Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This paper proposes using clinical translation standards as generative analogies to build new forms of reliability in machine learning systems, addressing current epistemic uncertainties. By interpreting medical warrants through a reliabilist lens, the authors aim to establish distinct yet compatible methodological foundations for trustworthy AI deployment. The work bridges philosophy and technical practice to enhance how we validate ML models against rigorous real-world benchmarks.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

What Can Artificial Intelligence Learn from Medicine? Generative Analogies and Reliable Machine Learning Systems

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.18186v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In the past few years, machine learning (ML) has been widely (and to an extent, successfully) implemented in medicine. However, uncertainties surrounding ML have made it difficult to establish the bases of its epistemic and methodological warrants. In the literature, a parallel has been drawn between medicine and ML, suggesting that we should model epistemic and methodological standards for ML on the standards of clinical translation. By developing tools from Hesse work, we characterise the nature of this parallel as a generative analogy between the process of clinical translation and the process of building ML systems. We identify more precisely the epistemic and methodological warrants of clinical translation that are typically only mentioned when appealing to the analogy, and we show in which sense such warrants apply analogically to the context of ML. In particular, we interpret warrants of clinical translation in reliabilist terms, and we show how this can inform a new form of ML reliabilism, which is distinct from (though compatible with) existing reliabilist accounts in philosophy of AI.

Title:What Can Artificial Intelligence Learn from Medicine? Generative Analogies and Reliable Machine Learning Systems

Abstract:In the past few years, machine learning (ML) has been widely (and to an extent, successfully) implemented in medicine. However, uncertainties surrounding ML have made it difficult to establish the bases of its epistemic and methodological warrants. In the literature, a parallel has been drawn between medicine and ML, suggesting that we should model epistemic and methodological standards for ML on the standards of clinical translation. By developing tools from Hesse work, we characterise the nature of this parallel as a generative analogy between the process of clinical translation and the process of building ML systems. We identify more precisely the epistemic and methodological warrants of clinical translation that are typically only mentioned when appealing to the analogy, and we show in which sense such warrants apply analogically to the context of ML. In particular, we interpret warrants of clinical translation in reliabilist terms, and we show how this can inform a new form of ML reliabilism, which is distinct from (though compatible with) existing reliabilist accounts in philosophy of AI.

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY)

arXiv:2608.18186 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.18186v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.18186 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 286 words

Related coverage