Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
1–10 of 62 posts
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#2Topological data analysis is amazing, too bad all the hype around DL is leaving it in relative obscurity.
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#3I think the second big take away is that this was only made possible because the scientists willingly shared their "dark data"-- data and lab notes from failed experiments. I wonder how much data is hoarded privately and never opened up and analyzed like this.
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#4I think the second big take away is that this was only made possible because the scientists willingly shared their "dark data"-- data and lab notes from failed experiments. I wonder how much data is hoarded privately and never opened up and analyzed like this.
A lot of data is hoarded because scientists often have to compete for limited research funding (at least from what I've seen in the US).
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#5I think the second big take away is that this was only made possible because the scientists willingly shared their "dark data"-- data and lab notes from failed experiments. I wonder how much data is hoarded privately and never opened up and analyzed like this.
occasionally, I wonder how much more advanced our world would be if scientific and government data were simply available as a default choice. then I smile at my own optimistic viewpoint and come back to reality.
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#6I think the second big take away is that this was only made possible because the scientists willingly shared their "dark data"-- data and lab notes from failed experiments. I wonder how much data is hoarded privately and never opened up and analyzed like this.
A lot of data is hoarded because scientists often have to compete for limited research funding (at least from what I've seen in the US).
next up: "let's depend funding on how much data is shared and other people use it"
after that: "researchers overshare data and use each others data for no reason but to bump numbers"
it's interesting how every system tends to sooner or later be gamified by its players
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#7"The process was outlined in a paper published today in Nature, and hints at the possibility of medical breakthroughs lurking in the data of failed experiments."
If there was some way to make sense of data from negative-results experiments reliably, it would be absolutely revolutionary and certainly turn our ideas about what constitutes a successful experiment onto its head. I am very hopeful for fruitful results from the methods outlined in this article.
I worry about the usage of "failed" experimental data here, though. I've "failed" a lot of experiments for reasons other than not finding the effect I was looking for in my data. Any exploration of data from negative-results experiments needs to be taken very narrowly, with a deep understanding of exactly what effect is being examined.
Experiments are frequently designed incorrectly for studying the effect they want, and are almost always not suitably controlled for examining non-primary effects. Try to find a trend throughout non-primary effects over a large swath of experiments, and I'm sure you will-- but it may be noise.
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#8I think the second big take away is that this was only made possible because the scientists willingly shared their "dark data"-- data and lab notes from failed experiments. I wonder how much data is hoarded privately and never opened up and analyzed like this.
Frequently a lot of this hoarded data is flawed or defective due to improper setup or execution of the experiment. That isn't to say the information in this "dark data" is useless, but it needs to be taken in context. The cleanest data with the best results are put forward into a paper; the chaff is not.
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#9So my main take away is that scientist should publish their original data. Frankly, I'm amazed they don't already!
Re: Medical Breakthrough in Spinal Cord Injuries Was Made by a Computer Program
#10I think the second big take away is that this was only made possible because the scientists willingly shared their "dark data"-- data and lab notes from failed experiments. I wonder how much data is hoarded privately and never opened up and analyzed like this.
Frequently a lot of this hoarded data is flawed or defective due to improper setup or execution of the experiment. That isn't to say the information in this "dark data" is useless, but it needs to be taken in context. The cleanest data with the best results are put forward into a paper; the chaff is not.
Shouldn't this be noted? Isn't providing the "best" data risking making data fit your hypothesis?