Machine learning. Not really. Someone has to write the script for the AI/LLM. Our current script for sepsis (whatever that word means these days) lacks a disease model. Using "AI" to correlate thousands of sepsis data points is like trying to retrace a house fire without a degree in structural engineering. We need to go back to hard science and research microcirculation from the front end. I think p hacking and Vibe coding large data sets of models we dont understand is a dead end. I hope it isnt as we've exhausted and optimized the macroscopic model of reperfusion and infection source control. But data crunching is not a substitute for understanding replicable human physiology.
I like the analogy of retracing a house fire. I have used a storm system analogy before. Both highly complex events that can’t be analyzed from the residue that remains after they are well in progress.
Machine learning. Not really. Someone has to write the script for the AI/LLM. Our current script for sepsis (whatever that word means these days) lacks a disease model. Using "AI" to correlate thousands of sepsis data points is like trying to retrace a house fire without a degree in structural engineering. We need to go back to hard science and research microcirculation from the front end. I think p hacking and Vibe coding large data sets of models we dont understand is a dead end. I hope it isnt as we've exhausted and optimized the macroscopic model of reperfusion and infection source control. But data crunching is not a substitute for understanding replicable human physiology.
I like the analogy of retracing a house fire. I have used a storm system analogy before. Both highly complex events that can’t be analyzed from the residue that remains after they are well in progress.