3 ms·
Ohhh, I thought you were saying that we'll always need doctors to gather the data, but you meant that the ML systems will suck until they get enough data, and t
by dfabulich 10y ago
Ohhh, I thought you were saying that we'll always need doctors to gather the data, but you meant that the ML systems will suck until they get enough data, and they can only get enough data if the process can be automated, so we'll need doctors to do diagnoses until the ML systems stop sucking.
- rscho 10y agoYes, absolutely.
- neeleshs 10y agoDoctors can then focus on new diseases, higher level thinking about health, rare cases and such. Under-researched domains can get attention
- Scea91 10y agoYes. People are acting like the medicine problem would be solved if ML could replicate the performance of doctors today. I hope that, as you said, it will allow doctors to focus on more difficult problems that we did not even think would be possible to tackle.
- balamaci 10y agoNot to mention how hard is to have a standardization. Doesn't do any good if the data is not guaranteed to have been measured in somewhat similar conditions. Thinking about my cholesterol. I've seen so much fluctuation on my own blood results between labs. They blame it on the "bad chemical reactives". And that is even a somewhat standardized numerical values, but what about subjective symptom: "I have a sand in eye sensation". For ML this must be translated to a numerical value. Does it feel like a 1 or a 1,5 sensation out of 10, how can we make sure we have the same understanding?