Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Erik Duhaime

Publications and source records attributed to Erik Duhaime.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Managing Cognitive Bias in Human Labeling Operations for Rare-Event AI: Evidence from a Field Experiment

Many operational AI systems depend on large-scale human annotation to detect rare but consequential events (e.g., fraud, defects, and medical abnormalities). When positives are rare, the prevalence effect induces systematic cognitive biases that inflate misses and can propagate through the AI lifecycle via biased training labels. We analyze prior experimental evidence and run a field experiment on DiagnosUs, a medical crowdsourcing platform, in which we hold the true prevalence in the unlabeled stream fixed (20% blasts) while varying (i) the prevalence of positives in the gold-standard feedback stream (20% vs. 50%) and (ii) the response interface (binary labels vs. elicited probabilities). We then post-process probabilistic labels using a linear-in-log-odds recalibration approach at the worker and crowd levels, and train convolutional neural networks on the resulting labels. Balanced feedback and probabilistic elicitation reduce rare-event misses, and pipeline-level recalibration substantially improves both classification performance and probabilistic calibration; these gains carry through to downstream CNN reliability out of sample.

cs.HC↗

The use of large language models to enhance cancer clinical trial educational materials

Cancer clinical trials often face challenges in recruitment and engagement due to a lack of participant-facing informational and educational resources. This study investigated the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically GPT4, in generating patient-friendly educational content from clinical trial informed consent forms. Using data from ClinicalTrials.gov, we employed zero-shot learning for creating trial summaries and one-shot learning for developing multiple-choice questions, evaluating their effectiveness through patient surveys and crowdsourced annotation. Results showed that GPT4-generated summaries were both readable and comprehensive, and may improve patients' understanding and interest in clinical trials. The multiple-choice questions demonstrated high accuracy and agreement with crowdsourced annotators. For both resource types, hallucinations were identified that require ongoing human oversight. The findings demonstrate the potential of LLMs "out-of-the-box" to support the generation of clinical trial education materials with minimal trial-specific engineering, but implementation with a human-in-the-loop is still needed to avoid misinformation risks.

cs.CL↗

Expert-Level Annotation Quality Achieved by Gamified Crowdsourcing for B-line Segmentation in Lung Ultrasound

Accurate and scalable annotation of medical data is critical for the development of medical AI, but obtaining time for annotation from medical experts is challenging. Gamified crowdsourcing has demonstrated potential for obtaining highly accurate annotations for medical data at scale, and we demonstrate the same in this study for the segmentation of B-lines, an indicator of pulmonary congestion, on still frames within point-of-care lung ultrasound clips. We collected 21,154 annotations from 214 annotators over 2.5 days, and we demonstrated that the concordance of crowd consensus segmentations with reference standards exceeds that of individual experts with the same reference standards, both in terms of B-line count (mean squared error 0.239 vs. 0.308, p<0.05) as well as the spatial precision of B-line annotations (mean Dice-H score 0.755 vs. 0.643, p<0.05). These results suggest that expert-quality segmentations can be achieved using gamified crowdsourcing.

cs.CY↗