• Ludrol@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I have read some headline that said that some of these models just measure age of a patient and a quality of the machine making photos.

        • Ludrol@szmer.info
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          Still AI misalignment is a real issue. I just don’t remember which model was studied and had been found out that it was missaligned.

          • Daxtron2@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            That and bias, absolutely need improvements. That doesn’t mean LLMs can’t be extremely effective if given appropriate tasks. The problem is that the people who make decisions about where they’re used aren’t technical enough to understand their strengths and limitations

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I don’t think technical knowledge gives as good a sense as a lot of experience working with one.

              Like saying the guys who designed a particular car would know best how it’ll perform on various racetracks. My sense is a driver would have a better sense.

              • Daxtron2@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                I guess what I meant by technical knowledge meant to be less about general tech and more about specifically LLM tech

    • Kichae@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Eh. Depends on which tech is being used and how. For a lot of things, relatively basic ML models purposefully trained do a pretty good job, and are, in fact, limited by the diagnoses in the training data. But more generalized “AI” tools seem rather… questionable.

      Like, you can train a SVM on fMRIs to compare structures in the brain between patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder and those that are not diagnosed with it, and it will have an accuracy rate on new patients basically equal to the accuracy rate of the doctors who did the diagnosing in the training set. But you’ll have a much harder time creating a model that takes in fMRIs and reports back answers to the question of “which brain disease or abnormality do I have?”

      This stuff works much closer to advertised when it’s narrowly defined and purpose built, but the people making and funding this work want catch-all doctor replacements, because of course they do, because there’s way more money in charging hospitals and patience 10% less than a doctor’s salary than there is in providing tools that make doctors’ efforts in diagnosing specific illnesses easier.

      Or, at least there is if you can pull it off.

      • rho50@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Precisely. Many of the narrowly scoped solutions work really well, too (for what they’re advertised for).

        As of today though, they’re nowhere near reliable enough to replace doctors, and any breakthrough on that front is very unlikely to be a language model IMO.

        • Kichae@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          And they should no more replace doctors in the future than x-ray machines did in the past. We should never want them to.