“The following is a description of one prospective application of Computer Intuition. In 1995, Frederiksen published a paper entitled: Diagnostic Imaging in Dental Implantology. At the time, Frederiksen was one of the world leading experts on the subject. To test the pre-dictive power of the Computer Intuition analysis, Almog and Heisler from the University of Rochester devised a test. They conducted a Medline search for papers published between 1980 and 1996 using keywords relevant to the subject of diagnostics, imaging, and dental implantology. The search identified 34 papers. The content of these papers was analyzed with Computer Intuition. The analysis produced three ideas. Two ideas were identical to the main conclusions described in Frederik-sen’s paper. This, by itself, was an impressive achievement. By using Computer Intuition, Almog and Heisler duplicated the results of a world leading expert quickly and inexpensively. However, while it took Frederiksen decades to build his expertise, Almog and Heisler acquired similar expertise within weeks (3).”
The authors of the study went on to note that the third idea suggested by Computer Intuition was a new technology. “This technology was not mentioned in Frederiksen’s paper. The three ideas were published in 1997. How predictive was the Computer Intuition analysis? In 2006, Almog, Frederiksen, and four colleagues, published a survey of the academic and commercial field of diagnostic imaging in oral implantology. In their paper, they reported an interesting observation. Beginning in 2000, three years after the publication of the Computer Intuition paper, ‘numerous companies from technology-transfer and commercial standpoint have introduced technology platforms that offer planning and guidance systems to facilitate dental implant placement procedures’, the same technology proposed by the third idea three years earlier (3).”
The CBCD invites pha
Copyright©2012 Vocus, Inc.
All rights reserved