Skip to main content

Potential Surprises

There are extensive nuances in the standards governing autonomous IVF systems that need to be understood to fully appreciate their implications. Here are some key points that might come as surprises:

  • No Fractional Levels: There is no such thing as “Level 2+” or any other fractional level in autonomous IVF. Each level is clearly defined, and there are no intermediate stages between them.
  • Level 3 Systems Do Not Always Alert for Human Intervention: In Level 3, the system does not necessarily provide a warning or prompt the embryologist to take over. This can lead to situations where the system encounters a problem that requires human intervention, but no alert is issued.
  • Level 4 Systems May Still Require Human Oversight During Testing: Even at Level 4, where the system is highly autonomous, there might still be scenarios, especially during testing or in complex cases, where human oversight is necessary.
  • “Unlimited” Operational Design Domain (ODD) Is Not Truly Unlimited: The ODD for Level 5 systems, which are described as fully autonomous under all conditions, is actually limited by the specific environments and scenarios for which the system is designed. There are conditions and patient scenarios that may fall outside of this “unlimited” scope.
  • Level Applies to Specific Features, Not the Entire System: The level of autonomy refers to specific features within the IVF process rather than the entire system. For instance, one aspect of the process, like embryo monitoring, might be automated at Level 3, while other aspects, like fertilization, might operate at Level 2.

Scope of Autonomous IVF Standards

There are some limitations in the scope of autonomous IVF standards that are not always fully appreciated:

  • Environment Limitation: The standards are limited to specific operational environments such as laboratory settings and patient-specific conditions. “Unlimited” ODD in this context is actually constrained to the environments the system is designed to handle, much like public spaces in other contexts.
  • Does Not Cover All Types of Automation: The standards do not describe all possible types of automation in IVF. For example, they may not fully address scenarios where human oversight is augmented by advanced decision support systems, which are highly capable but do not provide full automation on a sustained basis.
  • Multiple Levels in One System: A single IVF system might operate at multiple levels depending on the situation. For example, it might use Level 2 automation for routine tasks like monitoring, but revert to Level 0 or 1 when dealing with complex patient cases that require human expertise.
  • Limited to Operational Functions, Not Strategic Decisions: The defined levels focus on the operational aspects of the IVF process, such as real-time monitoring and adjustments, and not on strategic functions like long-term patient planning or decision-making outside the immediate IVF procedure.

Terms That Are Not Used in Autonomous IVF Standards

Certain terms should be avoided or are deprecated in the context of autonomous IVF standards:

  • “Advanced Assisted Reproduction Technology” (ART): While ART is a broader term, it is not synonymous with specific levels of automation. The focus should be on the specific levels and capabilities of the system rather than using generalized terms like ART.
  • “Autonomous IVF System”: Instead of using this broad term, it is better to specify the level of automation, such as “Level 3 IVF System” or “Level 4 IVF System.”
  • “Fully Automated”: This term should be used carefully. Not all features within an autonomous IVF system are fully automated, even at higher levels. Some functions may still require human intervention.
  • “Robotic IVF”: Similar to “autonomous,” this term can be misleading. The automation in IVF involves sophisticated algorithms and AI, but not necessarily robotics in the traditional sense.
  • “Self-Managing IVF”: This term is not defined within the standards and should be avoided to prevent confusion. It implies a level of autonomy that might not be accurate for all systems.

Misuse of Operational Design Domain (ODD) Terminology

A specific type of terminology misuse in autonomous IVF involves misunderstanding the difference between the real-world environment and the designed operational domain of the system:

  • ODD vs. Real World: “ODD” refers to the conditions and scenarios that the autonomous IVF system is designed to handle. This might differ significantly from the actual conditions encountered in practice. If the real-world scenario exceeds the designed ODD, the system might not function as intended, leading to potential failures.
  • One ODD per Feature: Each feature of the autonomous IVF system has its own ODD. It is incorrect to say that a system has “multiple ODDs” for different conditions. Instead, each feature operates within a single, well-defined ODD that might cover a range of scenarios, such as different patient conditions or environmental factors.

These clarifications help ensure a correct understanding and application of the terminology and concepts within the autonomous IVF standards, preventing potential misunderstandings and ensuring the systems are used and evaluated correctly.