Evaluation of crowdsourced mortality prediction models as a framework for assessing artificial intelligence in medicine.

OBJECTIVE: Applications of machine learning in healthcare are of high interest and have the potential to improve patient care. Yet, the real-world accuracy of these models in clinical practice and on different patient subpopulations remains unclear. To address these important questions, we hosted a community challenge to evaluate methods that predict healthcare outcomes. We focused on the prediction of all-cause mortality as the community challenge question. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a Model-to-Data framework, 345 registered participants, coalescing into 25 independent teams, spread over 3 continents and 10 countries, generated 25 accurate models all trained on a dataset of over 1.1 million patients and evaluated on patients prospectively collected over a 1-year observation of a large health system. RESULTS: The top performing team achieved a final area under the receiver operator curve of 0.947 (95% CI, 0.942-0.951) and an area under the precision-recall curve of 0.487 (95% CI, 0.458-0.499) on a prospectively collected patient cohort. DISCUSSION: Post hoc analysis after the challenge revealed that models differ in accuracy on subpopulations, delineated by race or gender, even when they are trained on the same data. CONCLUSION: This is the largest community challenge focused on the evaluation of state-of-the-art machine learning methods in a healthcare system performed to date, revealing both opportunities and pitfalls of clinical AI

Beyond the imitation game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 442 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting

Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 442 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting.Comment: 27 pages, 17 figures + references and appendices, repo: https://github.com/google/BIG-benc