Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
worksinprogress.news
Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
1–10 of 486 posts
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#2What we need is a mandate for AI transformation of Radiology: Radiologists must be required to use AI every day on X% of scans, their productivity must double with the use of AI or they'll get fired, etc. To quote CEOs everywhere: AI is a transformative technology unlike any we've ever seen in our careers, and we must embrace it in a desperate FOMO way, anything else is unacceptable.
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#3I wouldn't trust a non-radiologist to safely interpret the results of an AI model for radiology, no matter how well that model performs in benchmarks.
Similar to how a model that can do "PhD-level research" is of little use to me if I don't have my own PhD in the topic area it's researching for me, because how am I supposed to analyze a 20 page research report and figure out if it's credible or not?
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#4I wouldn't trust a non-radiologist to safely interpret the results of an AI model for radiology, no matter how well that model performs in benchmarks. Similar to how a model that can do "PhD-level research" is of little use to me if I don't have my own PhD in the topic area it's researching for me, because how am I supposed to analyze a 20 page research report and figure out if it's credible or not?
Why, ask another deep research model to critique it of course! ;-)
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#5In 2016, Geoffrey Hinton – computer scientist and Turing Award winner – declared that ‘people should stop training radiologists now’.
If we had followed every AI evengelist sugestion the world would have collapsed.
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#6Every use of AI has its own problem of "person with 10 fingers" that AI image generation faces and can't seem to solve. For programmers, it's code that calls made up libraries and makes up language semantics. In prose, it's completely incoherent narratives that forget where they are going halfway through. For programmers it's making up case law and citations. Same for scientists, making up authorities and papers and results.
AI art is getting better but still it's very easy for me to quickly distinguish AI result from everything else, because I can visually inspect the artifacts and it's usually not very subtle.
I'm not a radiologist, but I would imagine AI is doing the same thing here, making up things that are cancer, missing things that aren't cancer, and it takes an expert to distinguish the false positives from true. So we're back at square one, except the expertise has shifted from interpreting the image to interpreting the image and also interpreting the AI.
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#7In 2016, Geoffrey Hinton – computer scientist and Turing Award winner – declared that ‘people should stop training radiologists now’. If we had followed every AI evengelist sugestion the world would have collapsed.
Let's assume the last person that entered their radiologist training started then and the training lasts 5 years. At the end of their training the year is 2021 and they are around 31. So that means they will practice medicine for cca 30 years which would put the calendar at around 2051. I'd wager in 25 years we'd get there so I think his opinion still has a large percentage of being correct.
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#8As a doctor and full stack engineer, I would never go into radiology or seek further training in it. (obviously)
AI is going to augment radiologists first, and eventually, it will start to replace them. And existing radiologists will transition into stuff like interventional radiology or whatever new areas will come into the picture in the future.
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#9Every use of AI has its own problem of "person with 10 fingers" that AI image generation faces and can't seem to solve. For programmers, it's code that calls made up libraries and makes up language semantics. In prose, it's completely incoherent narratives that forget where they are going halfway through. For programmers it's making up case law and citations. Same for scientists, making up authorities and papers and…
> AI art is getting better but still it's very easy for me to quickly distinguish AI result from everything else, because I can visually inspect the artifacts and it's usually not very subtle.
I actually disagree in that it's not easy for me at all to quickly distinguish AI images from everything else. But I think we might differ what we mean by "quickly". I can quickly distinguish AI if I am looking. But if I'm mindlessly doomscrolling I cannot always distinguish 'random art of an attractive busty woman in generic fantasy armor that a streamer I follow shared' as AI. I cannot always distinguish 'reply-guy profile picture that's like a couple dozen pixels in dimensions' as AI. I also cannot always tell if someone is using a filter if I'm looking for maybe 5 seconds tops while I scroll.
Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high
#10> Three things explain this. First,... Second, attempts to give models more tasks have run into legal hurdles: regulators and medical insurers so far are reluctant to approve or cover fully autonomous radiology models. Third, even when they do diagnose accurately, models replace only a small share of a radiologist’s job. Human radiologists spend a minority of their time on diagnostics and the majority on other activities, like talking to patients and fellow clinicians.
Everything else besides the above in TFA is extraneous. Machine learning models could have absolute perfect performance at zero cost, and the above would make it so that radiologists are not going to be "replaced" by ML models anytime soon.