Chatlog from scientist chat 31-10-2012
(Did a quick spellcheck and only moved for what Google docs told on big time)
jeehyung: hi all [11:00 PM]
Brourd: Hi Jee [11:00 PM]
starryjess: hi jee [11:00 PM]
rhiju: hey everybody! [11:00 PM]
Brourd: replied to your message, and how are you today? [11:00 PM]
Brourd: Hi rhiu, how are you today as well? [11:00 PM]
jeehyung: great : ] we’ll have your puzzle mod up in challenges soon [11:01 PM]
kws4679: hello! [11:01 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi Rhiju [11:00 PM]
Brourd: thanks, I made another in my spare time as well [11:01 PM]
starryjess: hi rhiju [11:01 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi Jee [11:01 PM]
rhiju: excellent, glad to see that many of you could make it to this chat. [11:01 PM]
Eli Fisker: [11:01 PM]
Brourd: Hi kws4679 [11:01 PM]
kws4679: hi Brourd [11:01 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi kws too [11:01 PM]
kws4679: Hello Eli Fisker [11:02 PM]
Brourd: Well, I shall start it off, I guess [11:02 PM]
Eli Fisker: [11:02 PM]
Toughguy: hey everybody! (i’m Tom from the forum posts) [11:06 PM]
Brourd: So, this paper about switches you are writing [11:02 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi Tom [11:02 PM]
Brourd: Hey toughguy Tom [11:02 PM]
tsuname: Pablo here [11:02 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi Pablo [11:02 PM]
Brourd: Hi Pablo [11:03 PM]
Toughguy: so, i saw that we already have a few posts in response to the template i put up earlier in the week [11:07 PM]
Eli Fisker: Yes, I have one more switch strategy from Jieux, who couldn’t be here [11:03 PM]
Eli Fisker: Mat can’t be here as well [11:03 PM]
Toughguy: oh, well then that would be great to share on the forum too [11:08 PM]
Adrien Treuille: Hi all. [11:04 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi Adrien [11:04 PM]
Brourd: HI adrien [11:04 PM]
jnicol: hi all [11:04 PM]
Eli Fisker: Tom, agree. He just sent it to me and asked to share it here, so I have put it up in a document for now [11:04 PM]
Eli Fisker: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U… [11:05 PM]
Eli Fisker: And I will ask him about what to do with it later [11:05 PM]
Eli Fisker: And suggest he put it up [11:05 PM]
jeehyung: Here’s a link to the forum post about today’s meeting topic [11:06 PM]
jeehyung: https://getsatisfaction.com/eternagam… [11:06 PM]
Toughguy: so, today is mainly so we can answer questions about the template, your ideas for switch strategies, and ideas for testing all of your theories [11:10 PM]
Eli Fisker: ok [11:06 PM]
Brourd: Is this about switch puzzles in general? [11:07 PM]
Brourd: or more specifically FMN switches? [11:07 PM]
Toughguy: switch puzzles in general [11:11 PM]
Toughguy: so far, we have only done fmn switches [11:11 PM]
Toughguy: but we have other switching molecules available that we may use in the near future [11:11 PM]
tsuname: Although we could also have strategies for simple puzzles, i.e. no switching [11:08 PM]
tsuname: I read jieux’s strategy, looks good, but to preserve modularity, I would write it up as different strategies that would depend on each other [11:09 PM]
rhiju: well, perhaps one question for players … [11:09 PM]
Brourd: Is the plan to use these strategies in a new algorithm, like EteRNA bot? [11:09 PM]
Eli Fisker: I will send him the chatlog afterwards, with your suggestion in, Tsuname [11:09 PM]
rhiju: brourd, that’s the question [11:09 PM]
rhiju: to solve switch puzzles, do you thnk it will be possible to collate a bunch of ‘features’ of good switch designs? [11:10 PM]
Brourd: Hmmm [11:10 PM]
rhiju: or do we need something like jieux’s strategy, which is more like a full protocol or ‘recipe’ [11:10 PM]
jnicol: my opinion, its too early to be thinking about bots to solve switches [11:11 PM]
rhiju: interesting, jnicol [11:11 PM]
rhiju: maybe we can break this into 2 questions [11:11 PM]
Eli Fisker: I kind of like the recipe idea, as I think that the puzzle will be needed to be solved in steps [11:11 PM]
jnicol: were still feeling our way through solving these ‘easy’ ones [11:11 PM]
rhiju: there are actually two ‘fronts’ on switches [11:12 PM]
Eli Fisker: fronts - schools on how to solve them? [11:12 PM]
rhiju: in one ‘front’, there’s the question of why switches that ‘work’ in silico, don’t work as well in real life [11:13 PM]
rhiju: that’s analogous to what we tried to solve for non-switch puzzles [11:13 PM]
rhiju: and there we got an impressive list of features that players ‘saw’ in designs that ‘worked’ expeimentally [11:13 PM]
Brourd: yep [11:13 PM]
rhiju: so one question is wlll we be able to apply the same ‘strategy market’ idea [11:14 PM]
rhiju: a second ‘front’ (coming soon) is a purely in silico question [11:14 PM]
rhiju: there are no algorithms to really effectively solve switch puzzles that involve transitions between more than two states [11:14 PM]
Adrien Treuille: are there efficient (polynomial time) algorithms for two state switches? [11:15 PM]
rhiju: for example, now we have +/- FMN. we can also create puzzles with four states, and you would be asked o toggle between them by adding FMN or not, and by adding theophylline or not (4 conditions) [11:15 PM]
Brourd: any time frame for these awesome 3+ state problems? [11:16 PM]
rhiju: @adrien, no there are not polynomial time algorithms for designing switches [11:16 PM]
rhiju: well, i think we could put up 3+ state problems as challenges soon [11:16 PM]
rhiju: would you be interested? [11:16 PM]
Brourd: Sweet [11:16 PM]
Eli Fisker: Yep [11:16 PM]
starryjess: wow [11:16 PM]
Toughguy: yeah, i can design the challenge puzzles soon for the new ligand, theophylline [11:21 PM]
rhiju: Great, toughguy [11:17 PM]
Brourd: I like that idea [11:17 PM]
jnicol: are these modeled off what nature currently does, or we think it does? [11:17 PM]
rhiju: (FYI, tom and I are sitting in the same room) [11:17 PM]
Toughguy: so i’ll make some basic ones with the aptamer for just theophylline [11:21 PM]
Adrien Treuille: (FYI, Tom = Toughguy) ! [11:17 PM]
Toughguy: and also some for theophylline and fmn that have 4 states [11:21 PM]
jnicol: and is a 3 state switch useful in nature? [11:17 PM]
Brourd: so, you just gave tom a high five, right? [11:18 PM]
rhiju: @jnicol, there are some natural RNA switches that have different functions depending on the presence or absence of more than one small molecule [11:18 PM]
rhiju: Some are called ‘tandem riboswitches’ [11:18 PM]
rhiju: ANd moreover, many engineers are trying to make RNA switches that turn on or off only when they see molecules X, Y, and Z [11:19 PM]
jnicol: but, wouldn’t it be better to concentrate on the 2 state switches? [11:20 PM]
rhiju: Folks at caltech and MIT. One application is in ‘gene therapy’, where you ask a gene to be delirvered only to cells that are expressing the right four other mRNAs [11:20 PM]
Toughguy: yes, jnicol, in the short term, i think our lab puzzles will definitely focus on the 2 state switches [11:24 PM]
Brourd: @ jnicol - for now, we would be dealing with them in silico, if I am following right [11:20 PM]
jnicol: I think we have a better chance at wowing the field if we came up with some great 2 state swicthes [11:20 PM]
rhiju: @jnicol, I agree too, for the ‘experimental’ front. [11:20 PM]
Adrien Treuille: So… an important topic for discussion today is “what should the Switch Strategy Market look like?” [11:21 PM]
Eli Fisker: Rhiju, that MIT thing sounds cool [11:21 PM]
Adrien Treuille: – what worked last time? [11:21 PM]
Eli Fisker: But we could play with 3 state puzzles in the meantime [11:21 PM]
Adrien Treuille: – what could we be doing better? [11:21 PM]
jnicol: I like the sound of multi state switches, but I would ratyher try to get you guys more funding for what we are doing [11:22 PM]
Toughguy: (yes, eli! should be fun) [11:26 PM]
Adrien Treuille: – how are (in vitro) switches different from previous in vitro puzzles? [11:22 PM]
Eli Fisker: Tom [11:22 PM]
rhiju: right, to go back to adrien’s thread and the strategy market – what do we need? [11:22 PM]
Brourd: @ Adrien, using something like the previous strategy market should work [11:23 PM]
Brourd: using specific features [11:23 PM]
Adrien Treuille: @brourd – I basically agree [11:23 PM]
rhiju: @brourd, do we need to give players access to a scripting language to formalize their algorithms and ideas? [11:23 PM]
rhiju: or would that be too burdensome? [11:23 PM]
Adrien Treuille: but there are many things we could do differently [11:23 PM]
Quasispecies: hello [11:23 PM]
Adrien Treuille: e.g. (1) : scripting languages [11:23 PM]
Eli Fisker: Rhiju, I know Mat would say yes to that [11:23 PM]
bigbloto: we want scripting [11:24 PM]
Adrien Treuille: e.g. (2) : tighter integration with the game [11:23 PM]
Eli Fisker: Hi Quasispecies [11:23 PM]
JR: scripting - yes [11:24 PM]
rhiju: @adrien, what do you mean tighter integration? [11:24 PM]
Toughguy: i think the scripting language could be useful at some point, but i think it could be burdensome to newer folks [11:28 PM]
tsuname: how complex scripting? you mean full scripting power or writing sort of pseudo-code algorithms? [11:24 PM]
Brourd: Apparently everybody wants scripts [11:24 PM]
Adrien Treuille: I think that we need to balance scripting with written descriptions [11:24 PM]
Eli Fisker: As long as those who can’t program can get their strategies programmed too [11:24 PM]
Adrien Treuille: for example, think of Eli’s rule from the last Strategy Market – about GC pairs in multiloops [11:25 PM]
Adrien Treuille: it can be described very simply, but it takes a fair amount of code to formalize [11:25 PM]
Eli Fisker: and I can’t program [11:25 PM]
Adrien Treuille: we don’t want to lose those beautiful insights and simply turn this into a scripting competition [11:25 PM]
Toughguy: totally agreed, adrien [11:29 PM]
Eli Fisker: But I will like the option for those who can [11:25 PM]
jeehyung: Maybe we can ask players to “describe in English” first [11:26 PM]
Adrien Treuille: at the same time, we had a bunch of people working really hard over here at CMU typing up all the player ideas, and that can’t scale [11:26 PM]
Toughguy: perhaps we could offer each option [11:30 PM]
jeehyung: And then those can be picked up by devs and players who can program [11:26 PM]
jeehyung: We do need a scripting system (and we have almost working one) to make the system scalable [11:26 PM]
Adrien Treuille: Ideally the solution would be to have two lists, one of ideas and one of scripts – with a 1-many relationship [11:26 PM]
rhiju: how many of you on the chat do have programming experience? [11:26 PM]
jeehyung: @Adrein yes - proposal & implementation [11:27 PM]
jnicol: me [11:27 PM]
Quasispecies: me [11:27 PM]
JR: me [11:27 PM]
Adrien Treuille: So that players can propose beautiful simple ideas, and others can express them in code [11:27 PM]
ElNando888: 30+ years [11:27 PM]
rhiju: what if we gave some reward for writing programs for other players? e.g., more votes [11:27 PM]
Eli Fisker: Nice [11:28 PM]
Adrien Treuille: yes [11:28 PM]
Adrien Treuille: I think that’s really nice [11:28 PM]
jnicol: I’m new to the scripts. Would they fill in the puzzle according to some written rules, ie alternate all the AU’s? [11:28 PM]
rhiju: ok, scripting + rewards for writing scripts (esp. helping other players) seems like a win [11:29 PM]
Toughguy: i like that rhiju [11:33 PM]
JR: scripts = series of sweeps over puzzle - do this , do this [11:29 PM]
rhiju: it will be a lot of coding… what does jee think? [11:29 PM]
Adrien Treuille: I think the other thing that was missing from the previous strategy market was better integration in the game [11:30 PM]
tsuname: hmmmm maybe this could turn into some sort of a toolbox in-game? [11:30 PM]
Toughguy: what do you mean, adrien? [11:34 PM]
Adrien Treuille: @tsuname – that’s just what I’m thinking! [11:30 PM]
rhiju: i think i know what adrien meant [11:30 PM]
Adrien Treuille: let players call “strategies” from within the game [11:30 PM]
Adrien Treuille: let players call “EteRNAbot” from within the design interface [11:30 PM]
tsuname: yea, that would be awesome [11:30 PM]
Adrien Treuille: add columns to the experiment viewer for different player strategies [11:30 PM]
Eli Fisker: Totally agree, Adrien. [11:30 PM]
Eli Fisker: Mat will be so happy [11:30 PM]
Adrien Treuille: [11:31 PM]
Brourd: Sounds great [11:31 PM]
Adrien Treuille: I have another… kind of weird question… [11:31 PM]
jeehyung: The scripting will be an open programming language. You should be able to program a script that will run specific sequence coloring, or make scripts that scores RNA (strategy market) [11:31 PM]
Toughguy: so players can submit strategies, have them coded up, and then those strategies are available to help solve puzzles? [11:35 PM]
jeehyung: So with the toolbox, you should be able to call other people’s script to score/solve puzzles, etc [11:31 PM]
Adrien Treuille: do the players who submitted strategies to the last strategy market feel that their efforts were “rewarded” enough in game? [11:31 PM]
kws4679: scripting sounds great [11:31 PM]
Adrien Treuille: if not, how could we better reward this extremely valuable scientific work? [11:32 PM]
rhiju: to the programmers out there (elnando888), any suggestions on what the script language should be? [11:32 PM]
JR: as reality check - forum post as to what players think they want? [11:32 PM]
jeehyung: @rhiju we are using javascript [11:32 PM]
rhiju: @jee, aha. [11:32 PM]
ElNando888: no preference, I have coded with every possible language (almost) [11:33 PM]
tsuname: hey, that would be interesting, how about putting popularity on strategies, and getting something in return for how much a strategy is used [11:33 PM]
JR: need simple stupid - java no good [11:33 PM]
jnicol: javascript, yes [11:33 PM]
ElNando888: simple guideline, work with what you’re already using [11:33 PM]
Quasispecies: i’ve got experience with python and fortran, but probably for accessibility something like lua at foldit [11:33 PM]
rhiju: the other good thing about javascript is that there are websites like codeacademy.org to teach it [11:34 PM]
rhiju: ok, going back to adrien’s question on rewarding scientific work… [11:34 PM]
Adrien Treuille: We’ve already invested in Javascript, and I think that’s a good choice especially as everyone’s browser can execute it, which means people can perform computation locally rather than burdening the server. [11:34 PM]
Brourd: It’s scientific work, our only reward needs to be recognition and a portion of the $1,000,000 from the nobel prize [11:35 PM]
Toughguy: pablo (tsuname) had a nice idea, i thought - to reward based on the frequency at which someone’s strategy is used [11:39 PM]
Adrien Treuille: Lol [11:35 PM]
Adrien Treuille: @tom/tsuname - that is a very interesting idea! [11:35 PM]
JR: sure [11:36 PM]
tsuname: @ Brourd lolz [11:36 PM]
rhiju: how to count when a strategy is ‘used’? [11:36 PM]
xaner: Oh hi. What’s the point of the rewards? Abusing our brain’s reward system? [11:36 PM]
Toughguy: maybe you get the reward if your strategy is used in a successful lab design [11:40 PM]
tsuname: @rhiju when it;s executed [11:36 PM]
Eli Fisker: HI Xaner [11:36 PM]
rhiju: what if its jus a google doc like jeiux’s switch strategy? [11:37 PM]
Adrien Treuille: So regarding recognition… we can pour effort into more ways to “reward players” … e.g. badges if you submit a strategy, badges if your strategy makes it into EteRNAbot, etc… but believe it or not, this infrastructure takes time to build [11:37 PM]
xaner: hi again [11:37 PM]
jeehyung: @rhiju for the implemented ones, we can count number of executions [11:37 PM]
Adrien Treuille: I’m wondering if you felt that the existing Strategy Market infrastructure did enough to reward players hard work or if we should work on this [11:37 PM]
Brourd: Oh, I had forgotten about the entire “time” thing [11:37 PM]
jeehyung: or we can have voting system like in the lab [11:38 PM]
rhiju: what if we could let players register that they ‘liked’ someone else’s strategy? [11:38 PM]
Brourd: There wasn’t particularly any reward, and I came in after the strategy market was made [11:38 PM]
ribonucleic: jee, when will my strategy market idea be ready, like when it is tested, published, etc. [11:38 PM]
mat747: back hi and re-hi [11:38 PM]
Brourd: the “liked” idea sounds better, prevents the abuse of just using a strategy over and over again in order to get rewards [11:38 PM]
Quasispecies: points… achievements… anything to give that extra squirt of dopamine [11:38 PM]
JR: forget about rewards - get it up and reuning first [11:39 PM]
xaner: that’s what I thought [11:39 PM]
Eli Fisker: wb, Mat [11:38 PM]
jnicol: For your paper, what are the main points you will be writing about? [11:39 PM]
Quasispecies: but yes, ultimately participation should be its own reward [11:39 PM]
rhiju: @JR and @xaner, yes – let’s stop talking about rewards [11:39 PM]
bigbloto: “like” risks rewarding more for an author’s perceived visibility in the community rather than actual value, imo [11:39 PM]
jandersonlee: for me the reward is synthesis. getting the cloud lab up so more designs can be run is important in that regard [11:39 PM]
xaner: Shouldn’t there be some kind of market study here? [11:39 PM]
ribonucleic: bigbloto, who are you [11:39 PM]
JR: need driver pgm and subroutines that [11:40 PM]
xaner: identifying which rewards would work best on the players would improve their motivation and efficiency [11:40 PM]
mat747: i agree with janderson [11:40 PM]
JR: sweep over file [11:40 PM]
rhiju: back to @jnicol, we don’t yet have a fixed plan for the switch paper [11:40 PM]
Brourd: btw, how is progress on the cloud lab and the updated site doing? [11:41 PM]
jnicol: ok [11:40 PM]
jeehyung: how about reward is gamepoints, but you can buy extra synthesis slots with those points? [11:41 PM]
jeehyung: @Brourd, updated site is going beta today - I’ll post a news item [11:41 PM]
rhiju: in fact, one thing I was hoping to discuss during this chat was the possibility of having more player input and even player writing on such a paper (or set of papers) [11:41 PM]
Brourd: I am on board with that Jee [11:41 PM]
Eli Fisker: Jee, cool [11:41 PM]
Adrien Treuille: my ideal reward structure would be (special badges + the ability to sort players by thier score at creating strategies) [11:41 PM]
Brourd: I’m on board with that as well Rhiju [11:42 PM]
JR: second score? [11:42 PM]
xaner: I think rewards need to be tailored to the players [11:42 PM]
Brourd: @ Adrien, too many boats, but I guess I like that idea as well [11:42 PM]
rhiju: [@brourd, cloud lab has been progressing slower than hoped, partly because our main technical expert has had sevral family-related emergencies over the last year.] [11:42 PM]
Brourd: Aww, that’s terrible [11:42 PM]
jandersonlee: foldit has separate scores for solo and evolver as different people have different skilsets [11:42 PM]
rhiju: [@brourd, but its a top priority, and we have pushed forward on illumina-basd readouts, and have even been able to make libraries of 4000 RNAs, albeit not yet on eterna player designs …] [11:43 PM]
rhiju: back to papers… [11:43 PM]
jnicol: Any chance on getting a high end server to get better simulation results? [11:44 PM]
rhiju: do any of the players on chat have experience in writing articles for publication in any kind of field (e.g. science, journalism)? [11:44 PM]
Toughguy: so, rhiju, i guess for the paper you are looking to have players contribute strategies, and then discuss some of the most successful strategies in the eventual paper? see how they compare to existing switch design algorithms? [11:48 PM]
jandersonlee: CS - years ago [11:44 PM]
xaner: what’s up with all the old people? [11:44 PM]
rhiju: @jandersonlee, did you find it difficult to write the articles? [11:45 PM]
jandersonlee: not reall - time consuming [11:45 PM]
Quasispecies: @ rhiju - yes. sorry i’ve been away for so long, but i’ve been busy with my own work and had less time for hobbies [11:45 PM]
rhiju: yes, i totally agree. [11:45 PM]
rhiju: abut time consuming. [11:45 PM]
Quasispecies: but to answer your question earlier, yes i have experience in that respect [11:45 PM]
rhiju: @quasispecies, cool. [11:46 PM]
jandersonlee: it helped to have a good grounding in the scinetific/experimental method in highschool chemistry/college courses [11:46 PM]
Adrien Treuille: @rhiju – were you thinking one paper / switch strategy or coarser granularity [11:46 PM]
rhiju: ok, now the challenge is – what would it take to get players like jandersonlee or quasispecies to help us and others write up this scientific knowledge? [11:47 PM]
rhiju: perhaps as multiple papers? [11:47 PM]
jandersonlee: no doubt there is a white-paper or tutorial online somewhere [11:47 PM]
rhiju: @jandersonlee, a white-paper for what? writing papers? [11:47 PM]
jandersonlee: (on how to write a scientific paper) [11:47 PM]
Toughguy: @adrien, i personally think the best way to get the field’s attention would be to produce something like EteRNA bot Switch that we can compare as a final product to other existing tools [11:51 PM]
Brourd: How many existing switch algorithms are out there? [11:48 PM]
rhiju: there are almost none… nupack has something on their site. [11:48 PM]
Brourd: Hmm, not much to compare to then [11:49 PM]
rhiju: back to papers, toughguy/tom has some thoughts… [11:49 PM]
Toughguy: so, we could do several potential things - we could shoot for one mega paper, in which lots of players contribute little pieces [11:54 PM]
Toughguy: or, we could practice on shorter papers, focusing on just one or two strategies at a time [11:54 PM]
rhiju: well, look, some players have already written lots of ‘little’ papers [11:50 PM]
Brourd: Hmmm [11:50 PM]
Brourd: Well, that depends, each little paper has to have a focus, will it be just on individual strategies? [11:51 PM]
xaner: what’s the goal of this? Advertisement? Funding? [11:51 PM]
Brourd: and then, will we eventually compile them all into one big paper anyway? [11:51 PM]
jandersonlee: What might help is some guidance on picking a research focus for a paper that would be interesting to the field and advance it by some small delta [11:51 PM]
Eli Fisker: science is the goal [11:51 PM]
rhiju: for example, here’s a start from some folks thinking abot barriers: https://docs.google.com/a/stanford.ed… [11:51 PM]
tsuname: although just the fact of having a community document the process of discovery/engineering would be an awesome demonstration as well [11:52 PM]
rhiju: and here’s one from eli on what makes an RNA design problem difficult: https://docs.google.com/a/stanford.ed… [11:52 PM]
rhiju: These contain interesting insights, and if they could be formalized with rigorous experimental tests, and written up in a ‘standard’ scientific format, they could be useful to a wide audience [11:52 PM]
Quasispecies: that’s really interesting. who did that work with barriers? [11:52 PM]
Brourd: ElNando [11:53 PM]
ElNando888: my “thing” about energy barriers is very far from a scientific paper, IMO [11:53 PM]
jandersonlee: hypothesis-experimenta_design-test-analysis-results? [11:53 PM]
xaner: Shouldn’t the people who initiated this also submit the papers? [11:53 PM]
rhiju: a bunch of people thought about barriers, and elnando888 put it together [11:53 PM]
rhiju: @xaner, yes certainly the people who put it together should be authors and submitters [11:53 PM]
jandersonlee: but where is the test and results? [11:53 PM]
rhiju: well, should we create a mechanism where some group of people get synthesis slots to test their ideas? [11:54 PM]
rhiju: even before the ‘cloud lab’? [11:54 PM]
Toughguy: yes, rhiju, i like that [11:58 PM]
jandersonlee: or improvement over standard practice? [11:54 PM]
Toughguy: perhaps we could do “small clouds” [11:58 PM]
Brourd: So, we have several micro papers, is the goal to eventually compile? [11:54 PM]
Brourd: small clouds sound nice [11:55 PM]
Toughguy: where we have a few ideas we test at a time [11:58 PM]
Toughguy: locally on a smaller deep sequencer [11:59 PM]
rhiju: well, i’d say that we didn’t have to compile the papers [11:55 PM]
jandersonlee: sounds promising [11:55 PM]
xaner: Do the players have full access to the program’s source and what exactly they are “playing” with? [11:55 PM]
Brourd: @ Xaner - we are currently using Vienna version 1. something [11:55 PM]
Brourd: available online [11:55 PM]
rhiju: we’ve ben in talks with folks at plos currents to create a new ‘current’ for ‘micropapers’: http://www.plos.org/ [11:55 PM]
jandersonlee: nice forum then [11:56 PM]
rhiju: the barrier now is getting the stuff tests and written up. [11:56 PM]
Quasispecies: i think before we talk about papers, we need very specific problems to tackle and a plant to attack them [11:56 PM]
xaner: Hum. Maybe eterna could get plos to lend them a space to drop their micro papers at or simply host their papers themselves [11:56 PM]
Brourd: yep [11:57 PM]
rhiju: @jandersonlee, what if we start with papers that are purely ‘in silico’, written by players [11:57 PM]
jandersonlee: forum and google docs is a starting proxy for ramping up [11:57 PM]
rhiju: for example, there isn’t any paper on ‘what makes an RNA design hard’ [11:57 PM]
rhiju: but eli fisker and others have thought about this [11:57 PM]
jandersonlee: @rhiju - if you think that would be of interest to the target audience - you’re the expert there [11:58 PM]
Brourd: Hard in silico, or hard in vitro? [11:58 PM]
rhiju: and arguably, the existing ‘player puzzles’ in eterna can test how hard a puzzle is for bots and for humans [11:58 PM]
xaner: Players should be able to test other players’ results [11:58 PM]
rhiju: @brourd (here i’m talking about in silico just o get started) [11:58 PM]
Brourd: Hmmm, what about other in silico models? [11:59 PM]
rhiju: so, in some sense we already have interesting scientific content that is not available elsewhere and could be tested by in silico ‘experiments’ (and later with the cloud lab with wet-lab experiments ) [11:59 PM]
Brourd: one design may be easy in one model, but impossible in another [11:59 PM]
xaner: It would be cool if it were possible to organically obtain results without any single player writing down anything [11:59 PM]
rhiju: @brourd, if we get scripting going, we could ask players to create bots that can solve more puzzles than existing bots – there’s another idea. [0:00 AM]
Brourd: yes, that sounds like an interesting idea Rhiju [0:00 AM]
rhiju: ok, so now the problem is … how do we formalize that knowledge into a reasonably paper? [0:00 AM]
mat747: timeframe for scripting ? [0:00 AM]
jandersonlee: or puzzles that are solved by one bot and not another to be tested in vitro later to see if they form [0:00 AM]
Brourd: @ Rhiju - for example, I believe RNASSD bot uses the Constraint Generation model, which allowed it to solve a puzzle unsolvable in the Vienna engine, [0:01 AM]
xaner: I don’t know what data is collected yet on the player’s puzzles. Anyone knows? [0:01 AM]
jandersonlee: (i.e. checking the veracity of the bots) [0:01 AM]
Brourd: @ Xaner - a few forum posts about the current limits of the bots are out there [0:01 AM]
rhiju: in principle, and academic scientist like me could polish and write up what the players put together, but that’s hard for me. [@brourd and jandersonlee, great ideas] [0:01 AM]
Adrien Treuille: Unfortunately, I have to go now… so I want to quickly propose a thought … given that we have so few synthesis slots, and don’t yet know how to write a community paper, I propose that we start by writing – as a community – a single (mega) Switch Design paper. We can start writing the paper now. As we continue to write the paper, we’ll figure out which experiments we need to do, a [0:02 AM]
rhiju: what if we ‘gamify’ paper writing to teach players how to write their own ideas up? [0:02 AM]
rhiju: i started writing some ideas on this here: [0:02 AM]
rhiju: https://docs.google.com/a/stanford.ed… [0:02 AM]
xaner: I mean, if we quantify how fast X players solve a puzzle, how many different strategies they come up with, etc, then we can quantify things like “how hard it is to solve”. [0:02 AM]
rhiju: this was meant to be for my lab [0:02 AM]
Eli Fisker: Rhiju, cool thanks [0:02 AM]
rhiju: for example, one thing that i do when i writ papers is to set ‘persnal goals’, like … i want to write the introduction by 5pm [0:03 AM]
Quasispecies: lol @ the transition state. dear god. too true. [0:03 AM]
Brourd: Very nice Rhiju [0:03 AM]
Eli Fisker: Rhiju, can we get that template up in the forum? [0:03 AM]
rhiju: that could be fun to have as a ‘timer’ in a game [0:03 AM]
Brourd: @ Adrien, one mega paper by the whole community could work [0:04 AM]
rhiju: @ brourd, what would be the best subject for that mega paper? [0:04 AM]
rhiju: the ‘what makes an rna design problem hard’? [0:04 AM]
xaner: that’s the question [0:04 AM]
xaner: I say submit a poll [0:04 AM]
LFP6: Happy halloween everyone! How did the dev chat go? [0:04 AM]
rhiju: why not have several potential papers/projects? [0:05 AM]
Brourd: We could focus on the in silico problem, point out flaws in the models, and how similar soluion in vitro fail [0:05 AM]
jnicol: limitations of current energy models [0:05 AM]
Eli Fisker: Hi LFP, most of them are still around [0:05 AM]
xaner: here we have a few propositions already [0:05 AM]
jandersonlee: probably 1-5 open topics/papers at any one time? [0:05 AM]
Adrien Treuille: both in silico and in vitro papers are possible [0:05 AM]
rhiju: yea, that’s very interesting! [0:05 AM]