AI may soon make Nobel-level discovery, scientists predict

Comments

• 6nk06@sh.itjust.works ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  almost certain, eventually

  Nice astrology bro.

  source

  • brathoven@feddit.org ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Nobel price in astrology, hallucinated.

    source
• fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Fyi, “AI” has been used in medicine research for decades. GenAI is the one that’s wonky. I’d be surprised and sceptical of any researcher that would suggest genAI as the star tool when there are so many predictive ML models that already work so well…

  source
• CosmoNova@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Technically machines make most discoveries possible these days but I have yet to see an electric microscope receive the prize. I don‘t see how this is any different.

  source
• SnoringEarthworm@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  This is the first of three waves of AI in science, says Sam Rodriques, chief executive of FutureHouse — a research lab in San Francisco, California, that debuted an LLM designed to do chemistry tasks earlier this year.

  The “one scientist” seems to have switched tracks from doing science to doing capitalism.

  source
• Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  We’ve been shoving large amounts of data into machine learning algorithms for ages now. Still need people to interpret the outputs and actually test that the results are accurate.

  source
• nyan@lemmy.cafe ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I’m pretty sure that you can find one researcher, somewhere, who will agree with anything you say, including that the weather is being affected by a war between Martians and the people living inside the hollow earth. Especially if you’re offering a large bribe to said researcher to make a statement about something outside their field while they’re somewhat drunk, and then mutilating their remark out of context via the process fondly known as journalism.

  In other words, “one researcher” predicting something is pretty much worthless.

  source
• Fyrnyx@kbin.melroy.org ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Well, until AI finds a cure for cancer, solves climate issues and fixes the economy for everyone, it is still shit.

  source

  • Xanthobilly@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Solves climate issues by turning itself off.

    source

    • Fyrnyx@kbin.melroy.org ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      After it does the other two things, yes.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • lunatique@lemmy.ml ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Can you find a cure to cancer? If you don’t are you shit?

    source

    • Fyrnyx@kbin.melroy.org ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      You're just mad because you suck at posting.

      source
• Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  “eventually” is a cheap cop out. Because I have no doubt AI will eventually surpass us, it’s simply the nature of the speed of development of technology over evolution. But we are not there yet.

  source
• phdepressed@sh.itjust.works ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Eventually we’ll make agi instead of this llm bullshit. Assuming we don’t destroy ourselves first.

  source
• frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  This one probably will happen.

  The reason is that there are certain fields where you have to sift through massive amounts of data to find the thing you’re looking for. This is an ideal task for machine learning. It’s not going to replace real scientists, and it sure as hell shouldn’t replace peer review. It’s a tool with a use.

  As one example, the longest known black hole jet was recently discovered using ML techniques: caltech.edu/…/gargantuan-black-hole-jets-are-bigg…

  source
• baggachipz@sh.itjust.works ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Any day now….

  source
• bufalo1973@piefed.social ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  May… or maybe not.

  source