-
Capabilities of Gemini Models in Medicine
Authors:
Khaled Saab,
Tao Tu,
Wei-Hung Weng,
Ryutaro Tanno,
David Stutz,
Ellery Wulczyn,
Fan Zhang,
Tim Strother,
Chunjong Park,
Elahe Vedadi,
Juanma Zambrano Chaves,
Szu-Yeu Hu,
Mike Schaekermann,
Aishwarya Kamath,
Yong Cheng,
David G. T. Barrett,
Cathy Cheung,
Basil Mustafa,
Anil Palepu,
Daniel McDuff,
Le Hou,
Tomer Golany,
Luyang Liu,
Jean-baptiste Alayrac,
Neil Houlsby
, et al. (42 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Excellence in a wide variety of medical applications poses considerable challenges for AI, requiring advanced reasoning, access to up-to-date medical knowledge and understanding of complex multimodal data. Gemini models, with strong general capabilities in multimodal and long-context reasoning, offer exciting possibilities in medicine. Building on these core strengths of Gemini, we introduce Med-G…
▽ More
Excellence in a wide variety of medical applications poses considerable challenges for AI, requiring advanced reasoning, access to up-to-date medical knowledge and understanding of complex multimodal data. Gemini models, with strong general capabilities in multimodal and long-context reasoning, offer exciting possibilities in medicine. Building on these core strengths of Gemini, we introduce Med-Gemini, a family of highly capable multimodal models that are specialized in medicine with the ability to seamlessly use web search, and that can be efficiently tailored to novel modalities using custom encoders. We evaluate Med-Gemini on 14 medical benchmarks, establishing new state-of-the-art (SoTA) performance on 10 of them, and surpass the GPT-4 model family on every benchmark where a direct comparison is viable, often by a wide margin. On the popular MedQA (USMLE) benchmark, our best-performing Med-Gemini model achieves SoTA performance of 91.1% accuracy, using a novel uncertainty-guided search strategy. On 7 multimodal benchmarks including NEJM Image Challenges and MMMU (health & medicine), Med-Gemini improves over GPT-4V by an average relative margin of 44.5%. We demonstrate the effectiveness of Med-Gemini's long-context capabilities through SoTA performance on a needle-in-a-haystack retrieval task from long de-identified health records and medical video question answering, surpassing prior bespoke methods using only in-context learning. Finally, Med-Gemini's performance suggests real-world utility by surpassing human experts on tasks such as medical text summarization, alongside demonstrations of promising potential for multimodal medical dialogue, medical research and education. Taken together, our results offer compelling evidence for Med-Gemini's potential, although further rigorous evaluation will be crucial before real-world deployment in this safety-critical domain.
△ Less
Submitted 1 May, 2024; v1 submitted 29 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
A Toolbox for Surfacing Health Equity Harms and Biases in Large Language Models
Authors:
Stephen R. Pfohl,
Heather Cole-Lewis,
Rory Sayres,
Darlene Neal,
Mercy Asiedu,
Awa Dieng,
Nenad Tomasev,
Qazi Mamunur Rashid,
Shekoofeh Azizi,
Negar Rostamzadeh,
Liam G. McCoy,
Leo Anthony Celi,
Yun Liu,
Mike Schaekermann,
Alanna Walton,
Alicia Parrish,
Chirag Nagpal,
Preeti Singh,
Akeiylah Dewitt,
Philip Mansfield,
Sushant Prakash,
Katherine Heller,
Alan Karthikesalingam,
Christopher Semturs,
Joelle Barral
, et al. (5 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Large language models (LLMs) hold immense promise to serve complex health information needs but also have the potential to introduce harm and exacerbate health disparities. Reliably evaluating equity-related model failures is a critical step toward developing systems that promote health equity. In this work, we present resources and methodologies for surfacing biases with potential to precipitate…
▽ More
Large language models (LLMs) hold immense promise to serve complex health information needs but also have the potential to introduce harm and exacerbate health disparities. Reliably evaluating equity-related model failures is a critical step toward developing systems that promote health equity. In this work, we present resources and methodologies for surfacing biases with potential to precipitate equity-related harms in long-form, LLM-generated answers to medical questions and then conduct an empirical case study with Med-PaLM 2, resulting in the largest human evaluation study in this area to date. Our contributions include a multifactorial framework for human assessment of LLM-generated answers for biases, and EquityMedQA, a collection of seven newly-released datasets comprising both manually-curated and LLM-generated questions enriched for adversarial queries. Both our human assessment framework and dataset design process are grounded in an iterative participatory approach and review of possible biases in Med-PaLM 2 answers to adversarial queries. Through our empirical study, we find that the use of a collection of datasets curated through a variety of methodologies, coupled with a thorough evaluation protocol that leverages multiple assessment rubric designs and diverse rater groups, surfaces biases that may be missed via narrower evaluation approaches. Our experience underscores the importance of using diverse assessment methodologies and involving raters of varying backgrounds and expertise. We emphasize that while our framework can identify specific forms of bias, it is not sufficient to holistically assess whether the deployment of an AI system promotes equitable health outcomes. We hope the broader community leverages and builds on these tools and methods towards realizing a shared goal of LLMs that promote accessible and equitable healthcare for all.
△ Less
Submitted 18 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
MINT: A wrapper to make multi-modal and multi-image AI models interactive
Authors:
Jan Freyberg,
Abhijit Guha Roy,
Terry Spitz,
Beverly Freeman,
Mike Schaekermann,
Patricia Strachan,
Eva Schnider,
Renee Wong,
Dale R Webster,
Alan Karthikesalingam,
Yun Liu,
Krishnamurthy Dvijotham,
Umesh Telang
Abstract:
During the diagnostic process, doctors incorporate multimodal information including imaging and the medical history - and similarly medical AI development has increasingly become multimodal. In this paper we tackle a more subtle challenge: doctors take a targeted medical history to obtain only the most pertinent pieces of information; how do we enable AI to do the same? We develop a wrapper method…
▽ More
During the diagnostic process, doctors incorporate multimodal information including imaging and the medical history - and similarly medical AI development has increasingly become multimodal. In this paper we tackle a more subtle challenge: doctors take a targeted medical history to obtain only the most pertinent pieces of information; how do we enable AI to do the same? We develop a wrapper method named MINT (Make your model INTeractive) that automatically determines what pieces of information are most valuable at each step, and ask for only the most useful information. We demonstrate the efficacy of MINT wrapping a skin disease prediction model, where multiple images and a set of optional answers to $25$ standard metadata questions (i.e., structured medical history) are used by a multi-modal deep network to provide a differential diagnosis. We show that MINT can identify whether metadata inputs are needed and if so, which question to ask next. We also demonstrate that when collecting multiple images, MINT can identify if an additional image would be beneficial, and if so, which type of image to capture. We showed that MINT reduces the number of metadata and image inputs needed by 82% and 36.2% respectively, while maintaining predictive performance. Using real-world AI dermatology system data, we show that needing fewer inputs can retain users that may otherwise fail to complete the system submission and drop off without a diagnosis. Qualitative examples show MINT can closely mimic the step-by-step decision making process of a clinical workflow and how this is different for straight forward cases versus more difficult, ambiguous cases. Finally we demonstrate how MINT is robust to different underlying multi-model classifiers and can be easily adapted to user requirements without significant model re-training.
△ Less
Submitted 22 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Towards Conversational Diagnostic AI
Authors:
Tao Tu,
Anil Palepu,
Mike Schaekermann,
Khaled Saab,
Jan Freyberg,
Ryutaro Tanno,
Amy Wang,
Brenna Li,
Mohamed Amin,
Nenad Tomasev,
Shekoofeh Azizi,
Karan Singhal,
Yong Cheng,
Le Hou,
Albert Webson,
Kavita Kulkarni,
S Sara Mahdavi,
Christopher Semturs,
Juraj Gottweis,
Joelle Barral,
Katherine Chou,
Greg S Corrado,
Yossi Matias,
Alan Karthikesalingam,
Vivek Natarajan
Abstract:
At the heart of medicine lies the physician-patient dialogue, where skillful history-taking paves the way for accurate diagnosis, effective management, and enduring trust. Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems capable of diagnostic dialogue could increase accessibility, consistency, and quality of care. However, approximating clinicians' expertise is an outstanding grand challenge. Here, we introdu…
▽ More
At the heart of medicine lies the physician-patient dialogue, where skillful history-taking paves the way for accurate diagnosis, effective management, and enduring trust. Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems capable of diagnostic dialogue could increase accessibility, consistency, and quality of care. However, approximating clinicians' expertise is an outstanding grand challenge. Here, we introduce AMIE (Articulate Medical Intelligence Explorer), a Large Language Model (LLM) based AI system optimized for diagnostic dialogue.
AMIE uses a novel self-play based simulated environment with automated feedback mechanisms for scaling learning across diverse disease conditions, specialties, and contexts. We designed a framework for evaluating clinically-meaningful axes of performance including history-taking, diagnostic accuracy, management reasoning, communication skills, and empathy. We compared AMIE's performance to that of primary care physicians (PCPs) in a randomized, double-blind crossover study of text-based consultations with validated patient actors in the style of an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). The study included 149 case scenarios from clinical providers in Canada, the UK, and India, 20 PCPs for comparison with AMIE, and evaluations by specialist physicians and patient actors. AMIE demonstrated greater diagnostic accuracy and superior performance on 28 of 32 axes according to specialist physicians and 24 of 26 axes according to patient actors. Our research has several limitations and should be interpreted with appropriate caution. Clinicians were limited to unfamiliar synchronous text-chat which permits large-scale LLM-patient interactions but is not representative of usual clinical practice. While further research is required before AMIE could be translated to real-world settings, the results represent a milestone towards conversational diagnostic AI.
△ Less
Submitted 10 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Towards Accurate Differential Diagnosis with Large Language Models
Authors:
Daniel McDuff,
Mike Schaekermann,
Tao Tu,
Anil Palepu,
Amy Wang,
Jake Garrison,
Karan Singhal,
Yash Sharma,
Shekoofeh Azizi,
Kavita Kulkarni,
Le Hou,
Yong Cheng,
Yun Liu,
S Sara Mahdavi,
Sushant Prakash,
Anupam Pathak,
Christopher Semturs,
Shwetak Patel,
Dale R Webster,
Ewa Dominowska,
Juraj Gottweis,
Joelle Barral,
Katherine Chou,
Greg S Corrado,
Yossi Matias
, et al. (3 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
An accurate differential diagnosis (DDx) is a cornerstone of medical care, often reached through an iterative process of interpretation that combines clinical history, physical examination, investigations and procedures. Interactive interfaces powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) present new opportunities to both assist and automate aspects of this process. In this study, we introduce an LLM op…
▽ More
An accurate differential diagnosis (DDx) is a cornerstone of medical care, often reached through an iterative process of interpretation that combines clinical history, physical examination, investigations and procedures. Interactive interfaces powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) present new opportunities to both assist and automate aspects of this process. In this study, we introduce an LLM optimized for diagnostic reasoning, and evaluate its ability to generate a DDx alone or as an aid to clinicians. 20 clinicians evaluated 302 challenging, real-world medical cases sourced from the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) case reports. Each case report was read by two clinicians, who were randomized to one of two assistive conditions: either assistance from search engines and standard medical resources, or LLM assistance in addition to these tools. All clinicians provided a baseline, unassisted DDx prior to using the respective assistive tools. Our LLM for DDx exhibited standalone performance that exceeded that of unassisted clinicians (top-10 accuracy 59.1% vs 33.6%, [p = 0.04]). Comparing the two assisted study arms, the DDx quality score was higher for clinicians assisted by our LLM (top-10 accuracy 51.7%) compared to clinicians without its assistance (36.1%) (McNemar's Test: 45.7, p < 0.01) and clinicians with search (44.4%) (4.75, p = 0.03). Further, clinicians assisted by our LLM arrived at more comprehensive differential lists than those without its assistance. Our study suggests that our LLM for DDx has potential to improve clinicians' diagnostic reasoning and accuracy in challenging cases, meriting further real-world evaluation for its ability to empower physicians and widen patients' access to specialist-level expertise.
△ Less
Submitted 30 November, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
Consensus, dissensus and synergy between clinicians and specialist foundation models in radiology report generation
Authors:
Ryutaro Tanno,
David G. T. Barrett,
Andrew Sellergren,
Sumedh Ghaisas,
Sumanth Dathathri,
Abigail See,
Johannes Welbl,
Karan Singhal,
Shekoofeh Azizi,
Tao Tu,
Mike Schaekermann,
Rhys May,
Roy Lee,
SiWai Man,
Zahra Ahmed,
Sara Mahdavi,
Yossi Matias,
Joelle Barral,
Ali Eslami,
Danielle Belgrave,
Vivek Natarajan,
Shravya Shetty,
Pushmeet Kohli,
Po-Sen Huang,
Alan Karthikesalingam
, et al. (1 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Radiology reports are an instrumental part of modern medicine, informing key clinical decisions such as diagnosis and treatment. The worldwide shortage of radiologists, however, restricts access to expert care and imposes heavy workloads, contributing to avoidable errors and delays in report delivery. While recent progress in automated report generation with vision-language models offer clear pote…
▽ More
Radiology reports are an instrumental part of modern medicine, informing key clinical decisions such as diagnosis and treatment. The worldwide shortage of radiologists, however, restricts access to expert care and imposes heavy workloads, contributing to avoidable errors and delays in report delivery. While recent progress in automated report generation with vision-language models offer clear potential in ameliorating the situation, the path to real-world adoption has been stymied by the challenge of evaluating the clinical quality of AI-generated reports. In this study, we build a state-of-the-art report generation system for chest radiographs, $\textit{Flamingo-CXR}$, by fine-tuning a well-known vision-language foundation model on radiology data. To evaluate the quality of the AI-generated reports, a group of 16 certified radiologists provide detailed evaluations of AI-generated and human written reports for chest X-rays from an intensive care setting in the United States and an inpatient setting in India. At least one radiologist (out of two per case) preferred the AI report to the ground truth report in over 60$\%$ of cases for both datasets. Amongst the subset of AI-generated reports that contain errors, the most frequently cited reasons were related to the location and finding, whereas for human written reports, most mistakes were related to severity and finding. This disparity suggested potential complementarity between our AI system and human experts, prompting us to develop an assistive scenario in which Flamingo-CXR generates a first-draft report, which is subsequently revised by a clinician. This is the first demonstration of clinician-AI collaboration for report writing, and the resultant reports are assessed to be equivalent or preferred by at least one radiologist to reports written by experts alone in 80$\%$ of in-patient cases and 60$\%$ of intensive care cases.
△ Less
Submitted 20 December, 2023; v1 submitted 30 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
Towards Generalist Biomedical AI
Authors:
Tao Tu,
Shekoofeh Azizi,
Danny Driess,
Mike Schaekermann,
Mohamed Amin,
Pi-Chuan Chang,
Andrew Carroll,
Chuck Lau,
Ryutaro Tanno,
Ira Ktena,
Basil Mustafa,
Aakanksha Chowdhery,
Yun Liu,
Simon Kornblith,
David Fleet,
Philip Mansfield,
Sushant Prakash,
Renee Wong,
Sunny Virmani,
Christopher Semturs,
S Sara Mahdavi,
Bradley Green,
Ewa Dominowska,
Blaise Aguera y Arcas,
Joelle Barral
, et al. (7 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Medicine is inherently multimodal, with rich data modalities spanning text, imaging, genomics, and more. Generalist biomedical artificial intelligence (AI) systems that flexibly encode, integrate, and interpret this data at scale can potentially enable impactful applications ranging from scientific discovery to care delivery. To enable the development of these models, we first curate MultiMedBench…
▽ More
Medicine is inherently multimodal, with rich data modalities spanning text, imaging, genomics, and more. Generalist biomedical artificial intelligence (AI) systems that flexibly encode, integrate, and interpret this data at scale can potentially enable impactful applications ranging from scientific discovery to care delivery. To enable the development of these models, we first curate MultiMedBench, a new multimodal biomedical benchmark. MultiMedBench encompasses 14 diverse tasks such as medical question answering, mammography and dermatology image interpretation, radiology report generation and summarization, and genomic variant calling. We then introduce Med-PaLM Multimodal (Med-PaLM M), our proof of concept for a generalist biomedical AI system. Med-PaLM M is a large multimodal generative model that flexibly encodes and interprets biomedical data including clinical language, imaging, and genomics with the same set of model weights. Med-PaLM M reaches performance competitive with or exceeding the state of the art on all MultiMedBench tasks, often surpassing specialist models by a wide margin. We also report examples of zero-shot generalization to novel medical concepts and tasks, positive transfer learning across tasks, and emergent zero-shot medical reasoning. To further probe the capabilities and limitations of Med-PaLM M, we conduct a radiologist evaluation of model-generated (and human) chest X-ray reports and observe encouraging performance across model scales. In a side-by-side ranking on 246 retrospective chest X-rays, clinicians express a pairwise preference for Med-PaLM M reports over those produced by radiologists in up to 40.50% of cases, suggesting potential clinical utility. While considerable work is needed to validate these models in real-world use cases, our results represent a milestone towards the development of generalist biomedical AI systems.
△ Less
Submitted 26 July, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Evaluating AI systems under uncertain ground truth: a case study in dermatology
Authors:
David Stutz,
Ali Taylan Cemgil,
Abhijit Guha Roy,
Tatiana Matejovicova,
Melih Barsbey,
Patricia Strachan,
Mike Schaekermann,
Jan Freyberg,
Rajeev Rikhye,
Beverly Freeman,
Javier Perez Matos,
Umesh Telang,
Dale R. Webster,
Yuan Liu,
Greg S. Corrado,
Yossi Matias,
Pushmeet Kohli,
Yun Liu,
Arnaud Doucet,
Alan Karthikesalingam
Abstract:
For safety, AI systems in health undergo thorough evaluations before deployment, validating their predictions against a ground truth that is assumed certain. However, this is actually not the case and the ground truth may be uncertain. Unfortunately, this is largely ignored in standard evaluation of AI models but can have severe consequences such as overestimating the future performance. To avoid…
▽ More
For safety, AI systems in health undergo thorough evaluations before deployment, validating their predictions against a ground truth that is assumed certain. However, this is actually not the case and the ground truth may be uncertain. Unfortunately, this is largely ignored in standard evaluation of AI models but can have severe consequences such as overestimating the future performance. To avoid this, we measure the effects of ground truth uncertainty, which we assume decomposes into two main components: annotation uncertainty which stems from the lack of reliable annotations, and inherent uncertainty due to limited observational information. This ground truth uncertainty is ignored when estimating the ground truth by deterministically aggregating annotations, e.g., by majority voting or averaging. In contrast, we propose a framework where aggregation is done using a statistical model. Specifically, we frame aggregation of annotations as posterior inference of so-called plausibilities, representing distributions over classes in a classification setting, subject to a hyper-parameter encoding annotator reliability. Based on this model, we propose a metric for measuring annotation uncertainty and provide uncertainty-adjusted metrics for performance evaluation. We present a case study applying our framework to skin condition classification from images where annotations are provided in the form of differential diagnoses. The deterministic adjudication process called inverse rank normalization (IRN) from previous work ignores ground truth uncertainty in evaluation. Instead, we present two alternative statistical models: a probabilistic version of IRN and a Plackett-Luce-based model. We find that a large portion of the dataset exhibits significant ground truth uncertainty and standard IRN-based evaluation severely over-estimates performance without providing uncertainty estimates.
△ Less
Submitted 5 July, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Towards Expert-Level Medical Question Answering with Large Language Models
Authors:
Karan Singhal,
Tao Tu,
Juraj Gottweis,
Rory Sayres,
Ellery Wulczyn,
Le Hou,
Kevin Clark,
Stephen Pfohl,
Heather Cole-Lewis,
Darlene Neal,
Mike Schaekermann,
Amy Wang,
Mohamed Amin,
Sami Lachgar,
Philip Mansfield,
Sushant Prakash,
Bradley Green,
Ewa Dominowska,
Blaise Aguera y Arcas,
Nenad Tomasev,
Yun Liu,
Renee Wong,
Christopher Semturs,
S. Sara Mahdavi,
Joelle Barral
, et al. (6 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Recent artificial intelligence (AI) systems have reached milestones in "grand challenges" ranging from Go to protein-folding. The capability to retrieve medical knowledge, reason over it, and answer medical questions comparably to physicians has long been viewed as one such grand challenge.
Large language models (LLMs) have catalyzed significant progress in medical question answering; Med-PaLM w…
▽ More
Recent artificial intelligence (AI) systems have reached milestones in "grand challenges" ranging from Go to protein-folding. The capability to retrieve medical knowledge, reason over it, and answer medical questions comparably to physicians has long been viewed as one such grand challenge.
Large language models (LLMs) have catalyzed significant progress in medical question answering; Med-PaLM was the first model to exceed a "passing" score in US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) style questions with a score of 67.2% on the MedQA dataset. However, this and other prior work suggested significant room for improvement, especially when models' answers were compared to clinicians' answers. Here we present Med-PaLM 2, which bridges these gaps by leveraging a combination of base LLM improvements (PaLM 2), medical domain finetuning, and prompting strategies including a novel ensemble refinement approach.
Med-PaLM 2 scored up to 86.5% on the MedQA dataset, improving upon Med-PaLM by over 19% and setting a new state-of-the-art. We also observed performance approaching or exceeding state-of-the-art across MedMCQA, PubMedQA, and MMLU clinical topics datasets.
We performed detailed human evaluations on long-form questions along multiple axes relevant to clinical applications. In pairwise comparative ranking of 1066 consumer medical questions, physicians preferred Med-PaLM 2 answers to those produced by physicians on eight of nine axes pertaining to clinical utility (p < 0.001). We also observed significant improvements compared to Med-PaLM on every evaluation axis (p < 0.001) on newly introduced datasets of 240 long-form "adversarial" questions to probe LLM limitations.
While further studies are necessary to validate the efficacy of these models in real-world settings, these results highlight rapid progress towards physician-level performance in medical question answering.
△ Less
Submitted 16 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
In Search of Ambiguity: A Three-Stage Workflow Design to Clarify Annotation Guidelines for Crowd Workers
Authors:
Vivek Krishna Pradhan,
Mike Schaekermann,
Matthew Lease
Abstract:
We propose a novel three-stage FIND-RESOLVE-LABEL workflow for crowdsourced annotation to reduce ambiguity in task instructions and thus improve annotation quality. Stage 1 (FIND) asks the crowd to find examples whose correct label seems ambiguous given task instructions. Workers are also asked to provide a short tag which describes the ambiguous concept embodied by the specific instance found. We…
▽ More
We propose a novel three-stage FIND-RESOLVE-LABEL workflow for crowdsourced annotation to reduce ambiguity in task instructions and thus improve annotation quality. Stage 1 (FIND) asks the crowd to find examples whose correct label seems ambiguous given task instructions. Workers are also asked to provide a short tag which describes the ambiguous concept embodied by the specific instance found. We compare collaborative vs. non-collaborative designs for this stage. In Stage 2 (RESOLVE), the requester selects one or more of these ambiguous examples to label (resolving ambiguity). The new label(s) are automatically injected back into task instructions in order to improve clarity. Finally, in Stage 3 (LABEL), workers perform the actual annotation using the revised guidelines with clarifying examples. We compare three designs for using these examples: examples only, tags only, or both. We report image labeling experiments over six task designs using Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Results show improved annotation accuracy and further insights regarding effective design for crowdsourced annotation tasks.
△ Less
Submitted 4 December, 2021;
originally announced December 2021.
-
Proceedings of the CSCW 2021 Workshop -- Investigating and Mitigating Biases in Crowdsourced Data
Authors:
Danula Hettiachchi,
Mark Sanderson,
Jorge Goncalves,
Simo Hosio,
Gabriella Kazai,
Matthew Lease,
Mike Schaekermann,
Emine Yilmaz
Abstract:
This volume contains the position papers presented at CSCW 2021 Workshop - Investigating and Mitigating Biases in Crowdsourced Data, held online on 23rd October 2021, at the 24th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW 2021). The workshop explored how specific crowdsourcing workflows, worker attributes, and work practices contribute to biases in data. The w…
▽ More
This volume contains the position papers presented at CSCW 2021 Workshop - Investigating and Mitigating Biases in Crowdsourced Data, held online on 23rd October 2021, at the 24th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW 2021). The workshop explored how specific crowdsourcing workflows, worker attributes, and work practices contribute to biases in data. The workshop also included discussions on research directions to mitigate labelling biases, particularly in a crowdsourced context, and the implications of such methods for the workers.
△ Less
Submitted 28 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
-
Data Excellence for AI: Why Should You Care
Authors:
Lora Aroyo,
Matthew Lease,
Praveen Paritosh,
Mike Schaekermann
Abstract:
The efficacy of machine learning (ML) models depends on both algorithms and data. Training data defines what we want our models to learn, and testing data provides the means by which their empirical progress is measured. Benchmark datasets define the entire world within which models exist and operate, yet research continues to focus on critiquing and improving the algorithmic aspect of the models…
▽ More
The efficacy of machine learning (ML) models depends on both algorithms and data. Training data defines what we want our models to learn, and testing data provides the means by which their empirical progress is measured. Benchmark datasets define the entire world within which models exist and operate, yet research continues to focus on critiquing and improving the algorithmic aspect of the models rather than critiquing and improving the data with which our models operate. If "data is the new oil," we are still missing work on the refineries by which the data itself could be optimized for more effective use.
△ Less
Submitted 19 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
-
The Challenge of Variable Effort Crowdsourcing and How Visible Gold Can Help
Authors:
Danula Hettiachchi,
Mike Schaekermann,
Tristan McKinney,
Matthew Lease
Abstract:
We consider a class of variable effort human annotation tasks in which the number of labels required per item can greatly vary (e.g., finding all faces in an image, named entities in a text, bird calls in an audio recording, etc.). In such tasks, some items require far more effort than others to annotate. Furthermore, the per-item annotation effort is not known until after each item is annotated s…
▽ More
We consider a class of variable effort human annotation tasks in which the number of labels required per item can greatly vary (e.g., finding all faces in an image, named entities in a text, bird calls in an audio recording, etc.). In such tasks, some items require far more effort than others to annotate. Furthermore, the per-item annotation effort is not known until after each item is annotated since determining the number of labels required is an implicit part of the annotation task itself. On an image bounding-box task with crowdsourced annotators, we show that annotator accuracy and recall consistently drop as effort increases. We hypothesize reasons for this drop and investigate a set of approaches to counteract it. Firstly, we benchmark on this task a set of general best-practice methods for quality crowdsourcing. Notably, only one of these methods actually improves quality: the use of visible gold questions that provide periodic feedback to workers on their accuracy as they work. Given these promising results, we then investigate and evaluate variants of the visible gold approach, yielding further improvement. Final results show a 7% improvement in bounding-box accuracy over the baseline. We discuss the generality of the visible gold approach and promising directions for future research.
△ Less
Submitted 19 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Deep Learning and Glaucoma Specialists: The Relative Importance of Optic Disc Features to Predict Glaucoma Referral in Fundus Photos
Authors:
Sonia Phene,
R. Carter Dunn,
Naama Hammel,
Yun Liu,
Jonathan Krause,
Naho Kitade,
Mike Schaekermann,
Rory Sayres,
Derek J. Wu,
Ashish Bora,
Christopher Semturs,
Anita Misra,
Abigail E. Huang,
Arielle Spitze,
Felipe A. Medeiros,
April Y. Maa,
Monica Gandhi,
Greg S. Corrado,
Lily Peng,
Dale R. Webster
Abstract:
Glaucoma is the leading cause of preventable, irreversible blindness world-wide. The disease can remain asymptomatic until severe, and an estimated 50%-90% of people with glaucoma remain undiagnosed. Glaucoma screening is recommended for early detection and treatment. A cost-effective tool to detect glaucoma could expand screening access to a much larger patient population, but such a tool is curr…
▽ More
Glaucoma is the leading cause of preventable, irreversible blindness world-wide. The disease can remain asymptomatic until severe, and an estimated 50%-90% of people with glaucoma remain undiagnosed. Glaucoma screening is recommended for early detection and treatment. A cost-effective tool to detect glaucoma could expand screening access to a much larger patient population, but such a tool is currently unavailable. We trained a deep learning algorithm using a retrospective dataset of 86,618 images, assessed for glaucomatous optic nerve head features and referable glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON). The algorithm was validated using 3 datasets. For referable GON, the algorithm had an AUC of 0.945 (95% CI, 0.929-0.960) in dataset A (1205 images, 1 image/patient; 18.1% referable), images adjudicated by panels of Glaucoma Specialists (GSs); 0.855 (95% CI, 0.841-0.870) in dataset B (9642 images, 1 image/patient; 9.2% referable), images from Atlanta Veterans Affairs Eye Clinic diabetic teleretinal screening program; and 0.881 (95% CI, 0.838-0.918) in dataset C (346 images, 1 image/patient; 81.7% referable), images from Dr. Shroff's Charity Eye Hospital's glaucoma clinic. The algorithm showed significantly higher sensitivity than 7 of 10 graders not involved in determining the reference standard, including 2 of 3 GSs, and showed higher specificity than 3 graders, while remaining comparable to others. For both GSs and the algorithm, the most crucial features related to referable GON were: presence of vertical cup-to-disc ratio of 0.7 or more, neuroretinal rim notching, retinal nerve fiber layer defect, and bared circumlinear vessels. An algorithm trained on fundus images alone can detect referable GON with higher sensitivity than and comparable specificity to eye care providers. The algorithm maintained good performance on an independent dataset with diagnoses based on a full glaucoma workup.
△ Less
Submitted 30 August, 2019; v1 submitted 20 December, 2018;
originally announced December 2018.