Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#61

Post by hodgehog11 »

11101010001100 wrote: post #38
hodgehog11 wrote: post #26

Something else to add is mathematical discovery. There is a team that is very close to solving the Navier-Stokes Millenium Prize problem: https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/discovering-new-soluti... The cynists will comment that I've just been sucked in by the PR. However, I know this team and have been using these techniques for other problems. I know they are so close to a computationally-assisted proof of count…

I think the PR is making it seem that Deepmind is not standing on the shoulder of giants, when in fact it very much is. The paper itself makes this clear. I wish them luck!

To add to this, I think it is important to recognise that this is not fundamentally a Deepmind project; engineers from Deepmind came to help with the computational aspects to bring the error down after the lead and last authors brilliantly realised this approach would work with a proof of concept back in 2023. A good amount of work from Deepmind was involved, but I don't like the idea that they could get all the credit for this.

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#62

Post by ragequittah »

marbro wrote: post #25
bonoboTP wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But given that LLMs cannot interact with the real world What type of interaction do you envision? Could a non-domain-expert, but somewhat trained person provide a bridge? If the LLM comes up with the big ideas and tells a human technical assistant to execute (put the vial here, run the 3D printer with this file, put the object there, drive in a screw), would that help? But dexterous robots are getting more and more…

Can these robots move a chess piece from one square to another?

Probably: https://www.senserobotchess.com/

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#63

Post by Hilift »

Inviz wrote: post #33

I have a mildly psychotic friend who think that he uncovered the secrets to everything with AI. Quantum theory and Jungian archetypes, together with 4 dimensions - great mix

AI really is good at finding new viruses, due to simple DNA sequences look like noise to humans. But then you may have created a different problem.

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#64

Post by _0ffh »

epolanski wrote: post #60
bonoboTP wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But given that LLMs cannot interact with the real world What type of interaction do you envision? Could a non-domain-expert, but somewhat trained person provide a bridge? If the LLM comes up with the big ideas and tells a human technical assistant to execute (put the vial here, run the 3D printer with this file, put the object there, drive in a screw), would that help? But dexterous robots are getting more and more…

> If the LLM comes up with the big ideas and tells a human technical assistant to execute (put the vial here, run the 3D printer with this file, put the object there, drive in a screw), would that help? No, because the bottleneck isn't the thinking but running experiments. I worked in solar research, assembling a cell to test implied 40 different steps and from beginning to testing it was around 4 to 5 days. This mea…

In biochemistry there are multiple vendors that sell semi-to-fully automated setups that do large numbers of experiments in parallel.

I have no idea what solar research experimentation looks like in detail, is it theoretically possible to build similar setups for that use case? Where exactly is the bottleneck?

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#65

Post by layoric »

layoric wrote: post #5
bgwalter wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Thank you for this context, should be the title IMO..

For clarity, all the parent said was John Jumper is the current director at Google DeepMind. Which I think is useful context, not sure why flagged..

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#66

Post by nosianu »

_0ffh wrote: post #64
epolanski wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the LLM comes up with the big ideas and tells a human technical assistant to execute (put the vial here, run the 3D printer with this file, put the object there, drive in a screw), would that help? No, because the bottleneck isn't the thinking but running experiments. I worked in solar research, assembling a cell to test implied 40 different steps and from beginning to testing it was around 4 to 5 days. This mea…

In biochemistry there are multiple vendors that sell semi-to-fully automated setups that do large numbers of experiments in parallel. I have no idea what solar research experimentation looks like in detail, is it theoretically possible to build similar setups for that use case? Where exactly is the bottleneck?

This may be a problem of scale. biochem is a much wider field, and I guess, depending on what devices exactly you mean, a lot of it is usable in other bio fields (like https://www.faulhaber.com/en/markets/laboratory-automation/l... - the pictures showing a common general bio-lab scenario, there can be thousands of such assays to test)?

So it depends on if the same machinery can be used for more general material science research and testing work.

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#67

Post by Fraterkes »

hodgehog11 wrote: post #26

Something else to add is mathematical discovery. There is a team that is very close to solving the Navier-Stokes Millenium Prize problem: https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/discovering-new-soluti... The cynists will comment that I've just been sucked in by the PR. However, I know this team and have been using these techniques for other problems. I know they are so close to a computationally-assisted proof of count…

What would the implications of solving NS actually be? Would we get much more accurate weather predictions?

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#68

Post by geordiew »

Fraterkes wrote: post #67
hodgehog11 wrote: post #26

Something else to add is mathematical discovery. There is a team that is very close to solving the Navier-Stokes Millenium Prize problem: https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/discovering-new-soluti... The cynists will comment that I've just been sucked in by the PR. However, I know this team and have been using these techniques for other problems. I know they are so close to a computationally-assisted proof of count…

What would the implications of solving NS actually be? Would we get much more accurate weather predictions?

I think it is fair to say that any blowing-up solution of navier stokes would be of purely intellectual interest. NS is a problem that many smart people have thought about and failed to solve. The current picture is that there are probably self-similar blowing up solutions that exist at extremely high codimension in the space of initial conditions. Thus they are "probability zero", and, if essentially never arise in nature. (A nice analogy: imagine a movie of a stone falling into a pond, and the ripples created afterwards. Now run the movie of the ripples backwards. We never see this in nature!)

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#69

Post by TZubiri »

hodgehog11 wrote: post #26

Something else to add is mathematical discovery. There is a team that is very close to solving the Navier-Stokes Millenium Prize problem: https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/discovering-new-soluti... The cynists will comment that I've just been sucked in by the PR. However, I know this team and have been using these techniques for other problems. I know they are so close to a computationally-assisted proof of count…

Worth noting that deep mind is a world class pre-LLM team. And the techniques used are completely unrelated to LLMs

Re: John Jumper: AI is revolutionizing scientific discovery [video]

#70

Post by alphydan »

epolanski wrote: post #60
bonoboTP wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But given that LLMs cannot interact with the real world What type of interaction do you envision? Could a non-domain-expert, but somewhat trained person provide a bridge? If the LLM comes up with the big ideas and tells a human technical assistant to execute (put the vial here, run the 3D printer with this file, put the object there, drive in a screw), would that help? But dexterous robots are getting more and more…

> If the LLM comes up with the big ideas and tells a human technical assistant to execute (put the vial here, run the 3D printer with this file, put the object there, drive in a screw), would that help? No, because the bottleneck isn't the thinking but running experiments. I worked in solar research, assembling a cell to test implied 40 different steps and from beginning to testing it was around 4 to 5 days. This mea…

Not to worry. With the millions unemployed by AGI, you can get hundreds of thousands of unskilled "hands" for your IA. Even with reasonable failure rates you will get a few hundred experimenters past the 40 steps.

Not sure if I should finish with /s or /fear or /uncertainty

Post reply on HN