2020
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.19.22145
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interpretable Artificial Intelligence: Why and When

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The opacity of these algorithms makes their clinical implementation a dilemma. Moreover, large amounts of standardized image data are required to develop the DL algorithm, which is difficult to acquire in the medical field (29,30). Considering these concerning issues of the DL algorithm, we elected interpretable ML methods that can take advantage of obtainable sample sizes of the data to study for the risk stratification of thyroid lesions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The opacity of these algorithms makes their clinical implementation a dilemma. Moreover, large amounts of standardized image data are required to develop the DL algorithm, which is difficult to acquire in the medical field (29,30). Considering these concerning issues of the DL algorithm, we elected interpretable ML methods that can take advantage of obtainable sample sizes of the data to study for the risk stratification of thyroid lesions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the successful results, there are several aspects in which scGCN can be improved. First, as an artificial intelligence (AI) model, scGCN shows not only the merits of its kind, but also some limitations including the black-box nature of AI models [47][48][49], which can be addressed through downstream analysis such as differential gene identification and enrichment analysis that can ameliorate some of the problems and bring insights into the labeled cells. Second, as a graph model, improving the graph construction can further boost the model performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As 42 more and more single-cell data becomes available, there is an urgent need to leverage existing data 43 with the newly generated data in a reliable and reproducible way, learning from the established 44 single-cell data with well-defined labels as reference, and transferring labels to new datasets to 45 assign cell-level annotations [10,11]. However, existing datasets and new datasets are often 46 collected from different tissues and species [14,15], under various experimental conditions, 47 generated by different platforms [16,17], and in the form of different omics types [18]. Thus a 48 reliable and accurate knowledge transfer method must overcome the following challenges: 1) the 49 unique technical issues of single-cell data (e.g., dropouts and dispersion) [19][20][21][22]; 2) batch effects 50 arisen from different operators, experimental protocols [23], and technical variation (e.g., mRNA quality, pre-amplification efficiency, technical settings during data generation) [24][25][26];…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the successful results, there are several aspects that DSTG can be improved. First, as an artificial intelligence (AI) model, DSTG shows not only the merits of its kind, but also some limitations including the black-box nature of AI models [34][35][36], which can be addressed through downstream analysis that can ameliorate some of the problems and bring insights into the learned cellular compositions. Second, as a graph model, improving the built graph can further boost the model performance.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%