Intelligent Access Control Systems

This paper introduces artificial intelligence system method and describes the developing and application in transformer fault diagnosis. An artificial intelligent system (TFDAI) design includes selection of input, network topology, synaptic connection weights, two-passageway, and output. This paper introduces the new intelligence technology in the transformer fault diagnosis -TFDAI System. TFDAI based data processing and diagnostic techniques are described in detail. It consists of expert system (ES ), artificial neural network (ANN), guide-rule, two-passageway and their characteristics are presented. This paper mentions the two-passageway structure of the artificial intelligence system and with practical examples. ES and ANN are connected by the two-passageway effectively. It states that artificial intelligence system for transformer early hidden faults achieves the possibility and accuracy of primary diagnosis

BackgroundThe surgical difficulty of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystitis (AC) and the risk of bile duct injury (BDI) depend on the degree of fibrosis and scarring caused by inflammation; therefore, understanding these intraoperative findings is crucial to preventing BDI. Scarring makes it particularly difficult to perform safely and increases the BDI risk. This study aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) system to indicate intraoperative findings of scarring in LC for AC.Materials and methodsAn AI system was developed to detect scarred areas using an algorithm for semantic segmentation based on deep learning. The training dataset consisted of 2025 images extracted from LC videos of 21 cases with AC. External evaluation committees (EEC) evaluated the AI system on 20 cases of untrained data from other centers. EECs evaluated the accuracy in identifying the scarred area and the usefulness of the AI system, which were assessed based on annotation and a 5-point Likert-scale questionnaire.ResultsThe average DICE coefficient for scarred areas between AI detection and EEC annotation was 0.612. The EEC’s average detection accuracy on the Likert scale was 3.98 ± 0.76. AI systems were rated as relatively useful for both clinical and educational applications.ConclusionWe developed an AI system to detect scarred areas in LC for AC. Since scarring increases the surgical difficulty, this AI system has the potential to reduce BDI.

This scoping study explores the role of Human-in-the-Loop Artificial Intelligence (HITL AI) in precision agriculture and evaluates the benefits of using human expertise in combination with Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems in decision-making within modern smart agricultural environments. The development of Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Internet of Things, and robotics has significantly impacted modern agriculture by providing automated crop monitoring, disease detection, yield prediction, and smart farm management systems. However, Artificial Intelligence systems also face challenges in terms of understanding, interpretability, flexibility, and trustworthiness in modern smart agricultural environments. This study is based on the literature regarding human-in-the-loop systems, human-centric Artificial Intelligence systems, and collaborative robotics systems in the context of smart agriculture. The structured scoping study methodology has been followed to identify and evaluate studies regarding Artificial Intelligence systems in smart agricultural environments, with a focus on automation-centric Artificial Intelligence systems and human-centric Artificial Intelligence systems within the context of Agriculture 5.0 concepts. The study concludes that although automation-centric AI systems show high accuracy in simulated smart agricultural environments, Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) AI systems show higher robustness in smart agricultural environments. Explainability in AI has shown significant potential in supporting the effectiveness of HITL AI systems in decision-making within smart agricultural environments. The study also identifies some important gaps in the literature regarding HITL AI systems in smart agriculture. The study concludes that for the development of modern smart precision agriculture, collaborative intelligence within smart agricultural environments is necessary to create sustainable smart agriculture systems.

To investigate the value of an artificial intelligence (AI) system in assisting radiologists to improve the assessment accuracy of BI-RADS 0 cases in mammograms. We included 34,654 consecutive digital mammography studies, collected between January 2011 and January 2019, among which, 1088 cases from 1010 unique patients with initial BI-RADS 0 assessment who were recalled during 2years of follow-up were used in this study. Two mid-level radiologists retrospectively re-assessed these BI-RADS 0 cases with the assistance of an AI system developed by us previously. In addition, four entry-level radiologists were split into two groups to cross-read 80 cases with and without the AI. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using the follow-up diagnosis or biopsy results as the reference standard. Of the 1088 cases, 626 were actually normal (BI-RADS 1 and no recall required). Assisted by the AI system, 351 (56%) and 362 (58%) normal cases were correctly identified by the two mid-level radiologists hence can be avoided for unnecessary follow-ups. However, they would have missed 12 (10 invasive cancers and 2 ductal carcinoma in situ cancers) and 6 (invasive cancers) malignant lesions respectively as a result. These missed lesions were not highly malignant tumors. The inter-rater reliability of entry-level radiologists increased from 0.20 to 0.30 (p < 0.005) by introducing the AI. The AI system can effectively assist mid-level radiologists in reducing unnecessary follow-ups of mammographically indeterminate breast lesions and reducing the benign biopsy rate without missing highly malignant tumors. • The artificial intelligence system could assist mid-level radiologists in effectively reducing unnecessary BI-RADS 0 mammogram recalls and the benign biopsy rate without missing highly malignant tumors. • The artificial intelligence system was capable of detecting low suspicion lesions from heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts that radiologists tended to miss. • The use of an artificial intelligence system may improve the inter-rater reliability and sensitivity, and reduce the reading time of entry-level radiologists in assessing potential lesions in BI-RADS 0 mammograms.

Physicians are required to work with rapidly growing amounts of medical data. Approximately 62% of time per patient is devoted to reviewing electronic health records (EHRs), with clinical data review being the most time-consuming portion. To determine whether an artificial intelligence (AI) system developed to organize and display new patient referral records would improve a clinician's ability to extract patient information compared with the current standard of care. In this prognostic study, an AI system was created to organize patient records and improve data retrieval. To evaluate the system on time and accuracy, a nonblinded, prospective study was conducted at a single academic medical center. Recruitment emails were sent to all physicians in the gastroenterology division, and 12 clinicians agreed to participate. Each of the clinicians participating in the study received 2 referral records: 1 AI-optimized patient record and 1 standard (non-AI-optimized) patient record. For each record, clinicians were asked 22 questions requiring them to search the assigned record for clinically relevant information. Clinicians reviewed records from June 1 to August 30, 2020. The time required to answer each question, along with accuracy, was measured for both records, with and without AI optimization. Participants were asked to assess overall satisfaction with the AI system, their preferred review method (AI-optimized vs standard), and other topics to assess clinical utility. Twelve gastroenterology physicians/fellows completed the study. Compared with standard (non-AI-optimized) patient record review, the AI system saved first-time physician users 18% of the time used to answer the clinical questions (10.5 [95% CI, 8.5-12.6] vs 12.8 [95% CI, 9.4-16.2] minutes; P = .02). There was no significant decrease in accuracy when physicians retrieved important patient information (83.7% [95% CI, 79.3%-88.2%] with the AI-optimized vs 86.0% [95% CI, 81.8%-90.2%] without the AI-optimized record; P = .81). Survey responses from physicians were generally positive across all questions. Eleven of 12 physicians (92%) preferred the AI-optimized record review to standard review. Despite a learning curve pointed out by respondents, 11 of 12 physicians believed that the technology would save them time to assess new patient records and were interested in using this technology in their clinic. In this prognostic study, an AI system helped physicians extract relevant patient information in a shorter time while maintaining high accuracy. This finding is particularly germane to the ever-increasing amounts of medical data and increased stressors on clinicians. Increased user familiarity with the AI system, along with further enhancements in the system itself, hold promise to further improve physician data extraction from large quantities of patient health records.

BackgroundChest radiography may play an important role in triage for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), particularly in low-resource settings.PurposeTo evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) system for detection of COVID-19 pneumonia on chest radiographs.Materials and MethodsAn AI system (CAD4COVID-XRay) was trained on 24 678 chest radiographs, including 1540 used only for validation while training. The test set consisted of a set of continuously acquired chest radiographs (n = 454) obtained in patients suspected of having COVID-19 pneumonia between March 4 and April 6, 2020, at one center (223 patients with positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction [RT-PCR] results, 231 with negative RT-PCR results). Radiographs were independently analyzed by six readers and by the AI system. Diagnostic performance was analyzed with the receiver operating characteristic curve.ResultsFor the test set, the mean age of patients was 67 years ± 14.4 (standard deviation) (56% male). With RT-PCR test results as the reference standard, the AI system correctly classified chest radiographs as COVID-19 pneumonia with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81. The system significantly outperformed each reader (P < .001 using the McNemar test) at their highest possible sensitivities. At their lowest sensitivities, only one reader significantly outperformed the AI system (P = .04).ConclusionThe performance of an artificial intelligence system in the detection of coronavirus disease 2019 on chest radiographs was comparable with that of six independent readers.© RSNA, 2020

Evaluation of physician performance using a concurrent-read artificial intelligence system to support breast ultrasound interpretation

Artificial intelligence and radiologists in prostate cancer detection on MRI (PI-CAI): an international, paired, non-inferiority, confirmatory study

Objective: to formulate proposals to form a system of subsidiary liability for harm resulting from the use of artificial intelligence systems. Methods: the research is based on a comprehensive methodological basis, including the abstract logical method for theoretical understanding of the legal nature of artificial intelligence as an object of legal regulation; the method of comparison to analyze the Russian and European legislations on tort liability; generalization to systematize the existing concepts of responsibility distribution between subjects of law; and correlation analysis to identify the relationships between the typology of artificial intelligence systems and the mechanisms of legal responsibility for their functioning. Results: the study summarizes and systematizes modern theoretical and legal concepts and regulations of the European Union and the Russian Federation on the distribution of subsidiary responsibility for the adverse effects of artificial intelligence. Potential subjects of responsibility were identified, as well as the key factors influencing the distribution of responsibility between them. A multidimensional matrix was developed for responsibility distribution between the subjects, taking into account their impact on the specific artificial intelligence system functioning and the systems typologization under the risk-based approach. Scientific novelty: for the first time, an original concept is proposed, which combines the differentiation of the subjects’ roles in terms of their real impact on the artificial intelligence results; the differentiation of artificial intelligence systems under the risk-based approach; and the system of legal presumptions of responsibility distribution corresponding to the above two classifications. The novelty lies in the creation of a multidimensional matrix of subsidiary liability, which allows taking into account many factors when determining the subject of responsibility in each specific case of harm caused by artificial intelligence systems, which differs significantly from existing unilateral approaches to this issue. Practical significance: the research conclusions and suggestions can be used to develop the doctrine of subsidiary responsibility in the field of artificial intelligence use, to develop and modify the legal norms regulating artificial intelligence. The proposed multidimensional matrix of responsibility distribution can serve as a theoretical basis for improving judicial practice in cases of compensation for damage caused by artificial intelligence systems, as well as for creating an effective balance between stimulating the development of AI technologies and ensuring the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and legal entities.

PurposeManual alpha angle measurement for diagnosing cam‐type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is time‐consuming and variable. We hypothesised that a smartphone‐based artificial intelligence (AI) system would demonstrate a high correlation with the conventional manual method.MethodsWe trained an AI model using 300 of the 45° Dunn view radiographs in a Python‐based environment. The model was implemented using a smartphone application that semi‐automatically extracted the femoral head from radiographs, detected at least four rim points, and calculated the femoral head centre and radius using a least‐squares method. It also identified the narrowest part of the femoral neck, and allowed manual adjustment of the alpha angle deviation. The images were directly captured and transferred without time loss. We evaluated 130 hips of patients with hip pain who underwent 45° Dunn view radiography. The alpha angle was measured using both the AI system and the manual method. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to assess agreement between the two methods. Measurement time and intra‐ and interobserver reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).ResultsPearson correlation coefficient for alpha angle measurement between the two methods was 0.91, indicating a strong correlation. The average alpha angle measured by the AI system (52.7 ± 6.0°) was not significantly different from that of the conventional method (53.9 ± 6.5°, p = 0.12). The AI‐powered system showed intra‐ and interobserver agreement ICCs of 0.96 and 0.93, respectively, demonstrating excellent reliability. The mean measurement time was 5.0 ± 2.4 and 46.7 ± 10.1 s for the AI‐powered system and manual method, respectively, indicating significant time‐saving.ConclusionThe AI‐powered system showed a strong correlation with the manual method and significantly reduced measurement time. This smartphone‐based tool offers a rapid and reliable approach for real‐time assessment of alpha angles and may help standardise the evaluation of cam‐type FAI in clinical practice.Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.

The purpose of this paper is to prospectively evaluate the performance of an artificial intelligence (AI) system in diagnosing thyroid nodules and to assess its potential value in comparison with the performance of radiologists with different levels of experience, as well as the factors affecting its diagnostic accuracy. In recent years, medical imaging diagnosis using AI has become a popular topic in clinical application research. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of an AI system in diagnosing thyroid nodules and compare it with the performance levels of different radiologists. This study involved 426 patients screened for thyroid nodules at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University between July 2017 and March 2019. All of the nodules were evaluated by radiologists with various levels of experience and an AI system. The diagnostic performances of two junior and two senior radiologists, an AI system, and an AI-assisted junior radiologist were compared, as were their diagnostic results with respect to nodules of different sizes. The senior radiologists, the AI system, and the AI-assisted junior radiologist performed better than the junior radiologist (p < 0.05). The area under the curves of the AI system and the AI-assisted junior radiologist were similar to the curve of the senior radiologists (p > 0.05). The diagnostic results concerning the two nodule sizes showed that the diagnostic error rates of the AI system, junior radiologists, and senior radiologists for nodules with a maximum diameter of ≤1 cm (Dmax ≤ 1 cm) were higher than those for nodules with a maximum diameter of 1 cm (Dmax > 1 cm) (23.4% vs. 12.1%, p = 0.002; 26.6% vs. 7.3%, p < 0.001; and 38.3% vs. 14.6%, p < 0.001). The AI system is a decision-making tool that could potentially improve the diagnostic efficiency of junior radiologists. Micronodules with Dmax ≤ 1cm were significantly correlated with diagnostic accuracy; accordingly, more micronodules of this size, in particular, should be added to the AI system as training samples. Other: The system could be a potential decision-making tool for effectively improving the diagnostic efficiency of junior radiologists in the community.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly being used in consumer as well and business applications. Companies are using them, Governments are using them, public security, medical researchers, you and I – everybody seems to be somehow touched. As it becomes more advanced and ubiquitous in our lives, it is critical that AI developers and users understand the ethical implications and challenges posed by this powerful technology. This paper explores the key ethical skills and considerations that are essential for navigating the new world of AI. Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents significant ethical dimensions across various sectors, including research, business, and daily life. It is important to appreciate the major ethical dimensions of AI and how they impact AI systems. Policies and guidelines needs to be laid out for development and usage of such systems. Automated Decisions/Responsibility: No matter how intelligent a AI system might perceived to be, it is always prone to making errors. So, AI system that make automated decisions will always be dangerous. Therefore, it is important to ensure that there is always "human intervention" or "human review" for outcomes/decisions made by AI systems. Determining accountability for AI-generated actions or content remains a significant challenge, emphasizing the need for ethical governance frameworks. There has to be human accountability.Fairness/Bias: AI systems can perpetuate existing biases present in training data, leading to discriminatory outcomes.Transparency: The opaque nature of many AI algorithms complicates accountability, making it difficult to understand decision-making processes.Privacy: AI's capability to process vast datasets can infringe on individual privacy rights, necessitating stringent data protection measuresHuman Dignity: The risk of AI-generated content resembling existing works raises ethical issues regarding originality and authorship.

We discuss how over the last 30 to 50 years, Artificial Intelligence (AI)\nsystems that focused only on data have been handicapped, and how knowledge has\nbeen critical in developing smarter, intelligent, and more effective systems.\nIn fact, the vast progress in AI can be viewed in terms of the three waves of\nAI as identified by DARPA. During the first wave, handcrafted knowledge has\nbeen at the center-piece, while during the second wave, the data-driven\napproaches supplanted knowledge. Now we see a strong role and resurgence of\nknowledge fueling major breakthroughs in the third wave of AI underpinning\nfuture intelligent systems as they attempt human-like decision making, and seek\nto become trusted assistants and companions for humans. We find a wider\navailability of knowledge created from diverse sources, using manual to\nautomated means both by repurposing as well as by extraction. Using knowledge\nwith statistical learning is becoming increasingly indispensable to help make\nAI systems more transparent and auditable. We will draw a parallel with the\nrole of knowledge and experience in human intelligence based on cognitive\nscience, and discuss emerging neuro-symbolic or hybrid AI systems in which\nknowledge is the critical enabler for combining capabilities of the\ndata-intensive statistical AI systems with those of symbolic AI systems,\nresulting in more capable AI systems that support more human-like intelligence.\n

Although the categorization of ultrasound using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) has become widespread worldwide, the problem of inter-observer variability remains. To maintain uniformity in diagnostic accuracy, we have developed a novel artificial intelligence (AI) system in which AI can distinguish whether a static image obtained using a breast ultrasound represents BI-RADS3 or lower, or BI-RADS4a or higher, to determine the medical management that should be performed on a patient whose breast ultrasound shows abnormalities. To establish and validate the AI system, a training dataset consisting of 4,028 images containing 5,014 lesions and a test dataset consisting of 3,166 images containing 3,656 lesions were collected and annotated. We selected a setting that maximized the area under the curve (AUC) and minimized the difference in sensitivity and specificity by adjusting the internal parameters of the AI system, achieving an AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.95, 90.0%, and 88.5%, respectively. Furthermore, based on 30 images extracted from the test data, the diagnostic accuracy of 20 clinicians and the AI system was compared, and the AI system was found to be significantly superior to the clinicians (McNemar test, p &amp;lt; 0.001). Then, we conducted a trial to introduce the system for use in clinical practice. Physicians reviewed the images and determined whether they were BI-RADS3 or lower, or BI-RADS4a or higher. Next, the classification was performed again for the same images concerning the AI diagnosis. At this time, the initial judgment was allowed to be overturned. We checked whether there was any difference in the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity before and after reviewing to the AI diagnosis. Reviews by 24 physicians were evaluated: 4 Japanese Breast Cancer Society breast specialists, 5 non-specialists and physicians with experience treating more than 40 cases of breast cancer, and 15 non-specialists and physicians with no experience treating more than 40 cases of breast cancer. The average rate of accuracy before confirming the AI diagnosis increased to 73.1% after confirming the AI diagnosis (p=0.00548), compared to 69.3% on average before the AI diagnosis. Compared to practice experience, the accuracy increased from an average of 77.1% to 79.6% for the 9 physicians who were breast specialists or who had treated 40 or more cases of breast cancer. For the 15 physicians with less than 40 breast cancer cases, the average rate of accuracy increased from 64.7% to 69.2%. Furthermore, sensitivity increased significantly to an average of 99.7% after reviewing of the AI diagnosis from an average of 88.8% prior to reviewing the AI-diagnosis.(p&amp;lt; 0.01). Specificity increased from an average of 62.4% to 63.8% (p=0.433) after reviewing AI diagnosis. We showed that our AI system, when applied to clinical practice and used by physicians, contributes to the improvement of diagnostic accuracy. Our results indicated that our AI diagnostic system was sufficiently accurate to be used in the clinical practice. Citation Format: Erina Odani, Tetsu Hayashida, masayuki kikuchi, Aiko Nagayama, tomoko seki, maiko takahashi, Akiko Matsumoto, Takeshi Murata, Rurina Watanuki, Takamichi Yokoe, Ayako Nakashoji, Hinako Maeda, Tatsuya Onishi, Sota Asaga, Takashi Hojo, Hiromitsu Jinno, Keiichi Sotome, Akira Matsui, Akihiko Suto, Shigeru Imoto, Yuko Kitagawa. Establishment of the breast ultrasound support system using deep-learning system [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-05-06.

Artificial intelligence evaluation practices face a fundamental challenge: traditional technical measures cannot adequately capture the complex socio-organizational impacts of artificial intelligence systems in real-world contexts. This research bridges the critical gap between technical evaluation and holistic evaluation by exploring how insights from evaluation theory can inform artificial intelligence system assessment. Using a mixed-methods case approach inspired by developmental evaluation, realistic evaluation, and empowerment evaluation principles, we analyzed 12 artificial intelligence implementations in organizations within the scaling responsible artificial intelligence mentoring program. Data collection consisted of semi-structured participant interviews, participant observation, and data extraction from various institutional databases, all guided by specific evaluation theoretical frameworks. Our analysis reveals five generative principles for a holistic evaluation of artificial intelligence: epistemic pluralism, democratic authority, contextual responsiveness, temporal sensitivity, and reflexive critique. These principles transcend procedural criteria to encompass fundamental epistemological changes in technology governance. This framework challenges technocentric evaluation paradigms and provides theoretical and practical guidance to organizations implementing artificial intelligence systems in diverse cultural contexts.