[directevolve]

The did NOT test radiologists. There were NO healthy controls. They evaluated AI false negative rate and used exclusively unblinded radiologists to grade the level of visibility and other features of the cancer.

Utility of the study is to evaluate potential AI sensitivity if used for mass fully automated screenings using mammography data. But says NOTHING about the CRUCIAL false positive rate (no healthy controls) and NOTHING about AI vs. human performance.

See my main comment elsewhere in this threat.

[swisniewski]

Huh? I was commenting that there were no controls and the doctors were given skewed data, so any conclusions of ai ability vs Dr ability seem misplaced. Which seems to be what you just said… so I am confused about what I said that was inaccurate.

Can you clarify?

I also hinted at the fact that I only had access to the posted summary and the original linked article, and not the study. So if there is data I am missing… please enlighten me.

[directevolve]

I was just reinforcing that point as your comment was worded in a way that left room for doubt. Sorry if this came across as critical toward you or implying you held a different interpretation.