Slashdot Mirror


Artificial Intelligence Can Now Predict Suicide With Remarkable Accuracy (qz.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Colin Walsh, data scientist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, and his colleagues have created machine-learning algorithms that predict, with unnerving accuracy, the likelihood that a patient will attempt suicide. In trials, results have been 80-90% accurate when predicting whether someone will attempt suicide within the next two years, and 92% accurate in predicting whether someone will attempt suicide within the next week. The prediction is based on data that's widely available from all hospital admissions, including age, gender, zip codes, medications, and prior diagnoses. Walsh and his team gathered data on 5,167 patients from Vanderbilt University Medical Center that had been admitted with signs of self-harm or suicidal ideation. They read each of these cases to identify the 3,250 instances of suicide attempts. This set of more than 5,000 cases was used to train the machine to identify those at risk of attempted suicide compared to those who committed self-harm but showed no evidence of suicidal intent.

20 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. An Algorithm.... by Luthair · · Score: 3, Insightful

    not artificial intelligence.

    1. Re:An Algorithm.... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3

      Unless you don't know what you're doing, then you're going try "heuristically" (read: panickingly) anything that comes to your mind.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:An Algorithm.... by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That AC you're responding to is far from being a 'fuckwit', they actually understand what's going on. You on the other hand keep sipping the media hype-supplied Kool-Aid and don't know the difference between the ersatz and the real thing when it comes to so-called 'AI'. Go educate yourself.

    3. Re:An Algorithm.... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3

      Or can you write a formal, terminating, deterministic sequence of elementary steps for reliably generating "Eureka!" moments in humans?

      There is no requirement that algorithms be formal. Or terminating. Or deterministic. Or a sequence. Or consist of elementary steps.

      Exempli gratia: ANNs (Artificial Neural Nets).

    4. Re:An Algorithm.... by penandpaper · · Score: 4, Funny

      Drugs. Lots of drugs.

      It may not be the "Eureka" moment you are expecting but from my perspective I discovered the meaning of existence.

    5. Re:An Algorithm.... by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This story is about machine learning. Whether you consider machine learning to be "artificial intelligence" probably says more about your definition of "artificial intelligence" than it does about machine learning.

      Machine learning definitely replaces human judgment at certain tasks -- in this case classifying a thing by its attributes -- however it does it in ways that an unaided human brain cannot duplicate. For example it might examine the goodness of fit of a large number of alternative (although structurally similar) algorithms against a vast body of training data.

      Many years ago, when I was a college student, AI enthusiasts used to say things like, "The best way to understand the human mind is to duplicate its functions." I believe that after three decades that has proven to be true, but not in the way people thought it would be true. It turns out the human way of doing things is just one possible way.

      I think that's a pretty significant discovery. But is it "AI"? It's certainly not what people are expecting. On the plus side, methods like classification and regression trees produce algorithms that can be examined and critiqued analytically.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  2. Simple solution by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Give people a reason to not kill themselves and you'll see rates drop.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Re:Have things changed in recent years... by haystor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why is it you say you don't find ELIZA to be that effective as a program?

    --
    t
  4. Falso positives and negatives calculation by houghi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So who can do the calculations for the false postives and the false negatives? Because I am sure that this will calculate that I am willing to kill myself, even if I have no desire to do so and tell me that I won't when I am willing to do so.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  5. Re:92% accuracy! by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    your are correct, these morons used a group of suicidal patients for their case study and now are claiming great success.

  6. Optimization by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Funny

    When the algorithm discovers it can improve accuracy by driving people to suicide by being linked to robocalling systems

    --
    Nullius in verba
  7. Re:False positive rate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    You have been deemed to be suicidal. Please check into your nearest healthcare location. Refusal to do so will result in you being placed imminently into level two treatment. Which may result in loss of job, loss of family, and the loss of your pet named spot.

  8. Percentages are misleading by gman003 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Simple accuracy percentages are misleading when applied to low-probability events. An "AI" that always returned "No" to the query "Will this person commit suicide within the next two years?" would be 97.2% accurate (and 99.975% accurate for the next-week variant). And yet, that "AI" would be absolutely useless for any practical purpose.

    Not to mention, with suicides, access to means has been a better statistical predictor than anything else, even mental illness. A person with no personal or family history of mental illness, but with a gun and a gas oven in their house, is at higher risk of killing themselves than a bipolar alcoholic with neither.

    1. Re:Percentages are misleading by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not that I think this is a particularly useful bit of research but - the study's patients pretest probability of suicide was much higher than the general population. These are people who are ADMITTED TO A HOSPITAL with concerns of self harm. They've already passed a bunch of screens to separate them from everybody else.

      So you are talking a group of people that the current system thinks is at some non trivial risk of suicide and trying to figure out which ones are at the highest risk.

      So it's quite a bit more useful than some of the posters have been assuming. Still not sure how generalizable this will be, but give the researchers a bit of a break.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Re:Have things changed in recent years... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why is it you say you don't find ELIZA to be that effective as a program?

    All those questions are enough to drive someone to commit suicide. Wait a minute...

  10. Re:92% accuracy! by houghi · · Score: 3, Funny

    I have made an algorithm that says that of those who never had previously tried suicide and then did it successfully, 97% did it for the first time. (+-3% accuracy on the calculation)

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  11. No, please. by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As someone who's been down that road (but never gone through with an attempt), I automatically hate this invention. When depressed to that point, emotions tend to swing so hard and so fast that any mention of predictions during this state of mind is utmost bullshit.

    The very slightest of triggers can either send you overboard or keep you in one piece depending on how your inner conversation is going with yourself. This can be anything... a faint sound, perhaps a song that reminds you of good/shitty times, from a car passing by not too far away.

    I consider myself lucky to be both scared of the afterlife enough to have thoughts force second-guessings into me (although the older I grow the less I care), and have enough positive triggers to bring myself back. Nobody, not even myself, could predict if these will always work for me as well as they have however.

    Suicidal/depressive folks definitely need help, but not from the machines of this day and age. A positive trigger could well be overridden by a "fuck it", and it only takes a split second to follow through the act. You can't predict that kind of stuff with a high degree of accuracy, at least not yet.

    Disclaimer : I did not RTFA. I find stuff like this appalling as it hits me right in the feels and I would be deeply insulted if a machine tried to guess whether I was going to kill myself or not. There's much more to it than some algorithms a team engineers wrote.

    --
    I tend to rant.
  12. Re:False positive rate by barbariccow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's probably mostly meaningless. I mean, they scanned for features of people who are suicidal. They were in the hospital because they inflicted self harm, and were on medications specifically prescribed to make people not do that. So as far as I can tell, this doesn't predict anything, it juts measures that "80-90% of the time doctors do the same thing for folks who would hurt themselves".

    It's not like they randomly picked a bunch of people off the street and determined from THAT. Like basically every single other artificial intelligence or machine learning story, it's a bunch of dumb hype, eventually to get folks investing in stupid startups.

  13. Involuntary commitment? by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, once the computer diagnoses someone as highly likely to kill themselves in the next week, then does it (or the user) call the men in white coats to give the subject the coat with the funny sleeves? Therapists frequently have a statutory or license requirement to report potential suicides.
    We don't know what the rate of false positives are, but with our current state of health insurance, getting locked up for a week and then getting a $50k bill would probably drive most people to suicide.

  14. Wrong title by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The title speaks of suicides while the article only of _attempted_ suicides, checking admissions to hospitals
    Real suicides get admitted to the morgue instead.