Greg Corrado

Greg Corrado

Greg Corrado is a senior research scientist interested in biological neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and scalable machine learning. He has published in fields ranging across behavioral economics, neuromorphic device physics, systems neuroscience, and deep learning. At Google he has worked for some time on brain inspired computing, and most recently has served as one of the founding members and the co-technical lead of Google's large scale deep neural networks project.
Authored Publications
Sort By
  • Title
  • Title, descending
  • Year
  • Year, descending
    Closing the AI generalisation gap by adjusting for dermatology condition distribution differences across clinical settings
    Rajeev Rikhye
    Aaron Loh
    Grace Hong
    Margaret Ann Smith
    Vijaytha Muralidharan
    Doris Wong
    Michelle Phung
    Nicolas Betancourt
    Bradley Fong
    Rachna Sahasrabudhe
    Khoban Nasim
    Alec Eschholz
    Basil Mustafa
    Jan Freyberg
    Terry Spitz
    Kat Chou
    Peggy Bui
    Justin Ko
    Steven Lin
    The Lancet eBioMedicine (2025)
    Preview abstract Background: Generalisation of artificial intelligence (AI) models to a new setting is challenging. In this study, we seek to understand the robustness of a dermatology (AI) model and whether it generalises from telemedicine cases to a new setting including both patient-submitted photographs (“PAT”) and clinician-taken photographs in-clinic (“CLIN”). Methods: A retrospective cohort study involving 2500 cases previously unseen by the AI model, including both PAT and CLIN cases, from 22 clinics in the San Francisco Bay Area, spanning November 2015 to January 2021. The primary outcome measure for the AI model and dermatologists was the top-3 accuracy, defined as whether their top 3 differential diagnoses contained the top reference diagnosis from a panel of dermatologists per case. Findings: The AI performed similarly between PAT and CLIN images (74% top-3 accuracy in CLIN vs. 71% in PAT), however, dermatologists were more accurate in PAT images (79% in CLIN vs. 87% in PAT). We demonstrate that demographic factors were not associated with AI or dermatologist errors; instead several categories of conditions were associated with AI model errors (p < 0.05). Resampling CLIN and PAT to match skin condition distributions to the AI development dataset reduced the observed differences (AI: 84% CLIN vs. 79% PAT; dermatologists: 77% CLIN vs. 89% PAT). We demonstrate a series of steps to close the generalisation gap, requiring progressively more information about the new dataset, ranging from the condition distribution to additional training data for rarer conditions. When using additional training data and testing on the dataset without resampling to match AI development, we observed comparable performance from end-to-end AI model fine tuning (85% in CLIN vs. 83% in PAT) vs. fine tuning solely the classification layer on top of a frozen embedding model (86% in CLIN vs. 84% in PAT). Interpretation: AI algorithms can be efficiently adapted to new settings without additional training data by recalibrating the existing model, or with targeted data acquisition for rarer conditions and retraining just the final layer. View details
    Triaging mammography with artificial intelligence: an implementation study
    Sarah M. Friedewald
    Sunny Jansen
    Fereshteh Mahvar
    Timo Kohlberger
    David V. Schacht
    Sonya Bhole
    Dipti Gupta
    Scott Mayer McKinney
    Stacey Caron
    David Melnick
    Mozziyar Etemadi
    Samantha Winter
    Alejandra Maciel
    Luca Speroni
    Martha Sevenich
    Arnav Agharwal
    Rubin Zhang
    Gavin Duggan
    Shiro Kadowaki
    Atilla Kiraly
    Jie Yang
    Basil Mustafa
    Krish Eswaran
    Shravya Shetty
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment (2025)
    Preview abstract Purpose Many breast centers are unable to provide immediate results at the time of screening mammography which results in delayed patient care. Implementing artificial intelligence (AI) could identify patients who may have breast cancer and accelerate the time to diagnostic imaging and biopsy diagnosis. Methods In this prospective randomized, unblinded, controlled implementation study we enrolled 1000 screening participants between March 2021 and May 2022. The experimental group used an AI system to prioritize a subset of cases for same-visit radiologist evaluation, and same-visit diagnostic workup if necessary. The control group followed the standard of care. The primary operational endpoints were time to additional imaging (TA) and time to biopsy diagnosis (TB). Results The final cohort included 463 experimental and 392 control participants. The one-sided Mann-Whitney U test was employed for analysis of TA and TB. In the control group, the TA was 25.6 days [95% CI 22.0–29.9] and TB was 55.9 days [95% CI 45.5–69.6]. In comparison, the experimental group's mean TA was reduced by 25% (6.4 fewer days [one-sided 95% CI > 0.3], p<0.001) and mean TB was reduced by 30% (16.8 fewer days; 95% CI > 5.1], p=0.003). The time reduction was more pronounced for AI-prioritized participants in the experimental group. All participants eventually diagnosed with breast cancer were prioritized by the AI. Conclusions Implementing AI prioritization can accelerate care timelines for patients requiring additional workup, while maintaining the efficiency of delayed interpretation for most participants. Reducing diagnostic delays could contribute to improved patient adherence, decreased anxiety and addressing disparities in access to timely care. View details
    Performance of a Deep Learning Diabetic Retinopathy Algorithm in India
    Arthur Brant
    Xiang Yin
    Lu Yang
    Jay Nayar
    Divleen Jeji
    Sunny Virmani
    Anchintha Meenu
    Naresh Babu Kannan
    Florence Thng
    Lily Peng
    Ramasamy Kim
    JAMA Network Open (2025)
    Preview abstract Importance: While prospective studies have investigated the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI) for detection of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME), to date, little published data exist on the clinical performance of these algorithms. Objective: To evaluate the clinical performance of an automated retinal disease assessment (ARDA) algorithm in the postdeployment setting at Aravind Eye Hospital in India. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional analysis involved an approximate 1% sample of fundus photographs from patients screened using ARDA. Images were graded via adjudication by US ophthalmologists for DR and DME, and ARDA’s output was compared against the adjudicated grades at 45 sites in Southern India. Patients were randomly selected between January 1, 2019, and July 31, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary analyses were the sensitivity and specificity of ARDA for severe nonproliferative DR (NPDR) or proliferative DR (PDR). Secondary analyses focused on sensitivity and specificity for sight-threatening DR (STDR) (DME or severe NPDR or PDR). Results: Among the 4537 patients with 4537 images with adjudicated grades, mean (SD) age was 55.2 (11.9) years and 2272 (50.1%) were male. Among the 3941 patients with gradable photographs, 683 (17.3%) had any DR, 146 (3.7%) had severe NPDR or PDR, 109 (2.8%) had PDR, and 398 (10.1%) had STDR. ARDA’s sensitivity and specificity for severe NPDR or PDR were 97.0% (95% CI, 92.6%-99.2%) and 96.4% (95% CI, 95.7%-97.0%), respectively. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 50.7% and negative predictive value (NPV) was 99.9%. The clinically important miss rate for severe NPDR or PDR was 0% (eg, some patients with severe NPDR or PDR were interpreted as having moderate DR and referred to clinic). ARDA’s sensitivity for STDR was 95.9% (95% CI, 93.0%-97.4%) and specificity was 94.9% (95% CI, 94.1%-95.7%); PPV and NPV were 67.9% and 99.5%, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study investigating the clinical performance of ARDA, sensitivity and specificity for severe NPDR and PDR exceeded 96% and caught 100% of patients with severe  NPDR and PDR for ophthalmology referral. This preliminary large-scale postmarketing report of the performance of ARDA after screening 600 000 patients in India underscores the importance of monitoring and publication an algorithm's clinical performance, consistent with recommendations by regulatory bodies. View details
    Preview abstract Microscopic interpretation of histopathology images underlies many important diagnostic and treatment decisions. While advances in vision–language modeling raise new oppor- tunities for analysis of such images, the gigapixel-scale size of whole slide images (WSIs) introduces unique challenges. Additionally, pathology reports simultaneously highlight key findings from small regions while also aggregating interpretation across multiple slides, often making it difficult to create robust image–text pairs. As such, pathology reports remain a largely untapped source of supervision in computational pathology, with most efforts relying on region-of-interest annotations or self-supervision at the patch-level. In this work, we develop a vision–language model based on the BLIP-2 framework using WSIs paired with curated text from pathology reports. This enables applications utilizing a shared image–text embedding space, such as text or image retrieval for finding cases of interest, as well as integration of the WSI encoder with a frozen large language model (LLM) for WSI-based generative text capabilities such as report generation or AI-in-the-loop interactions. We utilize a de-identified dataset of over 350,000 WSIs and diagnostic text pairs, spanning a wide range of diagnoses, procedure types, and tissue types. We present pathologist evaluation of text generation and text retrieval using WSI embeddings, as well as results for WSI classification and workflow prioritization (slide-level triaging). Model-generated text for WSIs was rated by pathologists as accurate, without clinically significant error or omission, for 78% of WSIs on average. This work demonstrates exciting potential capabilities for language-aligned WSI embeddings. View details
    Creating an Empirical Dermatology Dataset Through Crowdsourcing With Web Search Advertisements
    Abbi Ward
    Jimmy Li
    Julie Wang
    Sriram Lakshminarasimhan
    Ashley Carrick
    Jay Hartford
    Pradeep Kumar S
    Sunny Virmani
    Renee Wong
    Margaret Ann Smith
    Dawn Siegel
    Steven Lin
    Justin Ko
    JAMA Network Open (2024)
    Preview abstract Importance: Health datasets from clinical sources do not reflect the breadth and diversity of disease, impacting research, medical education, and artificial intelligence tool development. Assessments of novel crowdsourcing methods to create health datasets are needed. Objective: To evaluate if web search advertisements (ads) are effective at creating a diverse and representative dermatology image dataset. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective observational survey study, conducted from March to November 2023, used Google Search ads to invite internet users in the US to contribute images of dermatology conditions with demographic and symptom information to the Skin Condition Image Network (SCIN) open access dataset. Ads were displayed against dermatology-related search queries on mobile devices, inviting contributions from adults after a digital informed consent process. Contributions were filtered for image safety and measures were taken to protect privacy. Data analysis occurred January to February 2024. Exposure: Dermatologist condition labels as well as estimated Fitzpatrick Skin Type (eFST) and estimated Monk Skin Tone (eMST) labels. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary metrics of interest were the number, quality, demographic diversity, and distribution of clinical conditions in the crowdsourced contributions. Spearman rank order correlation was used for all correlation analyses, and the χ2 test was used to analyze differences between SCIN contributor demographics and the US census. Results: In total, 5749 submissions were received, with a median of 22 (14-30) per day. Of these, 5631 (97.9%) were genuine images of dermatological conditions. Among contributors with self-reported demographic information, female contributors (1732 of 2596 contributors [66.7%]) and younger contributors (1329 of 2556 contributors [52.0%] aged <40 years) had a higher representation in the dataset compared with the US population. Of 2614 contributors who reported race and ethnicity, 852 (32.6%) reported a racial or ethnic identity other than White. Dermatologist confidence in assigning a differential diagnosis increased with the number of self-reported demographic and skin-condition–related variables (Spearman R = 0.1537; P < .001). Of 4019 contributions reporting duration since onset, 2170 (54.0%) reported onset within less than 7 days of submission. Of the 2835 contributions that could be assigned a dermatological differential diagnosis, 2523 (89.0%) were allergic, infectious, or inflammatory conditions. eFST and eMST distributions reflected the geographical origin of the dataset. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this survey study suggest that search ads are effective at crowdsourcing dermatology images and could therefore be a useful method to create health datasets. The SCIN dataset bridges important gaps in the availability of images of common, short-duration skin conditions. View details
    Health equity assessment of machine learning performance (HEAL): a framework and dermatology AI model case study
    Terry Spitz
    Malcolm Chelliah
    Heather Cole-Lewis
    Tiam Jaroensri
    Geoff Keeling
    Stephanie Farquhar
    Qinghan Xue
    Jenna Lester
    Cían Hughes
    Patricia Strachan
    Fraser Tan
    Peggy Bui
    Craig Mermel
    Lily Peng
    Sunny Virmani
    Ivor Horn
    Cameron Chen
    The Lancet eClinicalMedicine (2024)
    Preview abstract Background Artificial intelligence (AI) has repeatedly been shown to encode historical inequities in healthcare. We aimed to develop a framework to quantitatively assess the performance equity of health AI technologies and to illustrate its utility via a case study. Methods Here, we propose a methodology to assess whether health AI technologies prioritise performance for patient populations experiencing worse outcomes, that is complementary to existing fairness metrics. We developed the Health Equity Assessment of machine Learning performance (HEAL) framework designed to quantitatively assess the performance equity of health AI technologies via a four-step interdisciplinary process to understand and quantify domain-specific criteria, and the resulting HEAL metric. As an illustrative case study (analysis conducted between October 2022 and January 2023), we applied the HEAL framework to a dermatology AI model. A set of 5420 teledermatology cases (store-and-forward cases from patients of 20 years or older, submitted from primary care providers in the USA and skin cancer clinics in Australia), enriched for diversity in age, sex and race/ethnicity, was used to retrospectively evaluate the AI model's HEAL metric, defined as the likelihood that the AI model performs better for subpopulations with worse average health outcomes as compared to others. The likelihood that AI performance was anticorrelated to pre-existing health outcomes was estimated using bootstrap methods as the probability that the negated Spearman's rank correlation coefficient (i.e., “R”) was greater than zero. Positive values of R suggest that subpopulations with poorer health outcomes have better AI model performance. Thus, the HEAL metric, defined as p (R >0), measures how likely the AI technology is to prioritise performance for subpopulations with worse average health outcomes as compared to others (presented as a percentage below). Health outcomes were quantified as disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) when grouping by sex and age, and years of life lost (YLLs) when grouping by race/ethnicity. AI performance was measured as top-3 agreement with the reference diagnosis from a panel of 3 dermatologists per case. Findings Across all dermatologic conditions, the HEAL metric was 80.5% for prioritizing AI performance of racial/ethnic subpopulations based on YLLs, and 92.1% and 0.0% respectively for prioritizing AI performance of sex and age subpopulations based on DALYs. Certain dermatologic conditions were significantly associated with greater AI model performance compared to a reference category of less common conditions. For skin cancer conditions, the HEAL metric was 73.8% for prioritizing AI performance of age subpopulations based on DALYs. Interpretation Analysis using the proposed HEAL framework showed that the dermatology AI model prioritised performance for race/ethnicity, sex (all conditions) and age (cancer conditions) subpopulations with respect to pre-existing health disparities. More work is needed to investigate ways of promoting equitable AI performance across age for non-cancer conditions and to better understand how AI models can contribute towards improving equity in health outcomes. View details
    Preview abstract Background Skin conditions are extremely common worldwide, and are an important cause of both anxiety and morbidity. Since the advent of the internet, individuals have used text-based search (eg, “red rash on arm”) to learn more about concerns on their skin, but this process is often hindered by the inability to accurately describe the lesion’s morphology. In the study, we surveyed respondents’ experiences with an image-based search, compared to the traditional text-based search experience. Methods An internet-based survey was conducted to evaluate the experience of text-based vs image-based search for skin conditions. We recruited respondents from an existing cohort of volunteers in a commercial survey panel; survey respondents that met inclusion/exclusion criteria, including willingness to take photos of a visible concern on their body, were enrolled. Respondents were asked to use the Google mobile app to conduct both regular text-based search (Google Search) and image-based search (Google Lens) for their concern, with the order of text vs. image search randomized. Satisfaction for each search experience along six different dimensions were recorded and compared, and respondents’ preferences for the different search types along these same six dimensions were recorded. Results 372 respondents were enrolled in the study, with 44% self-identifying as women, 86% as White and 41% over age 45. The rate of respondents who were at least moderately familiar with searching for skin conditions using text-based search versus image-based search were 81.5% and 63.5%, respectively. After using both search modalities, respondents were highly satisfied with both image-based and text-based search, with >90% at least somewhat satisfied in each dimension and no significant differences seen between text-based and image-based search when examining the responses on an absolute scale per search modality. When asked to directly rate their preferences in a comparative way, survey respondents preferred image-based search over text-based search in 5 out of 6 dimensions, with an absolute 9.9% more preferring image-based search over text-based search overall (p=0.004). 82.5% (95% CI 78.2 - 86.3) reported a preference to leverage image-based search (alone or in combination with text-based search) in future searches. Of those who would prefer to use a combination of both, 64% indicated they would like to start with image-based search, indicating that image-based search may be the preferred entry point for skin-related searches. Conclusion Despite being less familiar with image-based search upon study inception, survey respondents generally preferred image-based search to text-based search and overwhelmingly wanted to include this in future searches. These results suggest the potential for image-based search to play a key role in people searching for information regarding skin concerns. View details
    Preview abstract Importance: Interest in artificial intelligence (AI) has reached an all-time high, and health care leaders across the ecosystem are faced with questions about where, when, and how to deploy AI and how to understand its risks, problems, and possibilities. Observations: While AI as a concept has existed since the 1950s, all AI is not the same. Capabilities and risks of various kinds of AI differ markedly, and on examination 3 epochs of AI emerge. AI 1.0 includes symbolic AI, which attempts to encode human knowledge into computational rules, as well as probabilistic models. The era of AI 2.0 began with deep learning, in which models learn from examples labeled with ground truth. This era brought about many advances both in people’s daily lives and in health care. Deep learning models are task-specific, meaning they do one thing at a time, and they primarily focus on classification and prediction. AI 3.0 is the era of foundation models and generative AI. Models in AI 3.0 have fundamentally new (and potentially transformative) capabilities, as well as new kinds of risks, such as hallucinations. These models can do many different kinds of tasks without being retrained on a new dataset. For example, a simple text instruction will change the model’s behavior. Prompts such as “Write this note for a specialist consultant” and “Write this note for the patient’s mother” will produce markedly different content. Conclusions and Relevance: Foundation models and generative AI represent a major revolution in AI’s capabilities, ffering tremendous potential to improve care. Health care leaders are making decisions about AI today. While any heuristic omits details and loses nuance, the framework of AI 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 may be helpful to decision-makers because each epoch has fundamentally different capabilities and risks. View details
    Conversational AI in health: Design considerations from a Wizard-of-Oz dermatology case study with users, clinicians and a medical LLM
    Brenna Li
    Amy Wang
    Patricia Strachan
    Julie Anne Seguin
    Sami Lachgar
    Karyn Schroeder
    Renee Wong
    Extended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 10
    Preview abstract Although skin concerns are common, access to specialist care is limited. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted tools to support medical decisions may provide patients with feedback on their concerns while also helping ensure the most urgent cases are routed to dermatologists. Although AI-based conversational agents have been explored recently, how they are perceived by patients and clinicians is not well understood. We conducted a Wizard-of-Oz study involving 18 participants with real skin concerns. Participants were randomly assigned to interact with either a clinician agent (portrayed by a dermatologist) or an LLM agent (supervised by a dermatologist) via synchronous multimodal chat. In both conditions, participants found the conversation to be helpful in understanding their medical situation and alleviate their concerns. Through qualitative coding of the conversation transcripts, we provide insight on the importance of empathy and effective information-seeking. We conclude with design considerations for future AI-based conversational agents in healthcare settings. View details
    Preview abstract Background: Skin conditions are extremely common worldwide, and are an important cause of both anxiety and morbidity. Since the advent of the internet, individuals have used text-based search (eg, “red rash on arm”) to learn more about concerns on their skin, but this process is often hindered by the inability to accurately describe the lesion’s morphology. In the study, we surveyed respondents’ experiences with an image-based search, compared to the traditional text-based search experience. Methods: An internet-based survey was conducted to evaluate the experience of text-based vs image-based search for skin conditions. We recruited respondents from an existing cohort of volunteers in a commercial survey panel; survey respondents that met inclusion/exclusion criteria, including willingness to take photos of a visible concern on their body, were enrolled. Respondents were asked to use the Google mobile app to conduct both regular text-based search (Google Search) and image-based search (Google Lens) for their concern, with the order of text vs. image search randomized. Satisfaction for each search experience along six different dimensions were recorded and compared, and respondents’ preferences for the different search types along these same six dimensions were recorded. Results: 372 respondents were enrolled in the study, with 44% self-identifying as women, 86% as White and 41% over age 45. The rate of respondents who were at least moderately familiar with searching for skin conditions using text-based search versus image-based search were 81.5% and 63.5%, respectively. After using both search modalities, respondents were highly satisfied with both image-based and text-based search, with >90% at least somewhat satisfied in each dimension and no significant differences seen between text-based and image-based search when examining the responses on an absolute scale per search modality. When asked to directly rate their preferences in a comparative way, survey respondents preferred image-based search over text-based search in 5 out of 6 dimensions, with an absolute 9.9% more preferring image-based search over text-based search overall (p=0.004). 82.5% (95% CI 78.2 - 86.3) reported a preference to leverage image-based search (alone or in combination with text-based search) in future searches. Of those who would prefer to use a combination of both, 64% indicated they would like to start with image-based search, indicating that image-based search may be the preferred entry point for skin-related searches. Conclusion: Despite being less familiar with image-based search upon study inception, survey respondents generally preferred image-based search to text-based search and overwhelmingly wanted to include this in future searches. These results suggest the potential for image-based search to play a key role in people searching for information regarding skin concerns. View details