> It might catch the tumor in 99.9999% of cases, better than any human doctor. But missing a malignant tumor 0.0001% of the time is unacceptable Those probabil

> It might catch the tumor in 99.9999% of cases, better than any human doctor. But missing a malignant tumor 0.0001% of the time is unacceptable Those probabilities are way off given biology, but anyway ... The interesting cases of AI in radiology would be being able to catch stuff that a human has no hope of catching. For example, a woman with lobular (instead of ductal) breast cancer generally doesn't present until mid-to-late Stage 3 (which limits treatment options) because those cancers don't form lumps. You can stare at mammograms and ultrasounds all day and won't see anything because the "lumps" are unresolvable. You're trying to find a sleet particle in a blizzard. Sure, it's totally obvious on an MRI scan, but you don't want to do those without reason (picking up totally benign growths, gadolinium bioaccumulation, infections from IVs, etc.) An AI, however, could correlate subtle, but broad changes that humans are really bad at catching. Your last 5 mammograms looked like this but there is just something a little off about this one--go get an MRI this time.