I think my point is that mammograms are a (relatively) easy to solve problem using today's technology. Why wouldn't it be worthwhile to solve that problem such

I think my point is that mammograms are a (relatively) easy to solve problem using today's technology. Why wouldn't it be worthwhile to solve that problem such that it has very limited human involvement? It's the reason professional baseball is experimenting with electronic strike detection, despite the fact that umpires are very accurate (~94%) calling pitches. I get that there are useful applications of AI that could augment a radiologist. I'm simply pointing out that if one could completely remove a radiologist from the equation, that could be a super helpful tool. I suppose my view is that removing/limiting the human element in routine inspections is a very worthwhile goal. There's also the side benefit of increasing trust for these technologies. I think a lot of people are rightfully scared of AI technologies; showing that they can be as effective as a radiologist for routine screenings would be very beneficial.