What Artificial Intelligence Has Been Succeeding At – I

Unlike how AI has been floundering in offices, it’s been doing well elsewhere.  In Part I of this three-month rundown, you may wish to take note of the fields in which it has been triumphant and perhaps wonder how its threats and hallucinations don’t seem to be a factor there. 

First, “Artificial intelligence transforms patient care and reduces burnout, physician says” (Kennedy Hayes, Fox News, April 13^th).  The AI variety is “called ambient listening,” which “surveys show” “thousands of physicians across the country are using.”  This technology is like an enhanced transcriptionist, doing that with patient conversations in any of various languages, and adding a summary, with “a system of checks and balances” between doctors and software.  Hundreds of physician-employing organizations now use it, and it may soon be employed for other health professionals as well.

In another victory, “AI system restores speech for paralyzed patients using own voice” (Kurt Knutsson, Fox News, April 16^th).  Though not yet in production, in research “an AI-powered system… restores natural speech to paralyzed individuals in real time,” using “brain-computer interfaces.”  It uses electrodes and “electromyography sensors” on surfaces of the brain and face, and “learns to transform (mental activity) into the sounds of the patient’s voice.”  The author said it represents “key advancements” in “real-time speech synthesis,” “naturalistic speech,” and “personalized voice.”

As opposed to what many people thought, “Your A.I. Radiologist Will Not Be With You Soon” (Steve Lohr, The New York Times, May 14^th).  It seemed a good forecast that AI’s algorithmic abilities would far surpass human radiologists’, but “in recent years” at the Mayo Clinic, the technology has been used instead “to sharpen images, automate routine tasks, identify medical abnormalities and predict disease,” and “can also serve as “a second set of eyes.””  It has not been good enough to “advise other doctors and surgeons, talk to patients, write reports and analyze medical records,” or assess what results “might mean for an individual patient with a particular medical history, tapping years of experience.”  As a result, “a recent study from the American College of Radiology projected a steadily growing work force through 2055.”

Onto the more controversial area of education, we saw “How Miami Schools Are Leading 100,000 Students Into the A.I. Future” (Natasha Singer, The New York Times, May 19^th).  One way was to have them critique the tool’s requested “Kennedyesque text” using the students’ knowledge from studying that president’s speeches.  Another was for them to train AI models themselves on specific topics, something also requiring understanding they had acquired in the class.  A third was having students try “to break A.I.,” by posing “the most inappropriate questions you can imagine,” and hoping to “prompt the chatbots to produce racist, violent or sexually explicit responses.”  Perhaps that’s the way for people to learn to understand how AI functions, and with it, its limitations, while gaining true experience working with it.

On scholarship, “A.I. Is Poised to Rewrite History.  Literally.” (Bill Wasik, The New York Times, June 16^th).  With its penchant for making up facts, unchecked AI could pollute the stream of historical records.  Yet here, historians have found ways it could help without going too far, such as by identifying formerly obscure participants and by summarizing works in ways provoking new insights.  A research assistant with a good if strange mind can be plenty useful – if nothing it writes ends up in final versions unverified. 

That brings us back to how artificial intelligence is serving in offices.  It can be beneficial, if its shortcomings are known and minimized.  That may be the answer there.  See at least five more of its recent achievements next week.