It's not clear whether there doctor instructed it first to act like a doctor and then asked questions? It seems he didn't because it does make a difference
I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
181–190 of 368 posts
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#182Being a scifi geek and AI geek and neuroscience geek for pretty much the past 40 years, I've read countless predictions and scenarios and stories about society's response as "true" AI begins to emerge. So watching it play out for real is creating this bizarre sense of deja vu combined with fascination and frustration and also some anxiety. This article and the comments in this thread are right up that alley. I mean,…
I've noticed a very weird trend when trying to incorporate GPT4 into my workflow. I lead a small team of developers and security consultants, and whenever someone runs into a problem, it is immediately searched for on the web. However, there is a real resistance/reluctance in using GPT for the same task. I think it is a combination of factors. The wrong answers are part of it, but I think another part is the anthropo…
For me it's because I've been trained by decades of searching to type in only a few words to obtain a presumably relevant answer, whereas I think I have to write a mini-essay to ChatGPT to get an answer. But when I acquiesce to explaining to ChatGPT my information need, I get a more useful answer. (though frequently inaccurate in details)
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#1831. What version is he using? 2. It is all your fault that not providing all usefull information (like, my patient seems pregnant) and let the system to guess what you want.
I think that’s the point, the patient didn’t seem pregnant but the doctor had some clinical suspicion given the presentation and the location of the pain. He wasn’t withholding information from ChatGPT, he was just providing the same initial information he had when he saw the patient.
If
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#184Being a scifi geek and AI geek and neuroscience geek for pretty much the past 40 years, I've read countless predictions and scenarios and stories about society's response as "true" AI begins to emerge. So watching it play out for real is creating this bizarre sense of deja vu combined with fascination and frustration and also some anxiety. This article and the comments in this thread are right up that alley. I mean,…
I like your take on this but isnt it overly optimistic? I have the feeling that this tech will hit the a wall pretty quickly like driverless car technology.
It looks great on the surface but it isn't anything like the kind of sci-fi ai I think we're aiming for. Not in anything but a superficial way at least.
It doesnt know when its wrong and just straight up lies constantly inventing all sorts of fantastical stuff.
I asked it for history of a small local area in Ireland and it created a bunch of castles and tribes that never existed.
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
The goalposts people usually talk about were just the relatively low expectations of the past - low at least by the standards set by ChatGPT. Before ChatGPT there wasn't anything quite like it, so I think that the goalposts were mostly about passing the Turing test, or at least "not sucking" after 4 or 5 phrases. The leap from whatever existed before it was enormous, and I think comparable to the first iPhone versus,…
> ...I think that the goalposts were mostly about passing the Turing test... I mean, if that was ever the goalpost, ChatGPT does not clear it: the Turing test isn't about merely tricking someone who isn't paying attention, or making someone seriously doubt their belief system... it involved a careful discussion with a chat agent by someone who actively was trying to determine whether or not it/they were human. If you…
Sounds more like you failed the Turing test rather than your friends chatbot passing it :)
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ...I think that the goalposts were mostly about passing the Turing test... I mean, if that was ever the goalpost, ChatGPT does not clear it: the Turing test isn't about merely tricking someone who isn't paying attention, or making someone seriously doubt their belief system... it involved a careful discussion with a chat agent by someone who actively was trying to determine whether or not it/they were human. If you…
Sounds more like you failed the Turing test rather than your friends chatbot passing it :)
The point was that people mis-use the term "Turing test" as "manages to trick people sometimes into thinking its a human". To quote the description from Wikipedia:
> Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation was a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. The conversation would be limited to a text-only channel, such as a computer keyboard and screen, so the result would not depend on the machine's ability to render words as speech. If the evaluator could not reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine would be said to have passed the test. The test results would not depend on the machine's ability to give correct answers to questions, only on how closely its answers resembled those a human would give.
ChatGPT would not manage to pass an actual Turing test anymore than Roy's auto-responder; and, while we might get there frighteningly soon, that goalpost stands.
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have case that 5 doctors so far can't explain. I fed in what was happening (generally speaking) and it provided a rather good list of what it "might" be. I then asked it to start describing each scenario and I was able to determine nope, that's not it or if it was plausible. Meeting with doctor no 6 tomorrow to talk about what it could be but at least I have a better insight at what the more obvious possibilities.…
How does it matter to the doctor if the car accident was the cause of your issues?
I think some doctors don’t want to get involved with patients who are involved in litigation regarding the reason for their visit.
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
The author touches on this in the very article linked. His point is that the low accuracy answers provided by ChatGPT risks reinforcing the doctor's biases and then not thinking outside the box. In other words it risks the doctor blindly trusting the AI too much.
The inherent problem with chat bots is you can't investigate why they're telling you something. When I search Google, I'm critically evaluating the information, and it's frustrating when the results it gives are low-accuracy. If I ask a chat bot a question, what would I do with the answer if it might be wrong? There's no context for me to evaluate.
You can ask it to explain its reasoning. And it's even more useful if you ask it to show its reasoning when you ask a question, as it improves the answer.
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I didn't predict is so many AI boosters being so miffed at regular folks pointing out the obvious: a half-working system may be tremendously exciting to AI enthusiasts, but it's not that useful to society. Recently we've had all these people complaining of moving goalposts, when in fact most people never had goalposts for AI in the first place, and certainly never had goalposts that remotely resembled those that…
A half-working system is cute and useful when it recommends a pizza place you might like. But the same system is a menace to society when you tell it to drive a car or prescribe a drug to treat an illness or decide a person's prison sentence or protect a perimeter with lethal force. It's absolutely amazing that so many AI scientists don't seem to understand this distinction.
What about helping correct the grammar and style of an article? Writing out boring code? Creating a test for code you already have? These are all tasks that have important economic consequences. AI is not half-bad at them, it is actually approaching human levels of performance.
If we continue to improve AI, maybe one day its performance in these critical tasks you describe will also surpass humans.
Re: I’m a doctor: Here’s what I found when I asked ChatGPT to diagnose my patients
#190Being a scifi geek and AI geek and neuroscience geek for pretty much the past 40 years, I've read countless predictions and scenarios and stories about society's response as "true" AI begins to emerge. So watching it play out for real is creating this bizarre sense of deja vu combined with fascination and frustration and also some anxiety. This article and the comments in this thread are right up that alley. I mean,…
I can't think of any science fiction where th AI is there but not at all reliable. Maybe evil, but not unreliable. It's a failure mode we weren't anticipating. It also might make it next to useless for some real world applications, despite being incredible technology.