35 interactive systems at MICCAI were only ever evaluated with simulated users
maier_ak · x · 2026-10-19
A MICCAI narrative review (keyword-based, illustrative rather than systematic, and openly says so) draws a sharp number: 35 papers propose interactive systems yet evaluate them only with simulated users — interactive, but never tested with a real person. The fix it asks for is simple: put the system in front of the people it is for.
More from Research
- Amazon Paper: QA Scores Miss Agent Memory Failures by 16.8 Points, New FEB-30 Benchmark Fixes It — rohanpaul_ai · 2026-10-19
- New benchmark tests agents on human needs with a ticking clock, no in-domain demos — ccloy · 2026-10-19
- Team seeks Hilbert's 6th problem collaborators to build verifiable logic for AI x Science — CatAstro_Piyush · 2026-10-19
- Dream2Discern: Self-Generated Hard Examples Predict Multi-Agent Failures With 90%+ Accuracy — RutgersU · 2026-10-19
- BridgeWAM: latent bridge queries decouple video and action experts, 2.47x faster robot inference — Fudan-University · 2026-10-19
- NVIDIA's FC-SWE: Failure-Conditioned RL Boosts Multi-Attempt Resolution for SWE Agents — nvidia · 2026-10-19