Analysis

2020/5/21 Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus  | WIRED

https://www.wired.com/story/artificial-intelligence-wont-save-us-from-coronavirus/ 1/6

ALEX ENGLER IDEAS 04.26.2020 08:00 AM

Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus The hype is real, but the potential is not: Approach claims around AI and Covid-19 with skepticism.

Fever detection is a plausible use case of AI, but it will take far more time, effort, and money to build systems that are robust enough

to trust. PHOTOGRAPH: ELIJAH NOUVELAGE/BLOOMBERG/GETTY IMAGES

2020/5/21 Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus  | WIRED

https://www.wired.com/story/artificial-intelligence-wont-save-us-from-coronavirus/ 2/6

A R T I F I C I A L I N T E L L I G E N C E I S here to save us from coronavirus. It spots new outbreaks,

identifies people with fevers, diagnoses cases, prioritizes the patients most in need, reads the

scientific literature, and is on its way to creating a cure.

If only.

WIRED OPINION

ABOUT

Alex Engler is a David M. Rubenstein Fellow at the Brookings Institution and an adjunct

professor and affiliated scholar at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy.

As the world confronts the outbreak of coronavirus, many have lauded AI as our omniscient

secret weapon. Although corporate press releases and some media coverage sing its praises, AI

will play only a marginal role in our fight against Covid-19. While there are undoubtedly ways

in which it will be helpful—and even more so in future pandemics—at the current moment,

technologies like data reporting, telemedicine, and conventional diagnostic tools are far more

impactful. So how can you avoid falling for the AI hype? In a recent Brookings Institution

report, I identified the necessary heuristics for a healthy skepticism of AI claims around Covid-

19.

Let’s start with the most important rule: always look to the subject matter experts. If they are

applying AI, fantastic! If not, be wary of AI applications from software companies that don’t

employ those experts. Data is always dependent on its context, which takes expertise to

understand. Does data from China apply to the United States? How long might exponential

growth continue? By how much will our interventions reduce transmission? All models, even

AI models, make assumptions about questions like these. If the modelers don’t understand

those assumptions, their models are more likely to be harmful than helpful.

Thankfully, in the case of Covid-19, epidemiologists know quite a bit about the context of the

data. Even though the virus is new and there is much to be learned, there is tremendous depth

2020/5/21 Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus  | WIRED

https://www.wired.com/story/artificial-intelligence-wont-save-us-from-coronavirus/ 3/6

of expertise around what questions to ask and how they can be answered. Modern statistical

epidemiology dates to the early 1900s, which means the field is incorporating a century of

scientific research into its analyses. In contrast, machine learning methods tend to assume that

everything can be learned directly from a data set, without incorporating the broader scientific

context.

Consider, for example, the claim that AI was the first to detect the coronavirus. Machine

learning is very dependent on historical data to create meaningful insights. Since there is no

database of prior Covid-19 outbreaks, AI alone cannot predict the spread of this new

pandemic. What’s more, the claim implicitly overstates the ability of AI to inform us about

huge and rare events, which is not the strength of AI at all. As it turns out, while software may

have sounded the alarm, grasping the significance of the outbreak required human analysis.

AI’s real value lies in its ability to create many minute predictions. For instance, the AI

epidemiology company BlueDot has successfully helped the state of California monitor the

spread of the coronavirus. The company augmented traditional epidemiological models with

machine learning, using flight patterns to predict the spread at the zip code level. That’s the

value of AI. Those granular estimates can enable precise allocation of funding, supplies, and

medical staff.

That said, you should not trust all individualized estimates from AI. Frequently, a company will

report accuracy—the percent of predictions that are correct during development—to purport

the effectiveness of an AI model. Unfortunately, this number is easy to juke and often offers an

incomplete picture. For instance, Alibaba has claimed it can diagnose Covid-19 from CT scans

with 96 percent accuracy. But, if you check in with the subject matter experts, you’ll see that

the American College of Radiology has said that CT scans should not be used as “first-line tests

to diagnose Covid-19." Other experts echo that this method is not yet proven, and further

caution that while the algorithm may be fast, it requires that CT scan rooms must be cleaned

and their air recirculated between each patient

As for that impressively high rate of accuracy, it’s time to share a dirty secret of the machine

learning world: any data scientist in the field would scoff at that level of accuracy. It’s

unbelievably high. Without any caveat, self-criticism, or external validation, it’s suspicious on

its face. Even if it is true, we often need metrics aside from accuracy to know if a model is

2020/5/21 Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus  | WIRED

https://www.wired.com/story/artificial-intelligence-wont-save-us-from-coronavirus/ 4/6

effective, such as the percent of sick individuals who are correctly diagnosed. While fatigued

medical systems have turned to AI analysis of x-rays for triaging patients based on the severity

of their lung conditions, AI can’t currently diagnose Covid-19 on its own.

Even AI models that are thoroughly tested and validated in development need further

skepticism, since real-world situations nearly always degrade AI performance. In a recent

paper about the diagnosis of malignant moles, researchers noticed that their AI models had

learned that medical rulers were often present in images of moles known to be malignant. This

has the dual effect of driving accuracy up in the lab but down in the real world.

This lesson gives us reason to be dubious of AI systems that attempt to detect fevers from

thermal cameras. Surveillance technology company Athena Security claimed that, in the past

month, they had adapted their existing software to do just that. Even before it was reported

that Athena had allegedly faked the software demonstration, the claim warranted skepticism.

While the fever-detecting technology may work well in lab conditions, the software would

require a clear and precise view of a person’s inner face, something that could be difficult for a

camera to obtain for, say, a person quickly walking into a grocery store. That’s not to mention

that the analysis is affected by ambient temperature, humidity, and even the sex of the subject,

which, of course, opens the door to bias.

Fever detection is a plausible use case of AI, but it will take far more time, effort, and money to

build systems that are robust enough to trust. AI predictions are only valuable if they enable an

intervention—is the fever detection reliable enough to prevent people from entering a

supermarket or pharmacy? The CDC doesn’t think so and would require a confirmatory test in

addition to thermal cameras.

All this should give you pause when evaluating claims that tout AI as our Covid savior, and

that’s before considering the high likelihood that, just as we’ve seen with other applications of

machine learning, it will introduce unintended consequences and systemic bias. But while a

dose of skepticism is healthy, the near-future impact of AI on some of these applications is

bright. AI is a widely applicable technology with tremendous potential, but its advantages need

to be hedged in a realistic understanding of its limitations.

2020/5/21 Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus  | WIRED

https://www.wired.com/story/artificial-intelligence-wont-save-us-from-coronavirus/ 5/6

WIRED Opinion publishes articles by outside contributors representing a wide range of

viewpoints. Read more opinions here. Submit an op-ed at [email protected].

More Great WIRED Stories

How a doomed porpoise may save other animals from extinction

Wait, what’s the deal with sunscreen? Does it work or not?

The ultimate quarantine self-care guide

Anyone's a celebrity streamer with this open source app

The face mask debate reveals a scientific double standard

👁 AI uncovers a potential Covid-19 treatment. Plus: Get the latest AI news

💻 Upgrade your work game with our Gear team’s favorite laptops, keyboards,

typing alternatives, and noise-canceling headphones

Alex Engler is a David M. Rubenstein Fellow at the Brookings Institution, where he studies the governance

of artificial intelligence and emerging technology. He is also an adjunct professor and affiliated scholar at

Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy, where he teaches courses on data science for

policy analysis.

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

Featured Video

2020/5/21 Artificial Intelligence Won't Save Us From Coronavirus  | WIRED

https://www.wired.com/story/artificial-intelligence-wont-save-us-from-coronavirus/ 6/6

Dr. Seema Yasmin Debunks Coronavirus Myths

Epidemic expert Dr. Seema Yasmin helps debunk some common medical myths surrounding Covid-19. Will

drinking water flush the virus out? Can you take ibuprofen? Will garlic prevent infection? Can you hold

your breath to test if you have coronavirus?

TOPICS WIRED OPINION ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CORONAVIRUS COVID-19

WATCHWATCH

Dr. Seema Yasmin Debunks Coronavirus MythsDr. Seema Yasmin Debunks Coronavirus Myths