arXiv:2610.38402v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Predicting medical item difficulty from item text alone remains challenging. Prior work has largely relied on linguistic features or text representations derived from general-purpose and domain-specific language models, but predictive performance has remained modest. This study takes a different approach by using difficulty-related signals that emerge when open-weight large language models (LLMs) interact with test items. Using USMLE and PANCE medical licensure examination items, we examined LLMs in two roles. As judges, the models provided absolute difficulty ratings and pairwise difficulty comparisons. As simulated examinees, they generated response-based signals including correctness, keyed-option probability, response entropy, and the probability margin between the top two options. We then combined the strongest judgment and response signals with baseline item features in downstream prediction models. Pairwise difficulty judgment was the most consistent individual LLM signal across both datasets and outperformed absolute ratings, and adding simulated-examinee signals yielded only small further gains. The best configurations reached a Spearman correlation of $\rho$ = .447 on USMLE, exceeding the best system in the 2024 BEA shared task ($\rho$ = .25), and $\rho$ = .494 on PANCE. These results were comparable to direct absolute judgments from the proprietary frontier model Claude Opus 5 ($\rho$ = .443 and .488, respectively). Overall, judgment and response signals from open-weight LLMs captured difficulty-related information beyond text representations. Because these models can be deployed locally, the approach offers a practical option for predicting the difficulty of unreleased or high-security test items.