ACCforum: Artificial intelligence or untrained case managers - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 4 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Artificial intelligence or untrained case managers Who/what would we trust?

#1 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 25 May 2018 - 12:33 PM

Perhaps the most important topic in the longer term as the ACC use of Artificial Intelligence. By artificial intelligence as it would apply to the ACC I am referring to computerised entities that are capable of learning on their own independently of the ACC by way of First considering the legislation as absolute and unalterable while then taking into account the native interpretation of the legislation followed by comparisons with every single decision the ACC, reviewers and district court judges have ever made with special attention in the learning process reliance on the superior appellate courts. All indications are that the technology that is available right now would produce far superior results than the majority of judges which means of course that the decisions are going to be far superior to the average ACC decision maker.

Already out of as low intelligence is being used quite extensively in the legal environment throughout the world with a very high level of success. As time progresses artificial intelligence being applied to the ACC environment will continue to improve.
Normally when using a computer system to assist in decision-making, as the ACC has already been doing, it is dependent upon the programming and data input. Artificial intelligence does not work this way so all of the normal fears in regards to such matters no longer apply when making reference to Artificial Intelligence.
The world is changing quite rapidly as result of artificial intelligence. For example over the next 5 to 10 years the majority of jobs for professional drivers will no longer exist. This means that artificial intelligence will displace millions upon millions of drivers throughout the world on the basis that artificial intelligence is safer, more reliable and cheaper. These very large taxi services are already planning for the changeover. Tesla already has the capacity for total automated driving completely independent of any human being apart from entering the destination address. The capacity at the moment is for 99.9% totally independent driving by artificial intelligence. For artificial intelligence operating in the ACC environment is a far more simplistic proposition.
The ACC Corporation employee what it considers viable case managers and decision-makers to take charge of injured people's lives and bestow upon those injured people whatever entitlements they see fit and by any means they perceive necessary as per what they have learnt from their peers. The Corporation expects their employees to familiarise themselves with ACC legislation despite the work that they do not expect any qualifications or experience on interpreting legislation but instead rely upon each staff member consulting with their colleagues when they are uncertain. In general ACC staff appear to be making decisions based on whatever they think they can get away with and historically do get away with which results in departures from legislative requirement and criteria on an ongoing basis. Obviously this creates inconsistencies in decision making and quite bizarre results. Nonetheless the ACC front-line staff are encouraged to make all decisions that they think might be defendable in a court with the expectation that the legal services unit take over the case and defend the decision with the result that the decision maker removes workload from their inbox to their outbox together with a higher level of key performance indicators resulting in downstream improvements in employment status and reward.
The important thing to consider with artificial intelligence is that it has no interest in reward or prestige and approaches the job with complete purity with regards to adherence to legislated criteria. In situations where there is insufficient information for a decision to be made with the legislated criteria one thing is for certain, artificial intelligence will never guess the answer. I would consider this to be one of the most significant benefits of artificial intelligence.

Given that artificial intelligence works at a fastly higher speed with a higher level of accuracy than human beings it is a foregone conclusion that for economic reasons the ACC is going to be compelled to dismiss its decision-making staff (redundancy) in favour of artificial intelligence. This will happen at increasing levels over the next five years and the process should be complete within 10 years given the fact that the cost savings to the ACC scheme are hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

Anyone asserting that the introduction of artificial intelligence will result in more claimants receiving more entitlements would tend to automatically identify that individual as fundamentally corrupt and dishonest if they wanted to maintain the status quo. When all is said and done there is no real justification for the ACC to maintain the status quo On the basis that artificial intelligence pays out more money costing the scheme more on the basis that the decision-making is more precise.

I for one would welcome the change as not one of the acc decisions has ever been made based on legislated criteria which also requires the information of the right criteria. No longer will I receive letters from the ACC staff who have simply used in ACC letter template whereupon they have placed in that letter randomised information without any reference to the information on file. Further decision-making will probably be about as quick as transferring money from one account to another rather than the standard operating procedures of ACC staff waiting three weeks before even looking at anything or in the case of privacy or official information requests ACC waiting 20 days before doing anything with their first letter asking for more time with their second letter asking for approval to be a summary of what they want us to be asking of them and then six months later providing something different again.
With the majority of claimants welcome artificial intelligence or are claimants in general satisfied with the status quo?

0

#2 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 26 May 2018 - 12:49 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 25 May 2018 - 12:33 PM, said:

Perhaps the most important topic in the longer term as the ACC use of Artificial Intelligence. By artificial intelligence as it would apply to the ACC I am referring to computerised entities that are capable of learning on their own independently of the ACC by way of First considering the legislation as absolute and unalterable while then taking into account the native interpretation of the legislation followed by comparisons with every single decision the ACC, reviewers and district court judges have ever made with special attention in the learning process reliance on the superior appellate courts. All indications are that the technology that is available right now would produce far superior results than the majority of judges which means of course that the decisions are going to be far superior to the average ACC decision maker.

Already out of as low intelligence is being used quite extensively in the legal environment throughout the world with a very high level of success. As time progresses artificial intelligence being applied to the ACC environment will continue to improve.
Normally when using a computer system to assist in decision-making, as the ACC has already been doing, it is dependent upon the programming and data input. Artificial intelligence does not work this way so all of the normal fears in regards to such matters no longer apply when making reference to Artificial Intelligence.
The world is changing quite rapidly as result of artificial intelligence. For example over the next 5 to 10 years the majority of jobs for professional drivers will no longer exist. This means that artificial intelligence will displace millions upon millions of drivers throughout the world on the basis that artificial intelligence is safer, more reliable and cheaper. These very large taxi services are already planning for the changeover. Tesla already has the capacity for total automated driving completely independent of any human being apart from entering the destination address. The capacity at the moment is for 99.9% totally independent driving by artificial intelligence. For artificial intelligence operating in the ACC environment is a far more simplistic proposition.
The ACC Corporation employee what it considers viable case managers and decision-makers to take charge of injured people's lives and bestow upon those injured people whatever entitlements they see fit and by any means they perceive necessary as per what they have learnt from their peers. The Corporation expects their employees to familiarise themselves with ACC legislation despite the work that they do not expect any qualifications or experience on interpreting legislation but instead rely upon each staff member consulting with their colleagues when they are uncertain. In general ACC staff appear to be making decisions based on whatever they think they can get away with and historically do get away with which results in departures from legislative requirement and criteria on an ongoing basis. Obviously this creates inconsistencies in decision making and quite bizarre results. Nonetheless the ACC front-line staff are encouraged to make all decisions that they think might be defendable in a court with the expectation that the legal services unit take over the case and defend the decision with the result that the decision maker removes workload from their inbox to their outbox together with a higher level of key performance indicators resulting in downstream improvements in employment status and reward.
The important thing to consider with artificial intelligence is that it has no interest in reward or prestige and approaches the job with complete purity with regards to adherence to legislated criteria. In situations where there is insufficient information for a decision to be made with the legislated criteria one thing is for certain, artificial intelligence will never guess the answer. I would consider this to be one of the most significant benefits of artificial intelligence.

Given that artificial intelligence works at a fastly higher speed with a higher level of accuracy than human beings it is a foregone conclusion that for economic reasons the ACC is going to be compelled to dismiss its decision-making staff (redundancy) in favour of artificial intelligence. This will happen at increasing levels over the next five years and the process should be complete within 10 years given the fact that the cost savings to the ACC scheme are hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

Anyone asserting that the introduction of artificial intelligence will result in more claimants receiving more entitlements would tend to automatically identify that individual as fundamentally corrupt and dishonest if they wanted to maintain the status quo. When all is said and done there is no real justification for the ACC to maintain the status quo On the basis that artificial intelligence pays out more money costing the scheme more on the basis that the decision-making is more precise.

I for one would welcome the change as not one of the acc decisions has ever been made based on legislated criteria which also requires the information of the right criteria. No longer will I receive letters from the ACC staff who have simply used in ACC letter template whereupon they have placed in that letter randomised information without any reference to the information on file. Further decision-making will probably be about as quick as transferring money from one account to another rather than the standard operating procedures of ACC staff waiting three weeks before even looking at anything or in the case of privacy or official information requests ACC waiting 20 days before doing anything with their first letter asking for more time with their second letter asking for approval to be a summary of what they want us to be asking of them and then six months later providing something different again.
With the majority of claimants welcome artificial intelligence or are claimants in general satisfied with the status quo?

The site is nigh on exclusively yours Thomas
Please do continue with your next major thesis on trivial intelligence. So we can be more fully informed.
Does Hal9000 arise and thus allowed for in your summations of AI being the new acc case management system?
3

#3 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 26 May 2018 - 10:38 PM

Thomas
What type of information would be required by the Artificial Inteligence case management machine from a claimant to be submitted to the Acc artificial machine for the machine to accept a claim as valid?
0

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 27 May 2018 - 12:58 PM

View PostHemi, on 26 May 2018 - 10:38 PM, said:

Thomas
What type of information would be required by the Artificial Inteligence case management machine from a claimant to be submitted to the Acc artificial machine for the machine to accept a claim as valid?


The information collected for artificial intelligence processing would be strictly limited to what is described in legislation and controlled by the privacy act.
The beauty of artificial intelligence is that it functions in accordance with the purity of law and fact.
In other words if someone has suffered an injury by accident while being an earner they will receive earnings compensation and other entitlements until they regain that particular capacity by way of medical intervention or physical recovery and if that doesn't happen then the next stage will be engaged in whereby vocational rehabilitation planning will take place which will search the viability of the utilisation of existing qualification skill and experience and determine what potential career path might be open with the inclusion of additional training, qualification followed by a period of experience to meet the industrial standards in accordance with the New Zealand qualification authorities which measures such things as skills so as to be placed in a situation where experience may be developed to the extent whereby eventually the person may resume as being an earner at the same skill level as described in the Australia New Zealand standard classifications of occupations whereby both occupational and medical assessors may Produce the relevant information for the ACC to ensure that the artificial intelligence of the ACC determines that it is both relevant and safe to pursue that line of work by having regard for the injuries.
I trust this information has been helpful.

0

#5 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 27 May 2018 - 01:52 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 27 May 2018 - 12:58 PM, said:

The information collected for artificial intelligence processing would be strictly limited to what is described in legislation and controlled by the privacy act.
The beauty of artificial intelligence is that it functions in accordance with the purity of law and fact.
In other words if someone has suffered an injury by accident while being an earner they will receive earnings compensation and other entitlements until they regain that particular capacity by way of medical intervention or physical recovery and if that doesn't happen then the next stage will be engaged in whereby vocational rehabilitation planning will take place which will search the viability of the utilisation of existing qualification skill and experience and determine what potential career path might be open with the inclusion of additional training, qualification followed by a period of experience to meet the industrial standards in accordance with the New Zealand qualification authorities which measures such things as skills so as to be placed in a situation where experience may be developed to the extent whereby eventually the person may resume as being an earner at the same skill level as described in the Australia New Zealand standard classifications of occupations whereby both occupational and medical assessors may Produce the relevant information for the ACC to ensure that the artificial intelligence of the ACC determines that it is both relevant and safe to pursue that line of work by having regard for the injuries.
I trust this information has been helpful.

No not helpful at all
So Thomas.
You’ve left out the important stuff
Why’s that?
0

#6 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1694
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 27 May 2018 - 07:59 PM

Alan there is a large amount of information about AI start reading and placing it in here and then the answers will come.
0

#7 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 28 May 2018 - 12:24 PM

View Postdoppelganger, on 27 May 2018 - 07:59 PM, said:

Alan there is a large amount of information about AI start reading and placing it in here and then the answers will come.


Artificial intelligence is going to be the prime decision maker of the ACC in the not too distant future. That much is an absolute.
So
What was the question?
0

#8 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 28 May 2018 - 04:50 PM

View PostHemi, on 27 May 2018 - 01:52 PM, said:

No not helpful at all
So Thomas.
You’ve left out the important stuff
Why’s that?



View PostAlan Thomas, on 28 May 2018 - 12:24 PM, said:

Artificial intelligence is going to be the prime decision maker of the ACC in the not too distant future. That much is an absolute.
So
What was the question?

question?
explain part of what youve left out so far.
How does an artificial intelligence machine decide what is a valid case/cover for entitlements , or decide what is a fraudulent /non valid case/ cover entitlements one.??
Posted Image/>
0

#9 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 28 May 2018 - 05:19 PM

View PostHemi, on 28 May 2018 - 04:50 PM, said:

question?
explain part of what youve left out so far.
How does an artificial intelligence machine decide what is a valid case/cover for entitlements , or decide what is a fraudulent /non valid case/ cover entitlements one.??
Posted Image/>


Interrogating the criteria of the legislation against the documented facts provided by those who are qualified and authorised by that legislation.I think I have already stated this in the above.
0

#10 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1561
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 28 May 2018 - 05:37 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 28 May 2018 - 05:19 PM, said:

Interrogating the criteria of the legislation against the documented facts provided by those who are qualified and authorised by that legislation.I think I have already stated this in the above.No you have not thomas-conveniently forgotten it would seem.


So how would the artificial intelligence machine ascertain/ receive verify investigate and then ratify as to the truth of accident injury ability etc for the machine to grant cover entitlements etc as to /from the information provided to the acc in a claim for cover , in say relation to the case such as
1999-T 990176 - ARCIC v THOMAS.
0

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 10:18 AM

ACC Staff


Don't want A.I. to take your job? Learn to use it as a tool and you will be the very limited number of staff that remains!

ACC claimants who want your claims and entitlements? Learn to use A.I. as a tool!
0

#12 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 10:47 AM

View PostHemi, on 28 May 2018 - 05:37 PM, said:

So how would the artificial intelligence machine ascertain/ receive verify investigate and then ratify as to the truth of accident injury ability etc for the machine to grant cover entitlements etc as to /from the information provided to the acc in a claim for cover , in say relation to the case such as
1999-T 990176 - ARCIC v THOMAS.


When artificial intelligence investigates the integrity of any claim it does so by way of examining information limited to that described in legislation. This is information limited to what originates from those who are qualified and experienced to provide information in accordance with the criteria of the legislation. For example if it is an issue of work the work would be tested by someone qualified to determine whether or not the claimant was qualified skilled and experienced to carry out such work and if any work had been carried out the quality of the result would need to be reported on by someone relevantly qualified. With regards to the safety to work while injured that question would need to be addressed by someone who was appropriately medically qualified subsequent to a clinical examination.

As for the case reported in 1999-T 990176 - ARCIC v THOMAS There is no indication of any information of any sort that meets the criteria of legislation for purposes of a decision of any sort. I think the important difference in such situations is the difference between decisions based on legislated criteria and decisions based on what the ACC have described as "common sense" was does not fall within the criteria of legislation as pointed out by judge Beattie Demonstrating human judges cannot agree even ACCs own Legal staff cannot agree on such as ACCs complaints investigator and also legal representative Mr Tui taking the time to write memos to the file them describing how the ACCs decision maker was wrong who has not even provided their identity to the file in order to challenge directly in the criminal court. This particular case is not open for further discussion on this thread but may be discussed on the other thread dealing with the topic concerning that particular decision.
So central to this discussion of ACC decision making as opposed to artificial intelligence decision-making we have ACC making decisions without any training but rather dependence upon fellow ACC workers who confess that they are instructed to effectively make intuitive decisions based on their "own common" sense in group decision-making or "groupthink" as opposed to artificial intelligence which by its nature is limited to information flooding the legislated criteria and the processing of that information in accordance with legislation.

0

#13 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2352
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 12:18 PM

" I am referring to computerised entities that are capable of learning on their own independently..."

Regarding this quoted statement or belief of yours Alan - this is a vision which horrifies me


From past discussions in here where it seems that you have only been online within a fairly small tunnel mostly related to your own failed business enterprises or court convictions ... but I wonder have you ever come across the acronym GIGO Alan?


Now I do realise that you have attempted to gloss past this issue by making this following comment but it may be helpful if you try to distinguish the differences for your acolytes or readers... ie the differences with Artificial Intelligence versus other comprehensive decisionmaking systems

"Normally when using a computer system to assist in decision-making, as the ACC has already been doing, it is dependent upon the programming and data input. Artificial intelligence does not work this way so all of the normal fears in regards to such matters no longer apply when making reference to Artificial Intelligence."


It would be great if you could then turn your mind to this comment too


"... the native interpretation of the legislation ..."

So before I say anything further on this issue, can you also expand this idea further too ...


Remember, that as you are again clearly criticising NZ Judges and other experienced officers and the implementation of the legislation and current tools with Benchbooks and various other assistances ... please remember that my POV is wider than yours. So do you imagine your AI machine would independently take over these other computers and people around the wider worlds perhaps eg ACC, WINZ, DWP or other international systems



"Anyone asserting that the introduction of artificial intelligence will result in more claimants receiving more entitlements would tend to automatically identify that individual as fundamentally corrupt and dishonest if they wanted to maintain the status quo."



Lastly can I confirm that you expect your Artifical Intelligence to REDUCE entitlements to claimants ...


It appears you are trying to argue that your AI machine will be a much cheaper cost to the tax or levypayer? Are you just trying to fire casemanagers and Judges in your POV .... or would you expect this AI also start independently thinking for the doctors and other professionals who assist the majority of claimants &or look to replace them too?


Do you after the ^identification step^ then also expect your AI to automatically enact adverse consequences against any claimant or casemanager too?


I can see that you have attempted to provide further information in posting #4, however I am still left basically wondering how you would also manage any transition times eg how frequently and extensively must a severely injured claimant currently has A,B,C entitlements at a specific $$ amount or hourly quota reviewed by the Artificial Intelligence? How would you ensure the AI does not criminalise claimants where their health condition may be deteriorating? What if they have subsequent injuries? Are you now after many years finally supporting the medical profession with their skills of prognosis being recognised & utilised by medics and ACC systems?



Also just in case what if evidence shows the claimant has other significant issues eg if an ACC fraudster has other civil strife convictions in their circumstances?

Do you expect the AI to completely ignore all this evidence? Or do you expect ACC legislation to be greatly expanded to specifically include other NZ Laws perhaps?

FYI yup I am a little bit intrigued at these changes with your perspective mainly as our past discussions regarding ^fundamental dishonesty^ and my times of frustration with your lack of insight, remorse & disrespect concerning the great harm which can be caused to genuine claimants by the actions of a few a$$holes manipulating other people.... so how would your AI manage such conmen Alan

1

#14 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 02:14 PM


anonymousey
Read my post again and this time read more carefully

0

#15 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2352
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 02:26 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 29 May 2018 - 02:14 PM, said:

Read my post again and this time read more carefully


So you going to stick with your idea of some uncontrolled machine doing its own thing against some numbers - or claimants huh?

Sorry I will never support such an atrocious inhumane thing that will automatically reduce entitlements of genuine claimants Alan

If you can not concieve of the dreadful possibilities with your picture of some offensive limited black & white machine which is trying to say its some kind of a autonomous taxi ... then you do not understand the various issues facing genuine ACC claimants IMHO
1

#16 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 02:33 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 29 May 2018 - 02:26 PM, said:

So you going to stick with your idea of some uncontrolled machine doing its own thing against some numbers - or claimants huh?

Sorry I will never support such an atrocious inhumane thing that will automatically reduce entitlements of genuine claimants Alan

If you can not concieve of the dreadful possibilities with your picture of some offensive limited black & white machine which is trying to say its some kind of a autonomous taxi ... then you do not understand the various issues facing genuine ACC claimants IMHO


As you still don't understand the topic Read my post again and this time read more carefully
0

#17 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2352
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 03:57 PM

Your games of played ignorance when faced with logical questions concerning irrational beliefs ... only demonstrate to me some of the reasons you were convicted Alan ..
1

#18 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2352
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 04:00 PM

I can see no planet or time in the future where your dangerous ideas concerning Artificial Intelligence supplanting human beings as ever being acceptable Alan ...
1

#19 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 04:23 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 29 May 2018 - 03:57 PM, said:

Your games of played ignorance when faced with logical questions concerning irrational beliefs ... only demonstrate to me some of the reasons you were convicted Alan ..


What you imagine our questions are in reality your statements with a question after it or a request for me to agree with you.
If you genuinely wanted to know something from me you would ask a direct question.

0

#20 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8896
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 29 May 2018 - 04:26 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 29 May 2018 - 04:00 PM, said:

I can see no planet or time in the future where your dangerous ideas concerning Artificial Intelligence supplanting human beings as ever being acceptable Alan ...


Why do you imagine the progression of technology is my idea? I have many made a statement of fact.

However we are still faced with the question of preference as to whether or not we would want artificial intelligence that dispassionately examines the criteria of the legislation against the information provided that also meets the criteria of legislation or whether we would prefer the status quo of untrained case managers making decisions based on their own intuition or what they claim to be "common sense". You seem to have bypassed the issue at hand and instead put forward related matters that are on your mind instead.

0

Share this topic:


  • 4 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users