> are just introducing greater inaccuracy
What makes you say that? This is exactly the sort of scenario where punting interpretation off to a simple algorithm is probably more accurate than leaving it up to untrained humans.
What makes you say that? This is exactly the sort of scenario where punting interpretation off to a simple algorithm is probably more accurate than leaving it up to untrained humans.
See for example https://www.reddit.com/r/TFABLinePorn/comments/4pxghm/confli...
Not to mention, false negatives are far more common than false positives. If you have a false positive, then there's typically some odd health concern with the person.