MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389109824 · doi:10.5539/cis.v16n4p78

Applying AI in the Healthcare Sector: Difficulties

2023· article· en· W4389109824 on OpenAlex
Abdussalam Garba, Muhammad Ahmad Baballe, Mukhtar Ibrahim Bello

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceHealth careApplications of artificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Space (punctuation)Class (philosophy)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) broadly speaking refers to any behavior shown by a computer or system that is similar to that of a person. Computers can learn from data without explicit human programming thanks to a kind of artificial intelligence known as "machine learning". The application of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in medicine is one of the most important current trends in global healthcare. Artificial intelligence-based technologies are radically changing the global healthcare system by allowing for a drastic rebuilding of the medical diagnostics system and a corresponding decrease in healthcare costs. Prior to beginning treatment, an illness must be classified into which class of disorders it belongs. It is possible to classify the disease kind according to the feature space of the ailment. Machine learning algorithms can help with this problem.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.302 · 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