Machine Learning , some thoughts
thomas.beale at openehr.org
Mon Jun 25 06:31:27 EDT 2018
On 25/06/2018 11:21, Stefan Sauermann wrote:
> 82% of correct recognition rate is a desaster in healthcare.
92% would be a disaster in healthcare ...
> 74% is even worse.
> My evidence based feeling is that we still will need to sort it out
> manually for some years to come.
I am slightly more optimistic: I suspect that the key bit of research is
to create machines, e.g. for interpreting images, that can accurately
distinguish between 3 /categories/ of image: don't know; not sure (error
rate likely to be too high); and sure (e.g. less than 0.2% error rate or
similar). Such machines would throw images in the first two groups to
humans, and would do the work on the 'sure' group. The key is to be able
to recognise ambiguity or the lack of it.
Doing this properly might require more than one kind of AI. And of
course, AI image interpreters would not need to work with displayed bit
maps, but would work with computable 3-D and 4-D matrices.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openEHR-clinical