AI-Based Modeling of System Reliability and Performance Metrics in Heterogeneous Computing Architectures

Real-World Surveillance of FDA-Cleared Artificial Intelligence Models: Rationale and Logistics.

Artificial Intelligence: The Future of Maxillofacial Prognosis and Diagnosis?

Quantum computing (QC) is not a futuristic notion in agriculture, though its full potential has yet to be realized. QC is an emerging field at the intersection of physics and computer science that holds immense potential to revolutionize various sectors, including agriculture production and artificial intelligence (AI) modeling. While QC is still in the early stages of development and practical applications within agriculture are not yet widespread, researchers are actively exploring its potential benefits in various agricultural domains, including crop optimization, livestock breeding, and environmental monitoring. QC harnesses the principles of quantum mechanics to perform computations using quantum bits or qubits, which can exist in multiple states simultaneously. Unlike classical computers, which rely on binary bits representing 0 or 1, quantum computers exploit phenomena such as superposition and entanglement to process information in parallel, potentially offering exponential speedup for certain types of problems. In agriculture production, particularly in animal science, QC offers promising avenues for optimizing processes and enhancing productivity. Quantum algorithms can analyze vast amounts of genomic data to improve breeding programs, leading to the development of more resilient and productive livestock breeds. Furthermore, QC can facilitate precision farming techniques by modeling complex environmental factors and animal behavior to optimize feeding strategies, disease management, and overall farm management practices. Moreover, QC can significantly benefit AI modeling by accelerating computations and enabling more efficient training of AI models. Quantum algorithms can enhance the performance of AI algorithms in various tasks, including pattern recognition, natural language processing, and predictive analytics. By leveraging quantum-enhanced optimization algorithms, AI models can achieve better convergence and accuracy, leading to more effective decision-making and problem-solving capabilities. While hybrid intelligent models also represent a novel frontier in agriculture, QC has the potential to expedite the merging of mechanistic and AI modeling paradigms, facilitating a more holistic understanding of complex systems in agriculture and beyond. By integrating mechanistic models, which describe the underlying physical processes, with AI models, which learn patterns from data, quantum computing can enable comprehensive simulations and predictions of agricultural systems. This fusion of modeling paradigms can lead to more accurate and robust predictions of crop yields, livestock performance, and environmental impacts, facilitating informed decision-making for farmers and policymakers. The application of QC in agriculture, however, requires interdisciplinary collaborations between physicists, computer scientists, agronomists/animal scientists, and AI researchers. These collaborations can drive the development of quantum algorithms tailored to agricultural applications, the integration of quantum-enhanced AI techniques into existing modeling frameworks, and the deployment of QC resources in real-world agricultural systems. Ultimately, harnessing the power of QC holds the potential to revolutionize agriculture production practices, including regenerative agriculture, and advance AI modeling capabilities, paving the way for a more sustainable and efficient agricultural industry.

This study evaluated if medical doctors could identify more hemorrhage events during chart review in a clinical setting when assisted by an artificial intelligence (AI) model and medical doctors' perception of using the AI model. To develop the AI model, sentences from 900 electronic health records were labeled as positive or negative for hemorrhage and categorized into one of 12 anatomical locations. The AI model was evaluated on a test cohort consisting of 566 admissions. Using eye-tracking technology, we investigated medical doctors' reading workflow during manual chart review. Moreover, we performed a clinical use study where medical doctors read two admissions with and without AI assistance to evaluate performance when using and perception of using the AI model. The AI model had a sensitivity of 93.7% and a specificity of 98.1% on the test cohort. In the use studies, we found that medical doctors missed more than 33% of relevant sentences when doing chart review without AI assistance. Hemorrhage events described in paragraphs were more often overlooked compared with bullet-pointed hemorrhage mentions. With AI-assisted chart review, medical doctors identified 48 and 49 percentage points more hemorrhage events than without assistance in two admissions, and they were generally positive toward using the AI model as a supporting tool. Medical doctors identified more hemorrhage events with AI-assisted chart review and they were generally positive toward using the AI model.

Solar energy-based technologies have developed rapidly in recent years, however, the inability to appropriately estimate solar energy resources is still a major drawback for these technologies. In this study, eight different artificial intelligence (AI) models namely; convolutional neural network (CNN), artificial neural network (ANN), long short-term memory recurrent model (LSTM), eXtreme gradient boost algorithm (XG Boost), multiple linear regression (MLR), polynomial regression (PLR), decision tree regression (DTR), and random forest regression (RFR) are designed and compared for solar irradiance prediction. Additionally, two hybrid deep neural network models (ANN-CNN and CNN-LSTM-ANN) are developed in this study for the same task. This study is novel as each of the AI models developed was used to estimate solar irradiance considering different timesteps (hourly, every minute, and daily average). Also, different solar irradiance datasets (from six countries in Africa) measured with various instruments were used to train/test the AI models. With the aim to check if there is a universal AI model for solar irradiance estimation in developing countries, the results of this study show that various AI models are suitable for different solar irradiance estimation tasks. However, XG boost has a consistently high performance for all the case studies and is the best model for 10 of the 13 case studies considered in this paper. The result of this study also shows that the prediction of hourly solar irradiance is more accurate for the models when compared to daily average and minutes timestep. The specific performance of each model for all the case studies is explicated in the paper.

Aim: The majority of machine learning (ML) models in healthcare are built on retrospective data, much of which is collected without explicit patient consent for use in artificial intelligence (AI) and ML applications. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether clinicians and scientific researchers themselves consent to provide their own data for the training of ML models. Materials and Methods: This survey was conducted through an anonymous online survey, utilizing platforms such as Telegram, LinkedIn, and Viber. The target audience comprised specific international groups, primarily Russian, German, and English-speaking, of clinicians and scientific researchers. These participants ranged in their levels of expertise and experience, from beginners to veterans. The survey centered on a singular, pivotal question: “Do You Consent to the Use of Your Biological and Private Data for Training Machine Learning and AI Models?” Respondents had the option to choose from three responses: “Yes” and “No”. Results: The survey was conducted in January 2024. A total of 119 unique and verified individuals participated in the survey. The results revealed that only 50% of respondents (63 persons) expressed consent to provide their own data for the training of ML and AI models. Conclusion: In the development of ML and AI models, particularly open-source ones, it is crucial to ascertain whether participants are willing to provide their private data. While ML algorithms can transform the nature of data, it is important to remember that the primary owner of this data is the individual. Our findings show that in 50% of the cases, even participants from scientific research and clinical backgrounds – individuals typically accountable for ensuring data quality in AI and ML model development – do not consent to the use of their data in AI and ML settings. This highlights the need for more stringent consent processes and ethical considerations in the utilization of personal data in AI and ML research.

The secondary use of health data for training Artificial Intelligence (AI) models holds immense potential for advancing medical research and healthcare delivery. However, ensuring patient consent for such utilization is paramount to uphold ethical standards and data privacy. Patient informed consent means patients are fully informed about how their data will be collected, used, and protected, and they voluntarily agree to allow their data to be used for AI models. In addition to formal consent frameworks, establishing a social license is critical to foster public trust and societal acceptance for the secondary use of health data in AI systems. This study examines patient consent practices in this domain. In this scoping review, we searched Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus. We included studies in English that addressed the core issues of interest, namely, privacy, security, legal, and ethical issues related to the secondary use of health data in AI models. Articles not addressing the core issues, as well as systematic reviews, meta-analyses, books, letters, conference abstracts, and study protocols were excluded. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, resolving disagreements with a third author. Data was extracted using a data extraction form. After screening 774 articles, a total of 38 articles were ultimately included in the review. Across these studies, a total of 178 barriers and 193 facilitators were identified. We consolidated similar codes and extracted 65 barriers and 101 facilitators, which we then categorized into four themes: "Structure," "People," "Physical system," and "Task." We identified notable emphasis on "Legal and Ethical Challenges" and "Interoperability and Data Governance." Key barriers included concerns over privacy and security breaches, inadequacies in informed consent processes, and unauthorized data sharing. Critical facilitators included enhancing patient consent procedures, improving data privacy through anonymization, and promoting ethical standards for data usage. Our study underscores the complexity of patient consent for the secondary use of health data in AI models, highlighting significant barriers and facilitators within legal, ethical, and technological domains. We recommend the development of specific guidelines and actionable strategies for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers to improve informed consent, ensuring privacy, trust, and ethical use of data, thereby facilitating the responsible advancement of AI in healthcare.

To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) model able to perform both segmentation of hand joint ultrasound images for osteophytes, bone, and synovium and perform osteophyte severity scoring following the EULAR-OMERACT grading system (EOGS) for hand osteoarthritis (OA). One hundred sixty patients with pain or reduced function of the hands were included. Ultrasound images of the metacarpophalangeal (MCP), proximal interphalangeal (PIP), distal interphalangeal (DIP), and first carpometacarpal (CMC1) joints were then manually segmented for bone, synovium and osteophytes and scored from 0 to 3 according to the EOGS for OA. Data was divided into a training, validation, and test set. The AI model was trained on the training data to perform bone, synovium, and osteophyte identification on the images. Based on the manually performed image segmentation, an AI was trained to classify the severity of osteophytes according to EOGS from 0 to 3. Percent Exact Agreement (PEA) and Percent Close Agreement (PCA) were assessed on individual joints and overall. PCA allows a difference of one EOGS grade between doctor assessment and AI. A total of 4615 ultrasound images were used for AI development and testing. The developed AI model scored on the test set for the MCP joints a PEA of 76% and PCA of 97%; for PIP, a PEA of 70% and PCA of 97%; for DIP, a PEA of 59% and PCA of 94%, and CMC a PEA of 50% and PCA of 82%. Combining all joints, we found a PEA between AI and doctor assessments of 68% and a PCA of 95%. The developed AI model can perform joint ultrasound image segmentation and severity scoring of osteophytes, according to the EOGS. As proof of concept, this first version of the AI model is successful, as the agreement performance is slightly higher than previously found agreements between experts when assessing osteophytes on hand OA ultrasound images. The segmentation of the image makes the AI explainable to the doctor, who can immediately see why the AI applies a given score. Future validation in hand OA cohorts is necessary though.

We have recently shown that histological phenotypes focusing on clear and eosinophilic cytoplasm in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) correlated with prognosis and the response to angiogenesis inhibition and checkpoint blockade. This study aims to objectively show the diagnostic utility of clear or eosinophilic phenotypes of ccRCC by developing an artificial intelligence (AI) model using the TCGA-ccRCC dataset and to demonstrate if the clear or eosinophilic predicted phenotypes correlate with pathological factors and gene signatures associated with angiogenesis and cancer immunity. Before the development of the AI model, histological evaluation using hematoxylin and eosin whole-slide images of the TCGA-ccRCC cohort (n=435) was performed by a urologic pathologist. The AI model was developed as follows. First, the highest-grade area on each whole slide image was captured for image processing. Second, the selected regions were cropped into tiles. Third, the AI model was trained using transfer learning on a deep convolutional neural network, and clear or eosinophilic predictions were scaled as AI scores. Next, we verified the AI model using a validation cohort (n=95). Finally, we evaluated the accuracy of the prognostic predictions of the AI model and revealed that the AI model detected clear and eosinophilic phenotypes with high accuracy. The AI model stratified the patients' outcomes, and the predicted eosinophilic phenotypes correlated with adverse clinicopathological characteristics and high immune-related gene signatures. In conclusion, the AI-based histologic subclassification accurately predicted clear or eosinophilic phenotypes of ccRCC, allowing for consistently reproducible stratification for prognostic and therapeutic stratification.

The pervasive deployment of Deep Learning models has recently prompted apprehensions regarding their ecological footprint, owing to the exorbitant levels of energy consumption necessitated by the training and inference processes. The term "Red AI" is employed to denote artificial intelligence (AI) models that undergo training using resource-intensive methodologies on very large datasets. This practice can engender substantial energy usage and emissions of carbon, thereby opposing "Green AI." The latter concept alludes to AI models designed for similar efficiency and reduced environmental impact. This objective is realized through the utilization of smaller datasets, less computationally intensive training techniques, or sustainable energy resources. While Red AI prioritizes accuracy and performance, Green AI emphasizes efficiency and sustainability. Given that both paradigms exhibit advantages and limitations, the debates around the topics have burgeoned in the scientific arena, delving into novel algorithms, hardware innovations, and improved data utilization techniques aimed at mitigating the ecological consequences of intricate applications such as GPT and BERT. Nevertheless, due to the relative novelty of this debate, not much effort has been dedicated yet to contextualizing the essence of Red AI and the prospects of Green AI in a coherent framework. Within this context, the present work contributes by meticulously delineating both domains through a multifaceted analysis of their causes and ramifications, described from the points of computer architectures, data structures, and algorithms. Additionally, the study reviews notable instances of study cases based on complex Red AI models. The primary contribution of this article encompasses a comprehensive survey of Red and Green AI, stemming from a selection of the literature performed by the authors, subsequently organized into distinct clusters. These clusters encompass i) articles that qualitatively or quantitatively address the issue of Red AI, identifying Green AI as a plausible remedy, ii) articles offering insights into the environmental impact associated with the deployment of extensive Deep Learning models, and iii) articles introducing the techniques underpinning Green AI, aiming at mitigating the cost of Red AI. The outcome emerging from the analysis performed by this work consists of a compromise between sustainability in contrast to the performance of AI tools. Unless the complex training and inference procedures of software models mitigate their environmental impact, it will be necessary to decrease the level of accuracy of production systems, inevitably conflicting with the objective of the major AI vendors. The outcomes of this work would be beneficial to scholars pursuing intricate Deep Learning architectures in scientific research, as well as AI enterprises struggling with the protracted training demands of commercial products within the realms of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing.

High-risk breast lesions (HRLs) are associated with future risk of breast cancer. Considering the pathological subtypes, malignancy upgrade rate differs according to each subtype and depends on various factors such as clinical and radiological features and biopsy method. Using artificial intelligence and machine learning models in breast imaging, evaluations can be made in terms of risk estimation in different research areas. This study aimed to develop a machine learning model to distinguish HRL cases requiring surgical excision from lesions with a low risk of accompanying malignancy. A total of 94 patients who were diagnosed with HRL by image-guided biopsy between January 2008 and March 2020 were included in the study. A structured database was created with clinical and radiological characteristics and histopathological results. A machine learning prediction model was created to make binary classifications of lesions as malignant or benign. Random forest, decision tree, K-nearest neighbors, logistic regression, support vector machine (SVM), and multilayer perceptron machine learning algorithms were used. Among these algorithms, SVM was the most successful. The estimations of malignancy for each case detected by artificial intelligence were combined and statistical analyses were performed. Considering all cases, the malignancy upgrade rate was 24.5%. A significant association was observed between malignancy upgrade rate and lesion size (P = 0.004), presence of mammography findings (P = 0.022), and breast imaging-reporting and data system category (P = 0.001). A statistically significant association was also found between the artificial intelligence prediction model and malignancy upgrade rate (P < 0.001). With the SVM model, an 84% accuracy and 0.786 area-underthe- curve score were obtained in classifying the data as benign or malignant. Our artificial intelligence model (SVM) can predict HRLs that can be followed up with a lower risk of accompanying malignancy. Unnecessary surgeries can be reduced, or second line vacuum excisions can be performed in HRLs, which are mostly benign, by evaluating on a case-by-case basis, in line with radiology-pathology compatibility and by using an artificial intelligence model.

Browser-based Data Annotation, Active Learning, and Real-Time Distribution of Artificial Intelligence Models: From Tumor Tissue Microarrays to COVID-19 Radiology

Lung cancer remains one of the deadliest cancers worldwide, with survival rates significantly dependent on early detection. Traditional diagnostic methods, while effective, often identify lung cancer in advanced stages, limiting treatment options. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning (DL) models have gained attention for their potential to assist in early lung cancer diagnosis through radiological data, particularly computed tomography (CT) and X-ray imaging. This review examines recent advancements in AI and DL models specifically applied to early lung cancer detection, offering a comprehensive look at model architecture, data preprocessing techniques, and performance metrics. AI models, particularly those using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and recurrent neural networks (RNNs), have shown significant promise in improving diagnostic accuracy. In studies published over the past two years, CNN-based models have achieved sensitivity rates upwards of 90% when applied to large datasets, such as the LIDC-IDRI, a publicly available database containing thousands of annotated lung scans. Furthermore, hybrid approaches combining AI models with radiologist expertise have demonstrated reduced false positives, a frequent challenge in automated image analysis. A critical factor in these advancements has been data quality and volume. Large, annotated datasets with high-resolution images have enabled more robust training and validation, essential for refining these models. However, challenges remain, particularly regarding the standardization of data across institutions, variations in scanner quality, and ethical concerns surrounding patient privacy. The review also highlights studies exploring multi-modal approaches, integrating radiological data with clinical records and genetic markers to create more personalized diagnostic tools. These multi-modal methods have the potential to improve predictive accuracy further, though they currently require more extensive validation. Overall, while AI and DL technologies offer transformative potential for early lung cancer detection, widespread implementation depends on continued research in model accuracy, data standardization, and ethical safeguards. This paper concludes by emphasizing the need for collaboration across disciplines—AI researchers, radiologists, and oncologists—to refine these models into reliable tools that can be integrated seamlessly into clinical workflows for timely and accurate lung cancer diagnosis.

Artificial intelligence using deep learning to screen for referable and vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy in Africa: a clinical validation study

PurposeDespite its promise to enhance patient outcomes and support clinical decision making, clinical use of artificial intelligence (AI) models at the bedside remains limited. Translation of advancements in AI research into tangible clinical benefits is necessary to improve neonatal and pediatric care for critically ill patients. This systematic review seeks to assess the maturity of AI models in neonatal and pediatric intensive care unit (NICU and PICU) treatment, and their risk of bias and objectives.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search in Medline ALL, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar. Studies using AI models during NICU or PICU stay were eligible for inclusion. Study design, objective, dataset size, level of validation, risk of bias, and technological readiness of the models were extracted.ResultsOut of the 1257 identified studies 262 were included. The majority of studies was conducted in the NICU (66%) and most had a high risk of bias (77%). An insufficient sample size was the main cause for this high risk of bias. No studies were identified that integrated an AI model in routine clinical practice and the majority of the studies remained in the prototyping and model development phase.ConclusionThe majority of AI models remain within the testing and prototyping phase and have a high risk of bias. Bridging the gap between designing and clinical implementation of AI models is needed to warrant safe and trustworthy AI models. Specific guidelines and approaches can help improve clinical outcome with usage of AI.