Carolyn Yu Tung Wong , Fares Antaki , Peter Woodward-Court , Ariel Yuhan Ong , Pearse A. Keane
{"title":"突出图在增强眼科医生对人工智能模型的信任方面的作用。","authors":"Carolyn Yu Tung Wong , Fares Antaki , Peter Woodward-Court , Ariel Yuhan Ong , Pearse A. Keane","doi":"10.1016/j.apjo.2024.100087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Saliency maps (SM) allow clinicians to better understand the opaque decision-making process in artificial intelligence (AI) models by visualising the important features responsible for predictions. This ultimately improves interpretability and confidence. In this work, we review the use case for SMs, exploring their impact on clinicians’ understanding and trust in AI models. We use the following ophthalmic conditions as examples: (1) glaucoma, (2) myopia, (3) age-related macular degeneration, and (4) diabetic retinopathy.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A multi-field search on MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted using specific keywords. Only studies on the use of SMs in glaucoma, myopia, AMD, or DR were considered for inclusion.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Findings reveal that SMs are often used to validate AI models and advocate for their adoption, potentially leading to biased claims. Overlooking the technical limitations of SMs, and the conductance of superficial assessments of their quality and relevance, was discerned. Uncertainties persist regarding the role of saliency maps in building trust in AI. It is crucial to enhance understanding of SMs' technical constraints and improve evaluation of their quality, impact, and suitability for specific tasks. Establishing a standardised framework for selecting and assessing SMs, as well as exploring their relationship with other reliability sources (e.g. safety and generalisability), is essential for enhancing clinicians' trust in AI.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We conclude that SMs are not beneficial for interpretability and trust-building purposes in their current forms. Instead, SMs may confer benefits to model debugging, model performance enhancement, and hypothesis testing (e.g. novel biomarkers).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8594,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"13 4","pages":"Article 100087"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2162098924000884/pdfft?md5=947c519db2eaf73afca2cbfe4639495c&pid=1-s2.0-S2162098924000884-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of saliency maps in enhancing ophthalmologists’ trust in artificial intelligence models\",\"authors\":\"Carolyn Yu Tung Wong , Fares Antaki , Peter Woodward-Court , Ariel Yuhan Ong , Pearse A. Keane\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apjo.2024.100087\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Saliency maps (SM) allow clinicians to better understand the opaque decision-making process in artificial intelligence (AI) models by visualising the important features responsible for predictions. This ultimately improves interpretability and confidence. In this work, we review the use case for SMs, exploring their impact on clinicians’ understanding and trust in AI models. We use the following ophthalmic conditions as examples: (1) glaucoma, (2) myopia, (3) age-related macular degeneration, and (4) diabetic retinopathy.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A multi-field search on MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted using specific keywords. Only studies on the use of SMs in glaucoma, myopia, AMD, or DR were considered for inclusion.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Findings reveal that SMs are often used to validate AI models and advocate for their adoption, potentially leading to biased claims. Overlooking the technical limitations of SMs, and the conductance of superficial assessments of their quality and relevance, was discerned. Uncertainties persist regarding the role of saliency maps in building trust in AI. It is crucial to enhance understanding of SMs' technical constraints and improve evaluation of their quality, impact, and suitability for specific tasks. Establishing a standardised framework for selecting and assessing SMs, as well as exploring their relationship with other reliability sources (e.g. safety and generalisability), is essential for enhancing clinicians' trust in AI.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We conclude that SMs are not beneficial for interpretability and trust-building purposes in their current forms. Instead, SMs may confer benefits to model debugging, model performance enhancement, and hypothesis testing (e.g. novel biomarkers).</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8594,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"13 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 100087\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2162098924000884/pdfft?md5=947c519db2eaf73afca2cbfe4639495c&pid=1-s2.0-S2162098924000884-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2162098924000884\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2162098924000884","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:显著性图(Saliency maps,SM)通过可视化负责预测的重要特征,让临床医生更好地理解人工智能(AI)模型中不透明的决策过程。这最终会提高可解释性和可信度。在这项工作中,我们回顾了 SM 的使用案例,探讨了 SM 对临床医生理解和信任人工智能模型的影响。我们以以下眼科疾病为例:(1)青光眼;(2)近视;(3)老年性黄斑变性;(4)糖尿病视网膜病变:方法:使用特定关键词在 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Web of Science 上进行多领域检索。结果:研究结果表明,SMs 在青光眼、近视、AMD 或 DR 中的应用非常普遍:结果:研究结果表明,人工智能模型经常被用于验证人工智能模型并倡导采用人工智能模型,这可能会导致有偏见的说法。研究发现,人们忽视了SMs的技术局限性,并对其质量和相关性进行了肤浅的评估。关于显著性地图在建立人工智能信任方面的作用,仍然存在不确定性。加强对突出显示图的技术限制的了解,改进对其质量、影响和对特定任务的适用性的评估至关重要。建立选择和评估SMs的标准化框架,以及探索它们与其他可靠性来源(如安全性和普遍性)的关系,对于增强临床医生对人工智能的信任至关重要:我们的结论是,目前形式的 SMs 对可解释性和建立信任并无益处。相反,SMs 可为模型调试、模型性能提升和假设检验(如新型生物标记物)带来益处。
The role of saliency maps in enhancing ophthalmologists’ trust in artificial intelligence models
Purpose
Saliency maps (SM) allow clinicians to better understand the opaque decision-making process in artificial intelligence (AI) models by visualising the important features responsible for predictions. This ultimately improves interpretability and confidence. In this work, we review the use case for SMs, exploring their impact on clinicians’ understanding and trust in AI models. We use the following ophthalmic conditions as examples: (1) glaucoma, (2) myopia, (3) age-related macular degeneration, and (4) diabetic retinopathy.
Method
A multi-field search on MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted using specific keywords. Only studies on the use of SMs in glaucoma, myopia, AMD, or DR were considered for inclusion.
Results
Findings reveal that SMs are often used to validate AI models and advocate for their adoption, potentially leading to biased claims. Overlooking the technical limitations of SMs, and the conductance of superficial assessments of their quality and relevance, was discerned. Uncertainties persist regarding the role of saliency maps in building trust in AI. It is crucial to enhance understanding of SMs' technical constraints and improve evaluation of their quality, impact, and suitability for specific tasks. Establishing a standardised framework for selecting and assessing SMs, as well as exploring their relationship with other reliability sources (e.g. safety and generalisability), is essential for enhancing clinicians' trust in AI.
Conclusion
We conclude that SMs are not beneficial for interpretability and trust-building purposes in their current forms. Instead, SMs may confer benefits to model debugging, model performance enhancement, and hypothesis testing (e.g. novel biomarkers).
期刊介绍:
The Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology, a bimonthly, peer-reviewed online scientific publication, is an official publication of the Asia-Pacific Academy of Ophthalmology (APAO), a supranational organization which is committed to research, training, learning, publication and knowledge and skill transfers in ophthalmology and visual sciences. The Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology welcomes review articles on currently hot topics, original, previously unpublished manuscripts describing clinical investigations, clinical observations and clinically relevant laboratory investigations, as well as .perspectives containing personal viewpoints on topics with broad interests. Editorials are published by invitation only. Case reports are generally not considered. The Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology covers 16 subspecialties and is freely circulated among individual members of the APAO’s member societies, which amounts to a potential readership of over 50,000.