zlacker

>>iafish+(OP)
I was born in late USSR and my father is software engineer. We had several books that were not available for "general public" (they were intended for libraries of science institutions). One of the book was, as I understand now, abridged translation of papers from some "Western" AI conference.

And there were description if EURISCO (with claims that it not only "win some game" but also that it "invented new structure of NAND-gate in silicon, used by industry now") and other expert systems.

One of the mentioned expert systems (without technical details) said was 2 times better in diagnose cancer than best human diagnostician of some university hospital.

And after that... Silence.

I always wonder, why did this expert system were not deployed in all USA hospitals, for example? If it is so good?

Now we have LLMs, but they are LANGUAGE models, not WORLD models. They predict distribution of possible next words. Same with images — pixels, not world concepts.

Looks like such systems are good for generating marketing texts, but can not be used as diagnosticians by definition.

Why did all these (slice of) world model approaches dead? Except Cyc, I think. Why we have good text generators and image generators but not diagnosticians 40 years later? What happens?..

>>blackl+tD1
I've read similar things about image models from 12 years ago beating the pants off most radiologists. I think the difference is that most writers, illustrators, musicians, drivers, etc. eke out a marginal living, while radiologists have enough reserves to fight back. The "move fast and break things" crowd in silicon valley isn't going to undertake that fight while there's still so much low-hanging fruit, ripe for the harvest.