{
  "docId": "019dd923-5e88-73ef-bd5c-fd5012384ae3",
  "docSlug": "bf350dd574c19997",
  "documentTitle": "2021 Air Street Capital The State of AI Report 2021",
  "authorId": "AirStreetCapital",
  "authorName": "Air Street Capital",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "vc_research",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "VC research",
  "presentationDate": null,
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.777,
  "pageNumber": 54,
  "pageCount": 188,
  "prevPage": 53,
  "nextPage": 55,
  "slideType": "diagnosis",
  "function": "diagnose",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 36,
  "notes": "The slide uses a scatter plot to compare sensitivity vs false positive rate across various studies.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "headline_text",
    "paragraph",
    "bullet_list",
    "scatter_plot"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5e88-73ef-bd5c-fd5012384ae3/54",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5e88-73ef-bd5c-fd5012384ae3",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5e88-73ef-bd5c-fd5012384ae3.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5e88-73ef-bd5c-fd5012384ae3#slide-54",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "AI systems are not sufficiently specific to replace radiologist double reading in screening programs.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd952-47c3-7407-8d29-1d43dc32f4e9",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.5,
        "w": 0.3,
        "x": 0.65,
        "y": 0.4
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "Scatter plot showing sensitivity vs false positive rate for various AI studies compared to radiologist consensus.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "scatter",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "221efedf-015c-4e9f-a0cb-1282297c3e45",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.6,
        "w": 0.55,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.25
      },
      "kind": "list",
      "text": "The UK National Screening Committee commissioned an investigation of the accuracy of AI systems for detecting breast cancer during routine screening. It found that studies published in the last ten years were of poor methodological quality and none were prospective studies that measured the accuracy in screening practice.\nOf three retrospective studies that pitted an AI system against clinical decisions made by a human radiologist, all 36 AI system evaluated by these studies were less accurate than the consensus of two or more radiologists.\nThe study concludes that “AI systems are not sufficiently specific to replace radiologist double reading in screening programs.”\nIt is unclear where AI might be most benefit on the clinical pathway for breast cancer.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bullet",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "d5bc36e9-4e93-4429-8902-203159ad9a70",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "metric",
      "text": "Accuracy: 94%",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": "Quantification",
      "toolSlug": "quantification",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd952-47c3-7407-8d29-20b4da73f1c1",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.1,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.13
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Beware of overstated claims: 94% of AI systems for breast cancer screening are less accurate than the original radiologist",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "e3d03704-1b47-446b-bdc2-da46c3fb04c1",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Action Titles",
      "slug": "action-titles",
      "agent": "Architect",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-0fd5-7148-8ed1-2e886c07011b",
      "evidence": "Title quotes the headline finding '94% less accurate than radiologist'.",
      "confidence": 88
    },
    {
      "name": "Chart Selection Guide",
      "slug": "chart-selection-guide",
      "agent": "Designer",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "92475da9-5fd8-400a-a10b-5fc72724a6a2",
      "evidence": "Scatter plot showing sensitivity vs false positive rate for various AI studies compared to radiologist consensus",
      "confidence": 0.6
    },
    {
      "name": "Concrete Language",
      "slug": "concrete-language",
      "agent": "Storyteller",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-0fd5-7148-8ed1-318062057a58",
      "evidence": "94% specific number anchors the claim.",
      "confidence": 85
    },
    {
      "name": "Data Story Arc",
      "slug": "data-story-arc",
      "agent": "Storyteller",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "33983b6e-bf7b-4ef2-881d-fc0299c9841e",
      "evidence": "94% of AI systems for breast cancer screening are less accurate than the original radiologist",
      "confidence": 0.7
    },
    {
      "name": "Unexpected Pattern",
      "slug": "unexpected-pattern",
      "agent": "Storyteller",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-0fd5-7148-8ed1-37b72ba281d3",
      "evidence": "Counter-claim against AI breast-cancer hype.",
      "confidence": 75
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 152,
      "from": 5,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e35-0affbadec38e",
      "arcName": "The Triple Take",
      "arcSlug": "triple-take",
      "beatName": "The Facts (What)",
      "beatSlug": "triple-take-the-facts-what",
      "evidence": "Definitions p.5-6, Exec Summary p.7, then Sections 1-3 catalog evidence.",
      "position": 1,
      "confidence": 78,
      "parentBeatName": "Setup",
      "parentBeatSlug": "setup"
    },
    {
      "to": 152,
      "from": 10,
      "beatId": "019dd95a-0682-776c-8e35-1b3ee3a1c012",
      "arcName": "The Mountain",
      "arcSlug": "mountain",
      "beatName": "Rising Action",
      "beatSlug": "mountain-rising-action",
      "evidence": "Three sections accumulating evidence of accelerating progress.",
      "position": 2,
      "confidence": 55,
      "parentBeatName": "Development",
      "parentBeatSlug": "development"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 55,
      "from": 52,
      "name": "Iceberg",
      "slug": "10-iceberg",
      "bestFor": "Consulting, complex problem solving, organizational change",
      "matchId": "019dd95a-07fe-70ce-8d3d-5a2841b69367",
      "evidence": "Data deserts -> measuring bias -> 94% systems worse than radiologist -> racial identification — symptom to system to root.",
      "position": 7,
      "objective": "Surface bias problems in medical AI",
      "structure": "The Symptom (Visible) -> The System (Hidden) -> The Root Cause",
      "confidence": 78,
      "description": "Reveal that the visible problem is merely a symptom of a deeper root cause"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}