Bone age assessment (BAA) is a standard method for determining the age difference between skeletal and chronological age. Manual processes are complicated and necessitate the expertise of experts. This is where deep learning comes into play. In this study, pre-trained models like VGG-16, InceptionV3, XceptionNet, and MobileNet are used to assess the bone age of the input data, and their mean average errors are compared and evaluated to see which model predicts the best.

While real-world decisions involve many competing objectives, algorithmic decisions are often evaluated with a single objective function. In this paper, we study algorithmic policies which explicitly trade off between a private objective (such as profit) and a public objective (such as social welfare). We analyze a natural class of policies which trace an empirical Pareto frontier based on learned scores, and focus on how such decisions can be made in noisy or data-limited regimes. Our theoretical results characterize the optimal strategies in this class, bound the Pareto errors due to inaccuracies in the scores, and show an equivalence between optimal strategies and a rich class of fairness-constrained profit-maximizing policies. We then present empirical results in two different contexts --- online content recommendation and sustainable abalone fisheries --- to underscore the applicability of our approach to a wide range of practical decisions. Taken together, these results shed light on inherent trade-offs in using machine learning for decisions that impact social welfare.