AI可加速部分流行病学工作,但受限于幻觉与数据壁垒,尚难全面自动化。
Why can't Epidemiology be automated (yet)?
- 用AI代理系统自动设计并执行流行病学分析流程
- 在文献综述等环节出现幻觉,影响结果可靠性
- 适合想测试AI能力的流行病学家与跨领域工程师
近年来人工智能(尤其是生成式AI)的发展为加速甚至自动化流行病学研究带来新机遇。不同于依赖物理实验的学科,流行病学大量依赖二次数据分析,非常适合AI辅助。然而,目前尚不明确哪些任务能受益于AI干预,以及存在哪些障碍。我们基于现有数据集,梳理了从文献回顾到数据获取、分析、撰写和传播的全流程,并识别出当前AI工具可提升效率的环节。尽管AI在编码与行政任务中显著提高生产力,但其应用受限于现有模型缺陷(如文献综述中的幻觉)及人类系统障碍(如数据访问壁垒)。通过展示完全由AI生成的流行病学论文实例,我们证明新兴的智能体系统已能自主完成分析设计与执行,但质量参差不齐。流行病学家现有机会实证测试并评估AI系统;实现AI潜力需流行病学家与工程师双向协作。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) - particularly generative AI - present new opportunities to accelerate, or even automate, epidemiological research. Unlike disciplines based on physical experimentation, a sizable fraction of Epidemiology relies on secondary data analysis and thus is well-suited for such augmentation. Yet, it remains unclear which specific tasks can benefit from AI interventions or where roadblocks exist. Awareness of current AI capabilities is also mixed. Here, we map the landscape of epidemiological tasks using existing datasets - from literature review to data access, analysis, writing up, and dissemination - and identify where existing AI tools offer efficiency gains. While AI can increase productivity in some areas such as coding and administrative tasks, its utility is constrained by limitations of existing AI models (e.g. hallucinations in literature reviews) and human systems (e.g. barriers to accessing datasets). Through examples of AI-generated epidemiological outputs, including fully AI-generated papers, we demonstrate that recently developed agentic systems can now design and execute epidemiological analysis, albeit to varied quality (see https://github.com/edlowther/automated-epidemiology). Epidemiologists have new opportunities to empirically test and benchmark AI systems; realising the potential of AI will require two-way engagement between epidemiologists and engineers.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。