Differences between experts data scientists and laypeople
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2025 4:47 am
A text with the necessary information about human resuscitation was then made available to the AI as a source. Separate training of the AI was not necessary, as the model can understand natural language and draw its own conclusions from the given text. Luminous was then influenced using prompt engineering to such an extent that the desired output was short and concise and suited the subject area of medicine. A few-shot was suitable for this, which displayed two medical texts and provided an example question and answer from each text in order to convey the correct syntax to the model.
What were the results of the study? The test subjects' acceptance of technology ranged from 3.2 to 4.4, with 0 being the minimum and 5 being the maximum. On average, the data scientists and laypeople had a slightly higher willingness to engage with technology than the experts. This was 3.95 to 3.88.
This distribution was also reflected in the choice of IL. While all laypeople opted for IL 4 and thus the automation of human resuscitation, the data scientists chose IL 2. The experts, however, were not so unanimous. Here, two test subjects opted for IL 1 and two for IL 4.
But what do the results tell us and how should they be kuwait consumer email list interpreted? Let's start with the laypeople. They chose the highest IL because they had the least experience in the field and needed the most support. This also gave them the opportunity to hand over responsibility in the event of complications and thus no longer fear legal consequences. However, due to their experience with AI, the data scientists did not want to give up control completely, as problems can always arise with technology. However, the voice assistant, which was able to support resuscitation with tips and explanations, gave them a feeling of security. It would therefore be conceivable that the experts, with their high level of experience, would have chosen the safest option and unanimously opted for IL 1. The two experts who opted for automation, however, justified this as follows.
What were the results of the study? The test subjects' acceptance of technology ranged from 3.2 to 4.4, with 0 being the minimum and 5 being the maximum. On average, the data scientists and laypeople had a slightly higher willingness to engage with technology than the experts. This was 3.95 to 3.88.
This distribution was also reflected in the choice of IL. While all laypeople opted for IL 4 and thus the automation of human resuscitation, the data scientists chose IL 2. The experts, however, were not so unanimous. Here, two test subjects opted for IL 1 and two for IL 4.
But what do the results tell us and how should they be kuwait consumer email list interpreted? Let's start with the laypeople. They chose the highest IL because they had the least experience in the field and needed the most support. This also gave them the opportunity to hand over responsibility in the event of complications and thus no longer fear legal consequences. However, due to their experience with AI, the data scientists did not want to give up control completely, as problems can always arise with technology. However, the voice assistant, which was able to support resuscitation with tips and explanations, gave them a feeling of security. It would therefore be conceivable that the experts, with their high level of experience, would have chosen the safest option and unanimously opted for IL 1. The two experts who opted for automation, however, justified this as follows.