFM-Zero across 20 benchmarks spanning zero-shot diagnosis and multimodal retrieval, achieving state-of-the-art performance without task-specific adaptation. We further evaluated its zero-shot capabilities in three multinational reader studies involving over 1,100 clinicians. In primary care settings, AI assistance enabled general practitioners to nearly double their differential diagnostic accuracy across 98 skin conditions. In specialist settings, the model significantly outperformed board-certified dermatologists in multimodal skin cancer assessment. In collaborative workflows, AI assistance enabled non-experts to surpass unassisted experts while improving management appropriateness. Finally, we show that DermFM-Zero's latent representations are interpretable: sparse autoencoders unsupervisedly disentangle clinically meaningful concepts that outperform predefined-vocabulary approaches and enable targeted suppression of artifact-induced biases, enhancing robustness without retraining. These findings demonstrate that a foundation model can provide effective, safe, and transparent zero-shot clinical decision support.
RPC-Bench: A Fine-grained Benchmark for Research Paper Comprehension
Understanding research papers remains challenging for foundation models due to specialized scientific discourse and complex figures and tables, yet existing benchmarks offer limited fine-grained evaluation at scale. To address this gap, we introduce RPC-Bench, a large-scale question-answering benchmark built from review-rebuttal exchanges of high-quality computer science papers, containing 15K human-verified QA pairs. We design a fine-grained taxonomy aligned with the scientific research flow to assess models' ability to understand and answer why, what, and how questions in scholarly contexts. We also define an elaborate LLM-human interaction annotation framework to support large-scale labeling and quality control. Following the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm, we develop a scalable framework that evaluates models on correctness-completeness and conciseness, with high agreement to human judgment. Experiments reveal that even the strongest models (GPT-5) achieve only 68.2% correctness-completeness, dropping to 37.46% after conciseness adjustment, highlighting substantial gaps in precise academic paper understanding. Our code and data are available at https://rpc-bench.github.io/.