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

DeepMind readies first commercial product

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 134 posts

Re: DeepMind readies first commercial product

#41

Post by sergers »

eismcc wrote: post #17
xiphias2 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which medical company doesn't want to move costs down? You don't need high costs to charge a lot.

If your business is making money on treating issues, preventing them isn’t aligned. Worst case, you neglect issues until they get to a point where you start making money. Legacy dialysis business is a good exsmple - they need ass-in-seats to justify clinics, so prevention isn’t as big a priority. Also, doctors often have shares in clinic revenue.

A friend of mind works for a software company that was utilizing Medq AI's brain bleed/hemorrhage detection Algorithm to identify urgent cases to be reviewed by a radiologist.

They were pitching it to a medical group, and they were like that's great for patient care but how does it cut costs to the organization...

Re: DeepMind readies first commercial product

#43

Post by skwb »

duado wrote: post #36
skwb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest I am highly skeptical that FB would be able to have the sort of institutional capacity to launch any sort of medical device health product. It takes a non trivial amount of effort and time to fully productize it (in terms of system integration/ product testing/ FDA submission). Unless there is involvement with one of the major MRI manufacturers, I don't foresee this going far. Many more players in the ga…

The thing is that because the highest-ROI application of machine learning is online advertising, unquestionably the two deepest pools of machine learning talent are at Google and Facebook. So this may be able to overcome the obvious culture mismatch between "move fast and break things" and the FDA.

Google has a long long history of failing in the medical space. They tend to overengineer their products in a way that makes sense if you’re a computer engineer, but not if you understand anything about the healthcare system. Facebook has no legitimate history developing these products either. It’s more involved to develop health products than it is to sell ads. And when it comes to deep learning, optimizing your ml for 2D rbg is not the same beast as volumetric 3D data.

And besides, let’s say tomorrow they have a method to do it tomorrow: how do they prospectively scam patients? How do they deploy the algorithm in a clinical setting? For any of this as a product to work, it would have to be integrated into a mri controller. Unless I’m eating my words at RSNA this year and deep mind is presenting their work, I’ll remain highly skeptical that this is going anywhere beyond a PR story that’s been sold to the media.

Re: DeepMind readies first commercial product

#44

Post by dontreact »

tntn wrote: post #34
dontreact wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have talked at length with several people in the FastMRI project and in my opinion it is actually very dangerous. There is no feasible way to validate that such a model will not hallucinate normal tissue in the presence of a rare abnormality. The argument often used is that advanced reconstruction techniques such as compressed sensing have not required validating against very rare abnormalities, however when deep n…

I don't have strong feelings about this, but a few thoughts come to mind regarding exploring accelerated MRIs via neural networks. 1. If an MRI can be done 10x faster with the same results except in exceptionally rare cases, might that not still be a win? Order of magnitude reduction in time may translate to substantial reduction in cost and increase opportunity for applications. It seems like it is worth considering…

1. Maybe, but that should be a tradeoff that is made consciously with some analysis and care, instead of just jumping over a low FDA bar, which is what everyone in this space seems to be doing. I think there are enough abnormalities that can be fatal which a net would just fill in (e.g. aortic dissection?)

2. There are thousands of different abnormalities. From what I understand about the FDA validation process for this sort of thing there would be only 10s of abnormalities. There are likely, many, many of them that are quite obvious to radiologists. And once again, this would be a question that should be studied carefully when people's lives are at risk, instead of just assuming that it will be fine then going ahead to "move fast and break things"

Re: DeepMind readies first commercial product

#46

Post by visarga »

gdy wrote: post #40
FeepingCreature wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care what it has to do, it can be drawing pentagrams in blood for all I care, as long as it has even a fraction better health outcomes to unassisted doctors I'm all for it. The point here is making people healthy, not providing some sort of validated theoretically clean design. If the rcts say it works, bring on the deep learning voodoo. (edit: I, for the record, want to trust in average accuracy.)

This is not how trust works

You mean it's not enough to trust in average accuracy, you want trust in specific instances of application?

Re: DeepMind readies first commercial product

#47

Post by yeahitslikethat »

krapht wrote: post #20
melling wrote: post #9

AI is being developed to make MRI scans 10x faster. https://www.forbes.com/sites/samshead/2018/08/20/facebook-ai... If DeepMind is trained on millions of MRI’s, we might have better preventative medicine.

"Using AI, it may be possible to capture less data and therefore scan faster, while preserving or even enhancing the rich information content of magnetic resonance images, says Facebook. The key will be to train artificial neural networks to recognise the underlying structure of the images in order to fill in detail omitted from an accelerated scan." Ah, right, what I want is for an ANN to invent information in a med…

It is clear to any mind of intelligence that you cannot give something less information and expect it to give you back better decisions.

Re: DeepMind readies first commercial product

#49

Post by bartimus »

dontreact wrote: post #44
tntn wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have strong feelings about this, but a few thoughts come to mind regarding exploring accelerated MRIs via neural networks. 1. If an MRI can be done 10x faster with the same results except in exceptionally rare cases, might that not still be a win? Order of magnitude reduction in time may translate to substantial reduction in cost and increase opportunity for applications. It seems like it is worth considering…

1. Maybe, but that should be a tradeoff that is made consciously with some analysis and care, instead of just jumping over a low FDA bar, which is what everyone in this space seems to be doing. I think there are enough abnormalities that can be fatal which a net would just fill in (e.g. aortic dissection?) 2. There are thousands of different abnormalities. From what I understand about the FDA validation process for t…

It's my understanding it's sometimes exactly those obvious abnormalities that are missed by radiologists.
Post reply on HN