MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400950690 · doi:10.3390/robotics13080112

The Future of Intelligent Healthcare: A Systematic Analysis and Discussion on the Integration and Impact of Robots Using Large Language Models for Healthcare

2024· article· en· W4400950690 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueRobotics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences NorthBaycrest HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careRobotComputer scienceData scienceHuman–computer interactionEngineeringArtificial intelligencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential use of large language models (LLMs) in healthcare robotics can help address the significant demand put on healthcare systems around the world with respect to an aging demographic and a shortage of healthcare professionals. Even though LLMs have already been integrated into medicine to assist both clinicians and patients, the integration of LLMs within healthcare robots has not yet been explored for clinical settings. In this perspective paper, we investigate the groundbreaking developments in robotics and LLMs to uniquely identify the needed system requirements for designing health-specific LLM-based robots in terms of multi-modal communication through human–robot interactions (HRIs), semantic reasoning, and task planning. Furthermore, we discuss the ethical issues, open challenges, and potential future research directions for this emerging innovative field.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.323 · 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