this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
180 points (90.5% liked)

Technology

59605 readers
4225 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
180
ChatGPT bombs test on diagnosing kids’ medical cases with 83% error rate | It was bad at recognizing relationships and needs selective training, researchers say. (arstechnica.com)
submitted 10 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

ChatGPT bombs test on diagnosing kids’ medical cases with 83% error rate | It was bad at recognizing relationships and needs selective training, researchers say.::It was bad at recognizing relationships and needs selective training, researchers say.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kromem@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Because when you use the SotA model and best practices in prompting it actually can do a lot of things really well, including diagnose medical cases:

We assessed the performance of the newly released AI GPT-4 in diagnosing complex medical case challenges and compared the success rate to that of medical-journal readers. GPT-4 correctly diagnosed 57% of cases, outperforming 99.98% of simulated human readers generated from online answers. We highlight the potential for AI to be a powerful supportive tool for diagnosis

The OP study isn't using GPT-4. It's using GPT-3.5, which is very dumb. So the finding is less "LLMs can't diagnose pediatric cases" and more "we don't know how to do meaningful research on LLMs in medicine."