JAMA Internal Medicine presents an opinion article: “Can Artificial Intelligence Speak for Incapacitated Patients at the End of Life?” The authors, three doctors from UCSF, don’t seem to have heard…
I mean, while this idea is obviously a stupid one, I have seen some suggestion that an AI could be used to help interperet the brain activity of patients that are capable of thought but not communication, and thus help them communicate with doctors, rather than try to figure out what they might have said from prior history.
I do not recommend using the word “AI” as if it refers to a single thing that encompasses all possible systems incorporating AI techniques. LLM guys don’t distinguish between things that could actually be built and “throwing an LLM at the problem” – you’re treating their lack-of-differentiation as valid and feeding them hype.
I mean, while this idea is obviously a stupid one, I have seen some suggestion that an AI could be used to help interperet the brain activity of patients that are capable of thought but not communication, and thus help them communicate with doctors, rather than try to figure out what they might have said from prior history.
I do not recommend using the word “AI” as if it refers to a single thing that encompasses all possible systems incorporating AI techniques. LLM guys don’t distinguish between things that could actually be built and “throwing an LLM at the problem” – you’re treating their lack-of-differentiation as valid and feeding them hype.