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

Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 100 posts

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#91

Post by bayesian_horse »

ecmascript wrote: post #82
bayesian_horse wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Founding a startup is not an option available to everyone. It takes money and other resources. And for some of the same reasons that I am unemployed despite valuable skills, it is virtually impossible for me to get any funding.

I completely disagree with you, bootstrapping your own internet company doesn't cost a lot. Except effort and time. You can fund it yourself with basically any income. Of course you will never get anywhere with an attitude like the one you currently have. It's not the skill or resources that is the problem, it's the mindset.

The chances of succeeding with a bootstrapped internet company are extremely low.

You confuse results I observed with my "attitude". I am trying quite a few things. I am only observing negative results. That might look like a negative attitude, it is, however, reality.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#92

Post by bayesian_horse »

itsoktocry wrote: post #65
throwaways885 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would one person bootstrap a venture in medical ML without initial funding or datasets?

Do you think it's the model and the data that's novel? That's exactly why AI is failing. How about starting with a problem to solve? You don't need anything but a pen and paper. Gotta start somewhere.

A pen and a paper doesn't make you any money. I have tons of ideas. Doesn't mean jack though.

In medical AI, you really need datasets. Of the most expensive kind, and lots of it.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#93

Post by bayesian_horse »

itsoktocry wrote: post #64
bayesian_horse wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not getting into any PhD programs though, because my CV is essentially radioactive (I tried...). I'm not getting any funding for a startup, for much of the same reasons.

> I'm not getting any funding for a startup, for much of the same reasons. I hate to ask why you believe this, because I see VC money being thrown at borderline low-lifes with mediocre ideas. There are so many "angel investors" on Twitter of companies I've never heard of... The SV bubble can warp your brain, but an outsider's tip is to focus on your idea before you start worrying about funding it...

I live in Germany. I have looked into creating a startup. Bootstrapping doesn't mean I'll ever earn an income (I'm unemployed) and I may even lose my benefits.

The chances of succeeding are excessively low, and the funding situation in Germany is very different. You mostly need to have revenue before you get funding. And when you aren't even employable on the normal labor market, then it is a lot harder still.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#94

Post by carlmr »

pc86 wrote: post #55
klodolph wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow. Why would anything need to be 100% accurate? Humans aren't 100% accurate, and there's no reason ML would need to be 100% accurate either.

The is a gigantic difference between a doctor looking at something in a scan and deciding it's an image artifact when it's not, subsequently missing a diagnosis, and an ML algorithm looking at that same image, deciding something is an artifact and removing it from the image . At that point you're not looking at an actual scan, you're looking at something different.

It would be interesting then to give the human a side by side comparison with the artifacts removed (and maybe shown in color), so that the doctor can more easily see whether he agrees with that.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#95

Post by carlmr »

rdedev wrote: post #23
klodolph wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't follow. Why would anything need to be 100% accurate? Humans aren't 100% accurate, and there's no reason ML would need to be 100% accurate either.

The difference is that a doctor can try to explain his findings and collaborate with others. This includes not just looking at the scan data but also reading other test results and patient history. ML is not capable of this as far as I know.

>This includes not just looking at the scan data but also reading other test results and patient history. ML is not capable of this as far as I know.

ML is capable of doing that if you train it to do that.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#96

Post by rubatuga »

rscho wrote: post #47
gjulianm wrote: post #8

Some radiologists think that AI will be really good for filtering out normal images, so that they only have to review anomalies. But I don't think that a model that detects diseases will be too successful, even if they manage to make it really work. For one, it's actually difficult to interpret and find signs in radiologic images. Obvious signs are obvious, but there are others that could be image artifacts, or just…

> modern machines can detect anomalies but doctors still learn how to interpret EKGs and double check what the machine says. Uh, TBH no professional so much as glances through the automated EKG summary. It's utterly useless and could be deleted with zero consequences.

It's actually improved a lot in the past few years with CNNs being used: https://stanfordmlgroup.github.io/projects/ecg/

No chance that a dinky ECG from 10 years ago is running a neural net inside.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#97

Post by chakkepolja »

spoonjim wrote: post #20

> By far the biggest problem — and the trickiest to solve — points to machine learning’s Catch-22: There are few large, diverse data sets to train and validate a new tool on, and many of those that do exist are kept confidential for legal or business reasons. This is why China will win the AI Age.

As if there will ever be an AI age apart from brokern jupyter notebooks and MBA PowerPoint bullshit.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#98

Post by throwaways885 »

itsoktocry wrote: post #65
throwaways885 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would one person bootstrap a venture in medical ML without initial funding or datasets?

Do you think it's the model and the data that's novel? That's exactly why AI is failing. How about starting with a problem to solve? You don't need anything but a pen and paper. Gotta start somewhere.

Getting trusted access to medical datasets is a huge issue, and so is getting clinicians to use the systems you've produced. Both of these problems are usually fixed with large amounts of funding.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#99

Post by j_wtf_all_taken »

ThomPete wrote: post #38
ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because China hoards more data doesn't guarantee any success. If just data collection would be enough then all crime should have been eradicated in the US by how much data NSA has.

It guarantees more access to training data which is crucial for development of any superiority when it comes to applied AI. The US still have a better academic culture but the chinese are catching up. Nothing is inevitable.

> The US still have a better academic culture but the chinese are catching up.

Science is about truth. Dictatorships are about appealing to the dear leader. That's why China will never catch up to free and open countries.

Re: Machine learning is booming in medicine, but also facing a credibility crisis

#100

Post by ThomPete »

j_wtf_all_taken wrote: post #99
ThomPete wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It guarantees more access to training data which is crucial for development of any superiority when it comes to applied AI. The US still have a better academic culture but the chinese are catching up. Nothing is inevitable.

> The US still have a better academic culture but the chinese are catching up. Science is about truth. Dictatorships are about appealing to the dear leader. That's why China will never catch up to free and open countries.

No science is about truth. It's about falsifying claims through the process. However I agree with what you are saying about China.
Post reply on HN