MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194625966 · doi:10.1088/2633-1357/ac1f88

An AI-assisted chatbot for radiation safety education in radiotherapy

2021· article· en· W3194625966 on OpenAlexafffund
David Kovacek, James C. L. Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP SciNotes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto Metropolitan University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChatbotComputer scienceWorkflowIBMInterface (matter)LaptopThe InternetWorld Wide WebMultimediaHuman–computer interactionOperating systemDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose . We created a virtual assistant chatbot that will serve as a tool for radiation safety training for clinical staff, including radiation oncologist, radiotherapist and medical physicist, in cancer treatment. The Bot can also be used to test their knowledge on radiation safety. Methods . The Bot was constructed using IBM’s Watson Assistant functionalities on the IBM cloud. A layered structure approach was used in the workflow of the Bot to interact with the user. Through answering various questions concerning radiation safety in radiotherapy, the users can learn the essential information to gain knowledge, when working in a cancer centre/hospital. Results . The user interface of the Bot was a front-end window operating on Internet, which could easily be accessed by any Internet-of-things such as smartphone, tablet or laptop. The Bot could communicate with the user for radiation safety Q&A. If the Bot could not identify what the user needed, the Bot would provide a list of options as a guidance. Using the natural language processing in communication, knowledge transfer from the Bot to user could be carried out. Conclusion . It is concluded that the radiation safety chatbot worked as intended, utilizing all the tools provided by the IBM Watson Assistant. The Bot could provide radiation safety information to the radiation staff effectively, and be used in staff training in radiotherapy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP SciNotesSame topicAI in Service InteractionsFrench-language works237,207