Evidence-Grounded Subspecialty Reasoning: Evaluating a Curated Clinical Intelligence Layer on the 2025 Endocrinology Board-Style Examination

Background: Large language models have demonstrated strong performance on general medical examinations, but subspecialty clinical reasoning remains challenging due to rapidly evolving guidelines and nuanced evidence hierarchies. Methods: We evaluated January Mirror, an evidence-grounded clinical reasoning system, against frontier LLMs (GPT-5, GPT-5.2, Gemini-3-Pro) on a 120-question endocrinology board-style examination. Mirror integrates a curated endocrinology and cardiometabolic evidence corpus with a structured reasoning architecture to generate evidence-linked outputs. Mirror operated under a closed-evidence constraint without external retrieval. Comparator LLMs had real-time web access to guidelines and primary literature. Results: Mirror achieved 87.5% accuracy (105/120; 95% CI: 80.4-92.3%), exceeding a human reference of 62.3% and frontier LLMs including GPT-5.2 (74.6%), GPT-5 (74.0%), and Gemini-3-Pro (69.8%). On the 30 most difficult questions (human accuracy less than 50%), Mirror achieved 76.7% accuracy. Top-2 accuracy was 92.5% for Mirror versus 85.25% for GPT-5.2. Conclusions: Mirror provided evidence traceability: 74.2% of outputs cited at least one guideline-tier source, with 100% citation accuracy on manual verification. Curated evidence with explicit provenance can outperform unconstrained web retrieval for subspecialty clinical reasoning and supports auditability for clinical deployment.

January Food Benchmark (JFB): A Public Benchmark Dataset and Evaluation Suite for Multimodal Food Analysis

Progress in AI for automated nutritional analysis is critically hampered by the lack of standardized evaluation methodologies and high-quality, real-world benchmark datasets. To address this, we introduce three primary contributions. First, we present the January Food Benchmark (JFB), a publicly available collection of 1,000 food images with human-validated annotations. Second, we detail a comprehensive benchmarking framework, including robust metrics and a novel, application-oriented overall score designed to assess model performance holistically. Third, we provide baseline results from both general-purpose Vision-Language Models (VLMs) and our own specialized model, january/food-vision-v1. Our evaluation demonstrates that the specialized model achieves an Overall Score of 86.2, a 12.1-point improvement over the best-performing general-purpose configuration. This work offers the research community a valuable new evaluation dataset and a rigorous framework to guide and benchmark future developments in automated nutritional analysis.