okay guys, I developed AI mammo screening product, let me clear things up.
you read it wrong, and I don't blame you. I doubt whoever wrote this actually have a good understanding of the numbers.
the setup:
1. 400s confirmed patients
2. AI reads Mammography ONLY and missed 1/3
3. on those AI missed patients, radiologists do a second read on MRI, which is the gold standard for differential.
evidence: the referenced paper at the bottom <Added value of diffusion-weighted imaging in detecting breast cancer missed by artificial intelligence-based mammography.>
So, the whole point it (or its reference paper) is trying to make is: Mammography sucks, MRI is much better, which is a KNOWN FACT.
Now, let me give you some more background missing from the paper:
1. Why does Mammography suck? well, go google/gpt some images, its essentially X-ray for the breast, which compress 3D volumes into 2D average poole plane, which is infomation lossy. SO, AI or not, the sensitivity is limited by the modality.
2. How bad/good is Mammography AI? I would say 80~85% sensitivity agaist very thorough+experienced radiologist without making unbearable amount of FP, that probably translates to 2/3 sensitivity against real cancer cohert, so the referenced number is about right.
3. Mammography sucks, what's the point? its cheap AND fast, you can probably do walk-in and get interpretation back in hours. Whereas MRI you probably need to schedule 2 weeks ahead if not MORE. For a yearly screening, it works for the majority of polulation.
and final pro tip,
1. breast tumor is more pravelent than you think (maybe 1 in 2 by age 70+)
2. most guides recommend women with 45+ do yearly checkup
3. if you have dense breast (basically small and firm), add ultrasound screening to make sure.
4. breast feeding does good for both the mother and child, do that.
Radiologist here, thanks for posting this because I was biting my tongue.
I'll supplement by directing others to consider how number needed to screen may be a more useful metric than mammographic sensitivity when making policy decisions. They're related, obviously, but only one of them concerns outcomes.
There are different techniques and namings.
Essentially, EVERY model is biased/aligned towards something, perhaps its creator's value.
China or NOT.
Look at Grok and read Elon
Look at Claude and Dario
I am sure OpenAI and GDM have some secret alignment sets which are not pilled towards the interet of general public, they just smart enough to NOT talking about it out loud...
6-lecture series on the Foundations of Deep RL by Pieter Abbeel is also very recommended. gives very good overview and intuition
https://youtu.be/2GwBez0D20A
Not really.
FB was choked by Apple and trolled by Google for so long, Zuck understood his position without a hardware platform in the furture.
XR seems to be a reasonable bet which he already have an edge.
If he won, he won big.
the setup: 1. 400s confirmed patients 2. AI reads Mammography ONLY and missed 1/3 3. on those AI missed patients, radiologists do a second read on MRI, which is the gold standard for differential. evidence: the referenced paper at the bottom <Added value of diffusion-weighted imaging in detecting breast cancer missed by artificial intelligence-based mammography.>
So, the whole point it (or its reference paper) is trying to make is: Mammography sucks, MRI is much better, which is a KNOWN FACT.
Now, let me give you some more background missing from the paper: 1. Why does Mammography suck? well, go google/gpt some images, its essentially X-ray for the breast, which compress 3D volumes into 2D average poole plane, which is infomation lossy. SO, AI or not, the sensitivity is limited by the modality. 2. How bad/good is Mammography AI? I would say 80~85% sensitivity agaist very thorough+experienced radiologist without making unbearable amount of FP, that probably translates to 2/3 sensitivity against real cancer cohert, so the referenced number is about right. 3. Mammography sucks, what's the point? its cheap AND fast, you can probably do walk-in and get interpretation back in hours. Whereas MRI you probably need to schedule 2 weeks ahead if not MORE. For a yearly screening, it works for the majority of polulation.
and final pro tip, 1. breast tumor is more pravelent than you think (maybe 1 in 2 by age 70+) 2. most guides recommend women with 45+ do yearly checkup 3. if you have dense breast (basically small and firm), add ultrasound screening to make sure. 4. breast feeding does good for both the mother and child, do that.
peace & love