'AI' extracts new knowledge from old science papers

In the domain of thermoelectric materials only for the time being but this machine learning program was able to 'predict' later findings from older papers :

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019...ntific-papers-makes-discoveries-missed-humans

But in principle the approach could be extended to other areas :

I doubt there is enough good science around ME/CFS for this approach to be directly useful but advances in understanding the immune system; metabolimics; the central nervous system etc may be relevant.

Original paper abstract : https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1335-8

 

I'm sure @mariovitali would support the message from this paper.

 

I will say it depends @Andy.

We do not want to be employing AI methods for the sake of it or because it is a buzzword. We need tangible results and thus prove that this technology outperforms other approaches.


I do agree with the paper in the sense that this technology can be used for medical research. However we have to make sure that the data is of good or sufficient quality and also to make "reality checks" very often to identify whether the software works as expected or not.

I was really happy to see that AI and Network Analysis was mentioned in the NIH conference but also in SolveCFS where Machine Learning and AI are discussed as technologies that "could help move the needle". It remains to be seen if this will be indeed the case.

 

The AI's going to be pretty frustrated when it gets to the PACE trial.

 

Kind'a puts a new slant on "Artificial Intelligence" don' it .

 

E X C E P T I O N F O U N D

W E H A V E L O S T I N T E L L I G E N C E

 

Thought this would be best here rather than on a new thread.

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02142-1

 

From projects like this I'm really looking forward for an evaluation of the entire body of psychosomatic medical research to show how, other than terminology, it still parrots the exact same tropes as a full century ago, unchanged and just as hollow. The phrasing may be different but the substance is exactly the same. It will be pretty illuminating.

Especially with the recent rise of FND as a shiny new thing despite the fact that it dates back at least as far as a century ago, in the exact same form (whatever form warm air can take anyway). Same with BPS that is simply a rebranding of the early psychosocial model and simply added baked-in deceit.

Same manure. Same rear ends. However you bottle it, whatever comes out is just as toxic. Although at least actual manure is useful, unlike the tripes it came from.

 

Or... just buy 72 of these 8TB hard drives for $120 a piece and create your own 576TB storage facility for about $8,600.