.png){kind=small}
BizFit QA Benchmark
Domain-specific question answering evaluation across legal, financial, and medical professional contexts with emphasis on accuracy, compliance, and expert-level reasoning.
Performance Rankings
Comprehensive evaluation of professional domain expertise across legal, financial, and medical question answering
Detailed Breakdown
| Rank | Model | Provider | Overall Score | Legal | Financial | Medical | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
#1 | o4-mini (medium) | OpenAI | 41.7 | 44.2 | 40.8 | 40.1 | ±1.8 |
#2 | DeepSeek-R1-0528 | DeepSeek | 39.3 | 38.7 | 41.2 | 38 | ±1.3 |
#3 | GPT-4.5 Preview | OpenAI | 37.8 | 39.1 | 37.4 | 36.9 | ±1.6 |
#4 | Claude Opus 4 | Anthropic | 36.5 | 37.2 | 36.8 | 35.5 | ±1.4 |
#5 | o3 (medium) | OpenAI | 35.2 | 36.8 | 34.9 | 33.9 | ±1.5 |
#6 | Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview | 34.1 | 33.7 | 35.2 | 33.4 | ±1.2 | |
#7 | Claude Sonnet 4 (Thinking) | Anthropic | 32.8 | 34.1 | 32.3 | 32 | ±1.7 |
#8 | o1 Pro | OpenAI | 31.5 | 32.8 | 31.1 | 30.6 | ±1.9 |
#9 | Gemini 2.5 Pro Experimental | 30.2 | 31.5 | 29.8 | 29.3 | ±1.8 | |
#10 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Thinking | Anthropic | 28.9 | 29.7 | 28.6 | 28.4 | ±2 |
Overview
Evaluation Framework
BizFit QA evaluates large language models on domain-specific question answering across 956 professionally validated scenarios covering legal, financial, and medical expertise. The benchmark measures factual accuracy, regulatory compliance awareness, and professional reasoning quality in high-stakes business contexts.
Models are assessed across four dimensions: domain accuracy (factual correctness within professional context), compliance awareness (understanding of regulatory requirements), reasoning depth (quality of analytical explanations), and risk assessment (identification of potential professional liabilities). Evaluation incorporates expert review from licensed professionals in each domain.
Performance Analysis
- o4-mini (medium) achieves highest overall score (41.7) - demonstrating superior performance in legal domain questions (44.2) with strong regulatory compliance awareness and detailed risk analysis capabilities
- DeepSeek-R1-0528 excels in financial analysis - ranking second overall with strongest financial domain performance (41.2), particularly in quantitative analysis and market regulation understanding
- Medical domain poses greatest challenge - All models show 3-8% lower performance in medical QA compared to legal/financial domains, highlighting complexity of clinical reasoning and diagnostic accuracy requirements
Evaluation Methodology
Domain Coverage and Dataset
The BizFit QA benchmark encompasses 956 question-answer pairs across three professional domains:
- •Legal Domain (38%) - 364 scenarios covering contract law, regulatory compliance, intellectual property, and liability assessment with emphasis on Asian jurisdictions
- •Financial Services (33%) - 315 scenarios addressing investment analysis, risk management, regulatory requirements, and financial planning across APAC markets
- •Medical & Healthcare (29%) - 277 scenarios covering clinical guidelines, diagnostic reasoning, treatment protocols, and healthcare regulations
Evaluation Protocol
Model responses undergo comprehensive evaluation with domain expert validation (κ = 0.81) across multiple assessment criteria:
Accuracy Assessment
- • Factual correctness verification
- • Domain-specific knowledge depth
- • Technical terminology usage
- • Current regulation compliance
Professional Reasoning
- • Analytical framework application
- • Evidence-based conclusions
- • Risk factor identification
- • Decision-making logic clarity
Compliance Awareness
- • Regulatory requirement knowledge
- • Ethical consideration inclusion
- • Professional standard adherence
- • Jurisdictional variation awareness
Expert Validation
- • Licensed professional review
- • Clinical/legal practitioner assessment
- • Industry expert validation
- • Professional liability evaluation
Data Sample
Scenario: Legal Advisory - Contract Review
"A startup is considering a licensing agreement that includes an indemnification clause stating 'Company A shall indemnify Company B against all claims arising from the use of licensed technology.' What are the key legal risks Company A should evaluate?"
Professional-Quality Response
Company A should assess several critical risks: (1) Scope of indemnification - whether it covers direct damages only or includes consequential damages, (2) IP infringement liability exposure, (3) Product liability risks if technology causes harm, (4) Third-party claims limitations, and (5) Insurance coverage adequacy. Company A should negotiate caps on liability, carve-outs for gross negligence, and require Company B to maintain appropriate insurance.
Inadequate Response
The indemnification clause means Company A has to pay for any problems. They should make sure they have enough money to cover costs and maybe get insurance.
Scenario: Medical Information - Clinical Guidelines
"What are the key considerations for prescribing ACE inhibitors in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease?"
Professional-Quality Response
Key considerations include: (1) Baseline kidney function assessment (eGFR, proteinuria), (2) Electrolyte monitoring (potassium, creatinine), (3) Starting with low doses and titrating gradually, (4) Contraindications (bilateral renal artery stenosis, hyperkalemia >5.5 mEq/L), (5) Drug interactions (NSAIDs, potassium supplements), and (6) Regular monitoring schedule (2-4 weeks after initiation/dose changes). ACE inhibitors provide renal protection in diabetic nephropathy when used appropriately.
Inadequate Response
ACE inhibitors are good for diabetes patients with kidney problems. Doctors should check kidney function and start with small amounts. Watch out for high potassium levels.