I remember, when were learning prolog, that in the 70s, or something like, that they were already experimenting with AI and it was quite good at diagnostics. However doctors were scared of losing jobs instead of embracing it and using it as a tool. So they dropped it at the time. Hopefully they will use it as an additional tool this time and everybody profits.
Does AI detect breast cancer better than doctors can?
Submitted 4 months ago by Cat@ponder.cat to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.voanews.com/a/does-ai-detect-breast-cancer-better-than-doctors-can/7980983.html
Comments
Mihies@programming.dev 4 months ago
Neuromancer49@midwest.social 4 months ago
My favorite AI fact is from cancer research. The New Yorker has a great article about how an algorithm used to identify and price out pastries at a Japanese bakery found surprising success as a cancer detector. newyorker.com/…/the-pastry-ai-that-learned-to-fig…
SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 4 months ago
regrub@lemmy.world 4 months ago
TL;DR: yes It’s unfortunate that LLMs are the only thing that come to mind when AI is mentioned though. Something that can do pattern recognition better than a human can is good for this application
Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml 4 months ago
Even if it were to do pattern recognition as well as or slightly worse than a human, it’s still worthwhile. As the article points out: It’s basically a non-tiring, always-ready second opinion. That alone helps a lot.
vividspecter@lemm.ee 4 months ago
One issue I could see is using it not as a second opinion, but the only opinion. That doesn’t mean this shouldn’t be pursued, but the incentives toward laziness and cost-cutting are obvious.