Comment on AI can find cancer pathologists miss
salty_chief@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Who is downvoting progress in Cancer identification?
There was also a study going around claiming that llms caused cancer screenings by humans to decrease in accuracy. I’m not a scientist but I’m pretty sure the sample size was super small and localized in one hospital?
Anyway maybe they’re remembering that in addition to the automatic AI hating down votes.
Not that I’m a fan of AI being shoved everywhere but this isn’t that
Why would you use a large language model to examine a biopsy?
These should be specialized models trained off structured data sets, not the unbridled chaos of an LLM. They’re both called “AI”, but they’re wildly different technologies.
It’s like criticizing a doctor for relying on an air conditioner to keep samples cool when I fact they used a freezer, simply because the mechanism of refrigeration is similar.
But the title had “AI” in it.
A lot of people don’t realize that votes are public 🤓
After reading the actual published science paper referenced in the article, I would downvote the article because the title is clickbaity and does not reflect the conclusions of the paper. The title suggests that AI could replace pathologists, or that pathologists are inept. This is not the case. Better title would be “Pathologists use AI to determine if biopsied tissue samples contain markers for cancerous tissue that is outside the biopsied region.”
RFK
Cancer causes autism
Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
Lemmings with knee-jerk reactions to anything AI related
victorz@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I was about to post a comment: Finally a use for AI that feels justified to spend energy on.