MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297685013 · doi:10.1109/ichi54592.2022.00127

Towards Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare

2022· article· en· W4297685013 on OpenAlex
Carson K. Leung, Evan W.R. Madill, Joglas Souza, Christine Y. Zhang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 10th International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsTrustworthinessHealth careComputer scienceHealth informaticsInformaticsData scienceArtificial intelligenceBig dataKnowledge managementData miningInternet privacyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Healthcare informatics is an interdisciplinary area where computer science, data science, cognitive science, informatics principles, and information technology meet to address problems and support healthcare, medicine, public health, and/or everyday wellness. In many healthcare and medical applications, it is helpful to have models that can learn from historical healthcare data or instances to make predictions on future instances. For human to trust these models or to perceive these models to be trustworthy, it is equally important to build a trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) solution. Hence, in this paper, towards trustworthy AI in healthcare, we present an explainable AI (XAI) solution that makes accurate predictions and explains the predictions. Evaluation results on real-life datasets demonstrates the effectiveness of our XAI solution towards trustworthy AI in healthcare.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.252 · 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