▲ 58 ▼ GPT-4 performance comparable with physicians on official medical board residency examinations. Model performance near or above official passing rate in all medical specialties tested (ai.nejm.org) submitted 2 years ago by cyu@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.ml 42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Skua@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) In the example you provided, you're doing it by hand afterwards anyway. How is a doctor going to vet the work of the AI without examining the case in as much detail as they would have without the AI? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* Input symptoms and patient info -> spits out odds they have x, y, or z -> doctor looks at that as a supplement to their own work or to look for more unlikely possibilities they haven't thought of because they're a bit unusual. Doctors aren't gods, they can't recall everything perfectly. It's as useful as any toxicology report or other information they get. I am not doing my edits by hand. I am not using a blade tool and spooling film. I am not processing it. My computer does everything for me, I simply tell it what to do and it spits out the desired result (usually lol). Without my eyes and knowledge the inputs aren't good and the outputs aren't vetted. With a person, both are satisfied. This is how all computer usage basically works, and AI tools are no different. Input->output, quality depends on the computer/software and who is handling it. TL;DR: Garbage in, garbage out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Skua@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) In the example you provided, you're doing it by hand afterwards anyway. How is a doctor going to vet the work of the AI without examining the case in as much detail as they would have without the AI? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* Input symptoms and patient info -> spits out odds they have x, y, or z -> doctor looks at that as a supplement to their own work or to look for more unlikely possibilities they haven't thought of because they're a bit unusual. Doctors aren't gods, they can't recall everything perfectly. It's as useful as any toxicology report or other information they get. I am not doing my edits by hand. I am not using a blade tool and spooling film. I am not processing it. My computer does everything for me, I simply tell it what to do and it spits out the desired result (usually lol). Without my eyes and knowledge the inputs aren't good and the outputs aren't vetted. With a person, both are satisfied. This is how all computer usage basically works, and AI tools are no different. Input->output, quality depends on the computer/software and who is handling it. TL;DR: Garbage in, garbage out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BolexForSoup@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* Input symptoms and patient info -> spits out odds they have x, y, or z -> doctor looks at that as a supplement to their own work or to look for more unlikely possibilities they haven't thought of because they're a bit unusual. Doctors aren't gods, they can't recall everything perfectly. It's as useful as any toxicology report or other information they get. I am not doing my edits by hand. I am not using a blade tool and spooling film. I am not processing it. My computer does everything for me, I simply tell it what to do and it spits out the desired result (usually lol). Without my eyes and knowledge the inputs aren't good and the outputs aren't vetted. With a person, both are satisfied. This is how all computer usage basically works, and AI tools are no different. Input->output, quality depends on the computer/software and who is handling it. TL;DR: Garbage in, garbage out. permalink fedilink source parent