Based on the study results and that level of uptake, using the different scanning techniques on women with very dense breasts could identify 3,500 extra cancers per year and potentially save 700 lives.
"I heard about the energy needed to power data centres and the amount of land they take up, and it didn't sit right with me. I didn't understand why we needed it," she says.However, about a year ago her three colleagues at the marketing firm she works for started adopting AI, for tasks such as copywriting and idea generation.
Six months ago Ms Adams had to follow them, after being told she had to cut her budget."Then it was out my control," she says. She feels that continuing to resist would have hurt her career."I started playing with it a bit more after reading job descriptions asking for AI experience. I recently realised that if I don't implement it into my ways of working, I'm going to get left behind."
Now, she says, she doesn't view tapping into AI as laziness anymore."It can elevate my work and make some things better," adding that she uses it to refine copywriting work and for editing photos.
The moment to opt out of AI has already passed, says James Brusseau, a philosophy professor specialising in AI ethics at Pace University in New York.
"If you want to know why a decision is made, we will need humans. If we don't care about that, then we will probably use AI," he says.It has alleged the company did so without informing the union of its intentions or bargaining over terms.
The BBC has approached Epic Games for comment.The union's
, filed to the US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), alleges that the company made "unilateral changes to terms and conditions of employment, without providing notice to the union or the opportunity to bargain, by utilising AI-generated voices to replace bargaining unit work".It said this amounted to a failure by the employer to "bargain in good faith".