With our goal here being to accelerate eterna community’s ability to innovate, we do not want to tread existing paths. Nothing unexpected would arise from that.
So immediately taking what collective views have been offered, I have experimented using my fuzzy understanding. Here is what I have come back with.
I used Broud’s guidance of needing a sequence close to MS2. I place this and his other guidance high in my thought process given I know he has a deep understanding of the science and this particular design. Note that he has left a lot of space for me to bring my own approach…and I will use that.
Second, I used a first step that I heard Astromon explaining to another player because I also know he is skilled at this. He said in State 4 to create a sequence that disrupts the oligo at the top right (110-131)
And third, will use Jaxon’s idea of using mutation tool selecting 4 NT’s to test to find new interesting patterns to follow. The initial patterns that looked interesting to me relate to which of the 6 top constraint boxes were resolved.
We start with the first 4 of the 6 constraints resolved. Using the first three steps above, it is easy to to resolve 1,4,5,and 6. So those two resolution patterns are basic.
The two resolution patterns I found more unusual were resolving 1,3,4,5 and resolving 1,2,4, 6.
Additionally, I think selecting 4 NT’s to mutate that cause many constraint fluctuations back and forth between these two more unusual constraint patterns means that I might be closer to creating design resolution.
Here is the lowest delta sequence that resolves 1,3,4,5:
Here is closely related sequence that resolves 1,2,4,6:
Additionally, I have found 4 NT’s that cause many fluctuations back and forth between these two more unusual constraint patterns.
This is currently where I am at.
Employing more immediacy in our interactions by sharing what strikes us in the moment, especially when we don’t know how those views fit in, will expand our community’s ability to innovate.
Please share what strikes you.