✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading
Medical AI Safety: Doing it wrong. – Lauren Oakden-Rayner
laurenoakdenrayner.com · 4,028 words · saved by 1 readers
Medical AI has a safety problem; we know for a fact our testing isn’t reliable. We’ve seen how this plays out before.
Last post , I said we have a safety problem in medical AI. I even suggested that it is bad enough that it could lead to a tragedy. It may not seem that way. Numerous papers are published every week, showing deep learning systems achieving impressive results on medical tasks. Products are being approved by the FDA, and companies are starting to sell them to healthcare providers. I’m going to argue we are doing three specific things wrong: we assume good experimental performance equals good clinical performance we assume good overall performance equals good subtask performance we are not v
Explore this link on the map →saved by
related reading
- Medical AI Safety: We have a problem. – Lauren Oakden-Raynerlaurenoakdenrayner.com
- AI for medicine is overhyped right now - by Dan Eltonmoreisdifferent.substack.com
- The algorithm will see you now - Works in Progress Magazineworksinprogress.co
- AI isn't replacing radiologistsworksinprogress.news
- AI as Normal Technology | Knight First Amendment Instituteknightcolumbia.org
- The Path to Medical Superintelligence | Microsoft AImicrosoft.ai
- Current AIs seem pretty misaligned to me — LessWronglesswrong.com
- Current AIs seem pretty misaligned to meblog.redwoodresearch.org
- Will AI make bad doctors better and good doctors worse?sarahgebauermd.substack.com
- AI Safety Seems Hard to Measurecold-takes.com
- Medical AI isn't the bottleneck to medical progress | Mechanize, Inc.mechanize.work
- AI Safety for Fleshy Humans: a whirlwind touraisafety.dance