Artificial intelligence-directed acupuncture: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acupuncture is widely used around the whole world nowadays and exhibits significant efficacy against many chronic diseases, especially in pain-related diseases. With the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI), its implementation into acupuncture has achieved a series of significant breakthroughs in many areas of acupuncture practice, such as acupoints selection and prescription, acupuncture manipulation identification, acupuncture efficacy prediction, and so on. The paper will discuss the significant theoretical and technical achievements in AI-directed acupuncture. AI-based data mining methods uncovered crucial acupoint combinations for treating various diseases, which provide a scientific basis for acupoints prescription in clinical practice. Furthermore, the rapid development of modern TCM instruments facilitates the integration of modern medical instruments, AI techniques, and acupuncture. This integration significantly improves the quantification, objectification, and standardization of acupuncture as well as the delivery of clinical personalized acupuncture therapy. Machine learning-based clinical efficacy prediction of acupuncture can help doctors screen patients who may benefit from acupuncture treatment. However, the existing challenges require additional work for developing AI-directed acupuncture. Some include a better understanding of ancient Chinese philosophy for AI researchers, TCM acupuncture theory-based explanation of the knowledge discoveries, construction of acupuncture databases, and clinical trials for novel knowledge validation. This review aims to summarize the major contribution of AI techniques to the discovery of novel acupuncture knowledge, the improvement for acupuncture safety and efficacy, the development and inheritance of acupuncture, and the major challenges for the further development of AI-directed acupuncture. The development of acupuncture can progress with the help of AI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".