Backend
Algorithmic Authority and the Clinical Standard of Care
arXiv cs.SY0 views
arXiv:2606.00044v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The integration of artificial intelligence into clinical medicine creates a fundamental tension between algorithmic probabilistic reasoning and the experiential intuition of expert physicians; applying Lawrence Lessig's \enquote{Code is Law} framework, I argue that the architecture of clinical AI systems already functions as de facto medical regulation, reshaping liability and the standard of care. Reframing AI \enquote{hallucination} as structurally analogous to well-documented human cognitive failures such as confirmation bias and premature diagnostic closure, I show that both failure modes demand a unified governance response. I therefore propose a dialectical standard of care that treats the integrated AI-physician dyad as the singular responsible diagnostic entity, mandating the synthesis of algorithmic precision with human interpretive authority within robust data governance and patient privacy frameworks.
Source:https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00044PreviousSoft-Label Governance for Distributional Safety in Multi-Agent SystemsNextTranslate, then decide: asymptotic optimality of latent-space control in bistable systems
Related posts
How to let Claude Code and Codex talk directly across two computers without copy-pasting logs
0dev.to
Why Is There a Delay When I’m Typing? (I Tested the Bottlenecks So You Don’t Have To)
0dev.to

Moving City GIS Into Unreal Engine: Coordinate Systems, LOD, and the Boring Parts
0dev.to
My AI Agent Said 'Done.' It Wasn't. A Field Guide to Trusting Nothing an Agent Tells You
0dev.to
Bridging Context and Execution: An Engineering Assessment of Connected AI Workflows
0dev.to
把 AI CLI 包成 OpenAI 相容 API:從 stdin、JSON 輸出到逾時處理(附可跑範例)
0dev.to