It sounds to me like the European center for nuclear research is getting a tiny bit off topic.
I’m confused, what’s the topic?
Their purpose is studying nuclear physics, in particular subatomic particles.
Building AI models to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease is, well, not that thing.
It’s in the opening paragraph. They apply it to make radiation machines more precise and smaller. This is kinda their wheelhouse.
Edit: this also shows the importance of research. You never know where it might also be applicable.
I have since been informed that AI is, indeed, physics.
Builldng the frigging world wide web is not tha thing either but nobody’s complaining.
CERN is awesome both when doing nuclear research or when they create actual awesome other content
CERN is so huge they do a lot of non-core research so that they improve their tooling, academic processes etc. This is how we got World Wide Web for example.
It’s worth noting that no evidence is presented for the improvement of stroke treatment. They link to an interview where the dude doesn’t mention strokes.
There’s no evidence presented for “Predicting the evolution of tumors or Alzheimer’s”.
And while the test for breast cancer sounds promising, it’s still in testing and it will (or should) always include human oversight. I think this application of data analysis sounds promising since it’s somewhat easy for computers to detect anomalies in otherwise uniform data… But it’s not “AI”. There’s no “artificial intelligence” involved here.
Overall… Typical BS article about “AI”. The red flag is how they use “AI” in the title for something that’s clearly not AI. The confirmation is when they start talking about strokes, tumors, alzheimers, etc… AI is a miracle drug!
I think this application of data analysis sounds promising since it’s somewhat easy for computers to detect anomalies in otherwise uniform data… But it’s not “AI”. There’s no “artificial intelligence” involved here.
takes a bong hit
It’s only artificial intelligence if it comes from the intelligence region of France. Otherwise it’s just sparkling decision trees.
