Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

worksinprogress.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 486 posts

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#261

Post by potato3732842 »

hnav wrote: post #246
code_biologist wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of young people (teens especially) cross active streets or cross in front of Waymos on scooters knowing that they'll stop. I try not to do anything too egregious, but I myself have begun using Waymo's conservative behavior as a good way to merge into ultra high density traffic when I'm in a car, or to cross busy streets when they only have a "yield to pedestrian" crosswalk rather than a full crosswalk…

Simultaneously, Waymo is adopting more human-like behavior like creeping at red lights and cutting in front of timid drivers as it jockeys for position. I still think that Google isn't capable of scaling a rideshare program because it sucks at interfacing with customers. I suspect that Uber's long-term strategy of "take the money out of investors' and drivers' pockets to capture the market until automation gets there…

>Simultaneously, Waymo is adopting more human-like behavior like creeping at red lights and cutting in front of timid drivers as it jockeys for position.

So before it was a 16yo in a driver's ed car. Now it's an 18yo with a license.

I'm gonna be so proud of them when it does something flagrantly illegal but any "decent driver who gets it" would have done in context.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#262

Post by red369 »

ModernMech wrote: post #6

Every 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…

All of the examples you gave (which I agree with, btw!), are generative AI, whereas I assume radiology would benefit more from the Machine Learning (ML), image in -> black-box ML decides whether it matches pattern -> verdict out, type of AI.

I suppose first of all, is that generally agreed? People aren't expecting a LLM to give a radiology opinion, the same as way that you can feed in a PDF or an image into ChatGPT and ask it something about it, are they?

I'm interested whether most people here have a higher opinion of ML than of the generative AIs, in terms of giving a reliably useful output. Or do a lot of you think that these also just create so much checking it would be easier to just have a human do the original work?

I think it's probably worth excluding self-driving from my above question, since that is a particularly difficult area to agree anything on.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#263

Post by CamperBob2 »

1718627440 wrote: post #203
CamperBob2 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can give it the same tests the human radiologists take in school. They do take tests, don't they? They don't all score 100% every time, do they?

The point here is that the radiologists has a concept of knowing which light patterns are sensible to draw conclusions from and which not, because the radiologist has a concept of real world 3D objects.

Sure. It's just not a valid point. Even if it's valid today, it won't be by next week.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#264

Post by layoric »

epcoa wrote: post #257
aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

For real though how close are we to a product that takes an order for an ED or inpatient CT A/P, protocols it then reads the images and can read the chart and spits out a dictated report without any human intervention that ends up usable as is even 90% of the time.

Right, the last 10% will be expensive or you accept a potential 10% failure rate.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#265

Post by lumost »

newyankee wrote: post #223
aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

But this indicates lack of incentives to reduce healthcare costs by optimisation. If AI can do something well enough , and AI + humans surpass humans leading to costs reductions/ increased throughput this should be reflected in the workflows. I feel that human processes have inertia and for lack of a better word, gatekeepers feel that new, novel approaches should be adopted slowly and which is why we are not seeing t…

Part of the challenge is that machines are significantly different. The radiologist’s statement that an object measured from two different machines is the same and has not changed in size is in large part judgement. Building a model which can replicate this judgement likely involves building a model which can solve all common computer vision tasks, has the full medical knowledge of an expert radiologist, and has been painstakingly calibrated against thousands of real radiologists in hospital conditions.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#266

Post by captainkrtek »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #247
captainkrtek wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Society accepts that humans make mistakes and considers it unavoidable, but there exists a much higher bar expected of computers/automation/etc. even if a waymo is objectively safer in terms of incidents per miles driven, one fatality makes headlines and adds scrutiny about “was it avoidable?”, whereas humans we just shrug. I think the theme of this extends to all areas where we are placing technology to make decisio…

> there exists a much higher bar expected of computers/automation/etc. even if a waymo is objectively safer in terms of incidents per miles driven, one fatality makes headlines and adds scrutiny about “was it avoidable?” This doesn’t seem to be happening. One, there are shockingly few fatalities. Two, we’ve sort of accepted the tradeoff.

It does happen:

https://sfist.com/2024/05/14/waymo-now-under-federal-investi...

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-closes-probe-int...

Similarly for Cruise: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-ge...

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#267

Post by erentz »

newyankee wrote: post #223
aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

But this indicates lack of incentives to reduce healthcare costs by optimisation. If AI can do something well enough , and AI + humans surpass humans leading to costs reductions/ increased throughput this should be reflected in the workflows. I feel that human processes have inertia and for lack of a better word, gatekeepers feel that new, novel approaches should be adopted slowly and which is why we are not seeing t…

From real world experience as a patient that has had a lot go wrong over the last decade. The problem isn’t lack of automation, it’s structural issues affecting cost.

Just as one example a chest CT would’ve cost $450 if done cash. It costed an insurer over $1200 done via insurance. And that was after multiple appeals and reviews involving time from people at the insurance company and the providers office including the doctor himself. The low hanging fruit in American healthcare costs is the stuff like that.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#268

Post by speakfreely »

smrtinsert wrote: post #243
aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

At some point medical equipment is certified in some way for use. Could the same happen for imaging AIs?

But the equipment is operated by a person, and the diagnostic report has to be signed off by a person, who has a malpractice insurance policy for personal injury attorneys to go after.

The system is designed a nanny-state fashion: there's no way to release practitioners from liability in exchange for less expensive treatments. I doubt this will change until healthcare pricing hits an extremely expensive breaking point.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#269

Post by Forgeties79 »

newyankee wrote: post #223
aabajian wrote: post #209

I'm an interventional radiologist with a master's in computer science. People outside radiology don't get why AI hasn't taken over. Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes. Will radiologists be replaced? Almost certainly the answer is no. Why not? Medical risk. Unless the law changes, a radiologist will have to sign off on each imaging report. So say yo…

But this indicates lack of incentives to reduce healthcare costs by optimisation. If AI can do something well enough , and AI + humans surpass humans leading to costs reductions/ increased throughput this should be reflected in the workflows. I feel that human processes have inertia and for lack of a better word, gatekeepers feel that new, novel approaches should be adopted slowly and which is why we are not seeing t…

If we were serious about reducing healthcare cost by optimization then we would be banning private equity from acquiring hospitals.

Re: Demand for human radiologists is at an all-time high

#270

Post by JumpCrisscross »

captainkrtek wrote: post #266
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there exists a much higher bar expected of computers/automation/etc. even if a waymo is objectively safer in terms of incidents per miles driven, one fatality makes headlines and adds scrutiny about “was it avoidable?” This doesn’t seem to be happening. One, there are shockingly few fatalities. Two, we’ve sort of accepted the tradeoff.

It does happen: https://sfist.com/2024/05/14/waymo-now-under-federal-investi... https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-closes-probe-int... Similarly for Cruise: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-05-16/woman-ge...

Sure. It happened. Folks moved on. Car companies are constantly being sued and investigated.

Cruise was outrageous because it fucked up in a way a human never would. (More germane: GM doesn’t have Google’s cash flow.)

Post reply on HN