Learning, Potential, and Retention: An Approach for Evaluating Adaptive AI-Enabled Medical Devices
Organizations: Division of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability (DIDSR), Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories (OSEL), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave, Silver Spring, MD US 20993
Abstract
This work addresses challenges in evaluating adaptive artificial intelligence (AI) models for medical devices, where iterative updates to both models and evaluation datasets complicate performance assessment. We introduce a novel approach with three complementary measurements: learning (model improvement on current data), potential (dataset-driven performance shifts), and retention (knowledge preservation across modification steps), to disentangle performance changes caused by model adaptations versus dynamic environments. Case studies using simulated population shifts demonstrate the approach's utility: gradual transitions enable stable learning and retention, while rapid shifts reveal trade-offs between plasticity and stability. These measurements provide practical insights for regulatory science, enabling rigorous assessment of the safety and effectiveness of adaptive AI systems over sequential modifications.
Figures & tables
| Training | Validation | Testing | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disease Positive | 525 | 75 | 150 |
| Disease Negative | 525 | 75 | 150 |
| Total | 1050 | 150 | 300 |
| Learning | Measures the effect of model modification with respect to the current evaluation dataset. |
|---|---|
| High learning means that the modifications improved model performance for the current population, but it may also indicate a lack of consistency in the model over time. If previous datasets still represent a portion of the current intended population, retention may need to be measured. | |
| Negative learning indicates that the current model performs worse than the previous model on the current dataset. If this is observed alongside an increase in performance, the new dataset may merit examination. | |
| Potential | Indicates the challenge posed by the new dataset from the perspective of the prior model. |
| High potential may indicate the addition of a new population. If a new population was not deliberately added, a population shift may have occurred. | |
| Retention | Indicates the model’s performance on previous datasets. |
| Low retention may be a concern when previous datasets represent a portion of the current intended population. |