Domain-Specific Jargon in Large Language Models: A Comparative Analysis between General-Purpose and Specialist Models
Organizations: Department of Statistics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois · Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable proficiency on general-purpose tasks, yet their performance often degrades in highly-specialized technical domains. Moreover, little is known about how parametric knowledge of domain-specific terms is encoded within these models. We address this gap by contributing two novel medical jargon evaluation benchmarks and evaluate a general-purpose Llama-3.1 model against a variant fine-tuned on medical-domain data. Surprisingly, the general-purpose model outperforms the medically fine-tuned model on both tasks. Using mechanistic interpretability tools, we find systematic patterns of miscalibration for the medically fine-tuned model. Instead of reorganizing parametric knowledge, the fine-tuned model places greater emphasis on a small subset of model components associated with jargon-favoring predictions. We find that applying component reweighting strategies against the benchmark tasks successfully suppresses these components and closes the gap with the general-purpose baseline. We also observe that some jargon-sensitive components transfer knowledge to the same tasks involving materials science jargon, suggesting they encode a partially domain-agnostic notion of specialized terminology. Our results provide a case study in which a medically fine-tuned checkpoint does not improve jargon comprehension over its general-purpose counterpart, highlighting that domain adaptation should not be assumed to yield better performance on specialized terminology.
Figures & tables
| Model | JU | JI |
|---|---|---|
| Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct | 76.1 [73.8, 78.2] | 58.8 [57.0, 60.6] |
| Llama-3.1-8B-UltraMedical | 74.1 [71.8, 76.3] | 53.1 [51.3, 54.9] |
| Instruct | UltraMedical | |
| Total Errors | 197 | 368 |
| False Positives | 1 | 367 |
| False Negatives | 196 | 1 |
| Mean Confidence Margin | 1.64 | 3.04 |
| JU | JI | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Reweighted | Baseline | Reweighted | |
| Instruct | 76.1 | 76.9 [74.7, 79.0] | 58.8 | 57.8 [56.1, 59.6] |
| UltraMedical | 74.1 | 74.2 [71.8, 76.2] | 53.1 | 56.1 [54.3, 57.9] |
| Question | Orig. M. | Rew. M. |
|---|---|---|
| PAST MEDICAL HISTORY: Significant for B-cell lymphoma …history of methadone use, hypertension, anxiety, deconditioning, nicotine addiction , depression, … | 2.01 | 0.0 |
| Assessment of Current Medications: medication administration orders for isosorbide mononitrate …Er tablet , By Mouth, BID, Routine, DATE[Oct 21 07] 10:55:00; heparin 25000 Unit(s) 250 mL … | 1.98 | 0.0 |
| Component | Med-JI | Mat-JI | BoolQ |
|---|---|---|---|
| L20H10 | 0.562 | 0.769 | 0.505 |
| L18H26 | 0.553 | 0.735 | 0.539 |
| L29H16 | 0.532 | 0.673 | 0.533 |
| L26H4 | 0.537 | 0.607 | 0.448 |
| L19H5 | 0.571 | 0.605 | 0.349 |
| L15H11 | 0.552 | 0.619 | 0.531 |
Appendix figures & tables17 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Dataset | Data Description | Size |
| Medical Domain | ||
| README-exp-good | Unfiltered medical jargon data | 113,659 |
| Jargon Dataset | SBERT filtered jargon | 5,977 |
| Non-Jargon Dataset | SBERT filtered non-jargon | 2,095 |
| Train data | 70% split from | 4,183 |
| Test data | 25% split from | 1,495 |
| System Prompt: |
| You are a clinical assistant. Given a medical TERM (jargon), an optional EHR context, and several candidate general definitions, select the single best general definition. Reply with ONE letter only (A, B, C, D, or E) |
| User Input: |
| TERM: aorta |
| EHR CONTEXT: Over the guidewire, a 5-French Sos catheter was reshaped in the descending thoracic aorta and utilized to catheterize an iliolumbar branch extending from the infrarenal abdominal aorta. |
| Choose the best general definition: |
| System Prompt: |
| You are a clinical assistant. Given a TERM from an EHR (Electronic Health Record) note and its context, determine whether the term is medical jargon — specialized medical terminology that a layperson would likely not understand. Answer only with a single letter (A or B). |
| User Input: |
| TERM: stable |
| EHR CONTEXT: The rest of his issues, including his hepatic encephalopathy, hypertension, and hypernutrition, are stable, and he appears to be eating adequately on his own, so we do not need to reinsert his oral gastric tube again. |
| Is this term a medical jargon (specialized terminology a layperson would not understand)? |
| Model | Original | Persona | Question R. | Definition R. | Ordering |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instruct | 58.8 | 58.0 | 60.3 | 60.2 | 58.1 |
| UltraMedical | 53.1 | 53.2 | 51.0 | 51.5 | 53.9 |
| Model | Original | Persona | Question R. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instruct | 76.1 | 74.7 | 76.3 |
| UltraMedical | 74.1 | 74.4 | 74.5 |
| Original System Prompt: |
| You are a clinical assistant. Given a TERM from an EHR (Electronic Health Record) note and its context, determine whether the term is medical jargon — specialized medical terminology that a layperson would likely not understand. Answer only with a single letter (A or B). |
| Modified System Input: |
| (Removed) Given a TERM from an EHR (Electronic Health Record) note and its context, determine whether the term is medical jargon — specialized medical terminology that a layperson would likely not understand. Answer only with a single letter (A or B). |
| Original User Prompt: |
| Is this term a medical jargon (specialized terminology a layperson would not understand)? |
| Modified User Prompt: |
| Would a non-expert reader most likely not understand this term here? |
| Original User Prompt: |
| TERM: aorta |
| EHR CONTEXT: Over the guidewire, a 5-French Sos catheter was reshaped in the descending thoracic aorta and utilized to catheterize an iliolumbar branch extending from the infrarenal abdominal aorta. |
| Choose the best general definition: |
| Modified User Input: |
| TERM: aorta |
| Original System Prompt: |
| You are a clinical assistant.Given a TERM from an EHR (Electronic Health Record) note and its context, determine whether the term is medical jargon — specialized medical terminology that a layperson would likely not understand. Answer only with a single letter (A or B). |
| Modified System Prompt: |
| You are a clinical assistant.Given a TERM from an EHR (Electronic Health Record) note and its context, determine whether the term is medical jargon — a term that a person without medical training would likely not understand. Answer only with a single letter (A or B). |
| Original User Prompt: |
| Is this term a medical jargon (specialized terminology a layperson would not understand)? |
| A) Yes |
| B) No |
| Modified User Prompt: |
| Is this term a medical jargon (specialized terminology a layperson would not understand)? |
| A) No |
| Based on the following term from a materials science abstract, how would you rate its perceived technical complexity? The term should be evaluated as a non-material science term. We are looking for terms that may sound technical but are not themselves materials science entities. Context: [Abstract] Term: [O-tokens] On a scale of 1 to 5, where: |
| 1 = Basic English (e.g., the , however , because ) |
| 2 = Standard academic vocabulary (e.g., study , analyze , method ) |
| 3 = Broad scientific vocabulary (e.g., temperature , velocity , concentration ) |
| 4 = College-level technical vocabulary (e.g., synthesized , configuration , empirical ) |
| 5 = Deceptive hard negative: mimics specialized nomenclature or is jargon from another field, but is not a materials science entity (e.g., stochastic , orthogonal , eigenvector ) Please only respond with a number from 1 to 5. |
| System Prompt: |
| You are a research assistant. Given a TERM from a material science paper abstract and its context, determine whether the term is material science jargon — specialized terminology that a reader outside the field would likely not understand. Answer only with a single letter (A or B). |
| User Input: |
| TERM: couples |
| ABSTRACT CONTEXT: analysis of the temperature dependence of the elastic modulus indicates that in the particular range of carrier concentration there exists a narrow electronic band in the vicinity of the fermi level which couples to the shearing strain exx - eyy . |
| Is this term a material science jargon (specialized terminology a non-expert would not understand)? |
| Question | Logit (Jargon) | Logit (Non-Jargon) |
|---|---|---|
| This is likely a small region of ischemia caused by elevated demand in the context of the current illness, which should resolve without incident … | 29.38 | 23.5 |
| DISCHARGE DIAGNOSIS: Chronic obstructive asthma with exacerbation, obstructive bronchitis, a history of noncompliance with medical treatment, and the necessity for prophylactic vaccination and inoculation against respiratory viruses. | 29.75 | 24.0 |
| Longitudinal incisions were simultaneously made over the PIP joints of 2, 3, 4, and 5, and capsulotomies of the PIP joints were performed. | 30.13 | 20.13 |
| Question | Logit (Jargon) | Logit (Non-Jargon) |
|---|---|---|
| Overlying surgical drain, skin staples, and dressings are applied. … | 33.5 | 37.5 |
| Due to the patient’s element of chronic venostasis disease, approximately 1 week of compression therapy was initiated prior to the surgery to reduce the edema. | 33.75 | 34.25 |
| Rank | Instruct | Accuracy | UltraMedical | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | L26H3 | 75.52% | L31H1 | 72.37% |
| 2 | L17H24 | 75.52% | L26H3 | 71.84% |
| 3 | MLP-29 | 74.45% | MLP-29 | 71.37% |
| 4 | L31H1 | 74.38% | L17H24 | 70.90% |
| 5 | L30H27 | 71.04% | MLP-28 | 70.03% |
| Rank | Instruct | Accuracy | UltraMedical | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | L18H20 | 61.34% | L24H24 | 58.63% |
| 2 | L25H28 | 61.00% | L14H6 | 58.46% |
| 3 | MLP-27 | 60.64% | MLP-19 | 57.86% |
| 4 | L31H1 | 60.47% | L24H26 | 57.39% |
| 5 | L22H19 | 60.03% | L21H17 | 57.26% |
| Jargon Understanding (JU) | Jargon Identification (JI) | |||
| Instruct | UltraMedical | Instruct | UltraMedical | |
| Full model | 76.05% | 74.10% | 58.80% | 53.10% |
| 1 | L17H24 ( ) | L17H24 ( ) | MLP-19 ( ) | L26H3 ( ) |
| 2 | L30H27 ( ) | MLP-29 ( ) | L17H24 ( ) | L31H1 ( ) |
| 3 | MLP-28 ( ) | L22H19 ( ) | L30H26 ( ) | MLP-29 ( ) |
| 4 | L31H1 ( ) | L31H1 ( ) | L26H22 ( ) | L31H3 ( ) |
Domain Adaptation for LLMs
Domain adaptation for large language models tailors their knowledge and behavior to specialized fields, languages, and tasks.
See all 94 papers