Those are some sketchy statistics. The evaluation procedure is questionable (F1 against the other 4 as ground truth? Mean of means?), and the 95% CI overlap pre

Those are some sketchy statistics. The evaluation procedure is questionable (F1 against the other 4 as ground truth? Mean of means?), and the 95% CI overlap pretty substantially. Even if their bootstrap sampling said the difference is significant, I don't believe them. Basically, I see this as "everyone sucks, but the AI maybe sucks a little less than the worst of our radiologists, on average"