Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 2026

Lexical Decision Task for Studying Written Word Recognition in Adults with and without Dementia or Mild Cognitive Impairment
Published on: June 25, 2019
Bigger Is Not Always Better: Computational Efficiency in Lexical Prehospital Triage Modeling
Aaron C Weidman1, Chase Zikmund1, Leonard S Weiss1
1Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States.
Introduction:
In future large-scale combat operations, military medics will likely face staggering numbers of casualties in the face of resource constrained evacuation and forward medical care. Artificial intelligence (AI) may enable triage at scale and improve operational efficiencies. Although many assume that sophisticated large language models (LLMs) hold the most promise, simpler machine learning models (MLMs) may offer advantages in edge implementation because of lower computational burden. Here we search for computational efficiency-achieving equivalent clinical performance with computationally simpler AI-in the domain of on-scene triage.
Materials And Methods:
We conducted a retrospective study via a civilian critical care air transport service from 2012 to 2021 (approved by the University of Pittsburgh IRB). Free-text impressions recorded by treating clinicians and records of patient lifesaving intervention (LSI; e.g., airway management; blood transfusion) were abstracted from the electronic health record. Two modeling approaches were used to predict LSI receipt from medic impression text. MLMs involved using an ensemble classifier model fed with word frequencies. LLMs involved using 2 transformer models (DistilBERT and BioBERT) fed with tokenized word embeddings.
Results:
A total of 12,913 patients were included (mean age = 52.3 years, 63% men). MLMs and LLMs produced broadly equivalent performance in predicting LSI (MLM: AUROC = .793 [.776, .810]; AP = .670 [.643, .695] vs. BioBERT: AUROC = .803 [.796, .816]; AP = .674 [.649, .698]) vs. DistilBERT: AUROC = .803 [.785, .811]; AP = .673 [.651, .688]). Broad predictive equipoise held across 7 independent LSI categories. Yet LLMs required considerably greater computational resources: Model training took 9.42 seconds for MLMs, 3 minutes 57 seconds for DistilBERT, and 7 minutes 14 seconds for BioBERT, whereas model prediction took .048 seconds for MLMs, 7.37 seconds for DistilBERT, and 13.36 seconds for BioBERT.
Conclusions:
Our findings counter the "bigger is better" paradigm in medical AI: MLMs performed equivalently to LLMs in task mirroring on-scene triage while requiring a fraction of the computational resources. Nimble MLMs offer several advantages for military AI, including seamless deployment on edge computing devices and explainable decision support for combat medics. As AI technologies expand across warfighting domains, considerations of computational efficiency are critical to adopt and field new medical capabilities in the forward environment.
Related Concept Videos
Pharmacokinetic Models: Comparison and Selection Criterion
Physiological models take a detailed approach by considering specific molecular processes. They can predict drug distribution, metabolism, and elimination changes, providing a comprehensive understanding of how drugs interact with the body.
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...