Automated Real-time Assessment of Intracranial Hemorrhage Detection AI Using an Ensembled Monitoring Model (EMM)

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.11738v1
• Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 22:50:42 GMT
• Title: Automated Real-time Assessment of Intracranial Hemorrhage Detection AI Using an Ensembled Monitoring Model (EMM)
• Authors: Zhongnan Fang, Andrew Johnston, Lina Cheuy, Hye Sun Na, Magdalini Paschali, Camila Gonzalez, Bonnie A. Armstrong, Arogya Koirala, Derrick Laurel, Andrew Walker Campion, Michael Iv, Akshay S. Chaudhari, David B. Larson,
• Abstract summary: We introduce Ensembled Monitoring Model (EMM), a framework inspired by clinical consensus practices using multiple expert reviews.<n>EMM operates independently without requiring access to internal AI components or intermediate outputs.<n>We demonstrate that EMM successfully categorizes confidence in the AI-generated prediction, suggesting different actions.
• Score: 1.8767322781894276
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools for radiology are commonly unmonitored once deployed. The lack of real-time case-by-case assessments of AI prediction confidence requires users to independently distinguish between trustworthy and unreliable AI predictions, which increases cognitive burden, reduces productivity, and potentially leads to misdiagnoses. To address these challenges, we introduce Ensembled Monitoring Model (EMM), a framework inspired by clinical consensus practices using multiple expert reviews. Designed specifically for black-box commercial AI products, EMM operates independently without requiring access to internal AI components or intermediate outputs, while still providing robust confidence measurements. Using intracranial hemorrhage detection as our test case on a large, diverse dataset of 2919 studies, we demonstrate that EMM successfully categorizes confidence in the AI-generated prediction, suggesting different actions and helping improve the overall performance of AI tools to ultimately reduce cognitive burden. Importantly, we provide key technical considerations and best practices for successfully translating EMM into clinical settings.

Related papers

• "Crash Test Dummies" for AI-Enabled Clinical Assessment: Validating Virtual Patient Scenarios with Virtual Learners [0.0]
  In medical and health professions education, AI is increasingly used to assess clinical competencies, including via virtual standardized patients.<n>Most evaluations rely on AI-human interrater reliability and lack a measurement framework for how cases, learners, and raters jointly shape scores.<n>We develop an open-source platform and measurement model for robust competency evaluation across cases and rating conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-26T02:47:28Z)
• AI Epidemiology: achieving explainable AI through expert oversight patterns [0.0]
  AI Epidemiology is a framework for governing and explaining advanced AI systems.<n>It mirrors the way in which epidemiologists enable public health interventions through statistical evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-15T11:29:05Z)
• SelfAI: Building a Self-Training AI System with LLM Agents [79.10991818561907]
  SelfAI is a general multi-agent platform that combines a User Agent for translating high-level research objectives into standardized experimental configurations.<n>An Experiment Manager orchestrates parallel, fault-tolerant training across heterogeneous hardware while maintaining a structured knowledge base for continuous feedback.<n>Across regression, computer vision, scientific computing, medical imaging, and drug discovery benchmarks, SelfAI consistently achieves strong performance and reduces redundant trials.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-29T09:18:39Z)
• How to Evaluate Medical AI [4.23552814358972]
  We introduce Relative Precision and Recall of Algorithmic Diagnostics (RPAD and RRAD)<n>RPAD and RRAD compare AI outputs against multiple expert opinions rather than a single reference.<n>Large-scale study shows that top-performing models, such as DeepSeek-V3, achieve consistency on par with or exceeding expert consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-15T14:01:22Z)
• Visual Analytics for Explainable and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence [2.1212179660694104]
  A key obstacle to AI adoption lies in the lack of transparency.<n>Many automated systems function as "black boxes," providing predictions without revealing the underlying processes.<n>Visual analytics (VA) provides a compelling solution by combining AI models with interactive visualizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T13:03:17Z)
• Uncertainty-Driven Expert Control: Enhancing the Reliability of Medical Vision-Language Models [52.2001050216955]
  Existing methods aim to enhance the performance of Medical Vision Language Model (MedVLM) by adjusting model structure, fine-tuning with high-quality data, or through preference fine-tuning.<n>We propose an expert-in-the-loop framework named Expert-Controlled-Free Guidance (Expert-CFG) to align MedVLM with clinical expertise without additional training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-12T09:03:30Z)
• Robot-Gated Interactive Imitation Learning with Adaptive Intervention Mechanism [48.41735416075536]
  Interactive Imitation Learning (IIL) allows agents to acquire desired behaviors through human interventions.<n>We propose the Adaptive Intervention Mechanism (AIM), a novel robot-gated IIL algorithm that learns an adaptive criterion for requesting human demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-10T18:43:26Z)
• Advancing AI Research Assistants with Expert-Involved Learning [84.30323604785646]
  Large language models (LLMs) and large multimodal models (LMMs) promise to accelerate biomedical discovery, yet their reliability remains unclear.<n>We introduce ARIEL (AI Research Assistant for Expert-in-the-Loop Learning), an open-source evaluation and optimization framework.<n>We find that state-of-the-art models generate fluent but incomplete summaries, whereas LMMs struggle with detailed visual reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T14:21:48Z)
• Over-Relying on Reliance: Towards Realistic Evaluations of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support [12.247046469627554]
  We advocate for moving beyond evaluation metrics like Trust, Reliance, Acceptance, and Performance on the AI's task.<n>We call on the community to prioritize ecologically valid, domain-appropriate study setups that measure the emergent forms of value that AI can bring to healthcare professionals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T03:28:56Z)
• Detecting Dataset Bias in Medical AI: A Generalized and Modality-Agnostic Auditing Framework [8.017827642932746]
  Generalized Attribute Utility and Detectability-Induced bias Testing (G-AUDIT) for datasets is a modality-agnostic dataset auditing framework.<n>Our method examines the relationship between task-level annotations and data properties including patient attributes.<n>G-AUDIT successfully identifies subtle biases commonly overlooked by traditional qualitative methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-13T02:16:48Z)
• To Err Is AI! Debugging as an Intervention to Facilitate Appropriate Reliance on AI Systems [11.690126756498223]
  Vision for optimal human-AI collaboration requires 'appropriate reliance' of humans on AI systems. In practice, the performance disparity of machine learning models on out-of-distribution data makes dataset-specific performance feedback unreliable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-22T09:43:27Z)
• A-Bench: Are LMMs Masters at Evaluating AI-generated Images? [78.3699767628502]
  A-Bench is a benchmark designed to diagnose whether multi-modal models (LMMs) are masters at evaluating AI-generated images (AIGIs)<n>Ultimately, 2,864 AIGIs from 16 text-to-image models are sampled, each paired with question-answers annotated by human experts, and tested across 18 leading LMMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T08:55:02Z)
• From Uncertainty to Trust: Kernel Dropout for AI-Powered Medical Predictions [14.672477787408887]
  AI-driven medical predictions with trustworthy confidence are essential for ensuring the responsible use of AI in healthcare applications.<n>This paper proposes a novel approach to address these challenges, introducing a Bayesian Monte Carlo Dropout model with kernel modelling.<n>We demonstrate significant improvements in reliability, even with limited data, offering a promising step towards building trust in AI-driven medical predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T11:43:26Z)
• New Epochs in AI Supervision: Design and Implementation of an Autonomous Radiology AI Monitoring System [5.50085484902146]
  We introduce novel methods for monitoring the performance of radiology AI classification models in practice. We propose two metrics - predictive divergence and temporal stability - to be used for preemptive alerts of AI performance changes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-24T06:29:04Z)
• Towards Reliable AI: Adequacy Metrics for Ensuring the Quality of System-level Testing of Autonomous Vehicles [5.634825161148484]
  We introduce a set of black-box test adequacy metrics called "Test suite Instance Space Adequacy" (TISA) metrics. The TISA metrics offer a way to assess both the diversity and coverage of the test suite and the range of bugs detected during testing. We evaluate the efficacy of the TISA metrics by examining their correlation with the number of bugs detected in system-level simulation testing of AVs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T10:16:05Z)
• Position: AI Evaluation Should Learn from How We Test Humans [65.36614996495983]
  We argue that psychometrics, a theory originating in the 20th century for human assessment, could be a powerful solution to the challenges in today's AI evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-18T09:54:33Z)
• Detecting Shortcut Learning for Fair Medical AI using Shortcut Testing [62.9062883851246]
  Machine learning holds great promise for improving healthcare, but it is critical to ensure that its use will not propagate or amplify health disparities. One potential driver of algorithmic unfairness, shortcut learning, arises when ML models base predictions on improper correlations in the training data. Using multi-task learning, we propose the first method to assess and mitigate shortcut learning as a part of the fairness assessment of clinical ML systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-21T09:35:38Z)
• Robust and Efficient Medical Imaging with Self-Supervision [80.62711706785834]
  We present REMEDIS, a unified representation learning strategy to improve robustness and data-efficiency of medical imaging AI. We study a diverse range of medical imaging tasks and simulate three realistic application scenarios using retrospective data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-19T17:34:18Z)
• Estimating and Improving Fairness with Adversarial Learning [65.99330614802388]
  We propose an adversarial multi-task training strategy to simultaneously mitigate and detect bias in the deep learning-based medical image analysis system. Specifically, we propose to add a discrimination module against bias and a critical module that predicts unfairness within the base classification model. We evaluate our framework on a large-scale public-available skin lesion dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-07T03:10:32Z)
• Privacy-preserving medical image analysis [53.4844489668116]
  We present PriMIA, a software framework designed for privacy-preserving machine learning (PPML) in medical imaging. We show significantly better classification performance of a securely aggregated federated learning model compared to human experts on unseen datasets. We empirically evaluate the framework's security against a gradient-based model inversion attack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-10T13:56:00Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.