trott
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
890
Submissions
222
Member since
Mar 3
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 year ago
> The AlphaFold3 analysis (the AI contribution) literally accounts for a few panels in a supplementary figure - it didn't even help guide their choice of small molecule inhibitors since those were already known.
(Disclaimer: I'm the author of a competing approach)
Searching for new small-molecule inhibitors requires going through millions of novel compounds. But AlphaFold3 was evaluated on a dataset that tends to be repetitive: https://olegtrott.substack.com/p/are-alphafolds-new-results-...
Comment · 1 year ago
Regarding point number 11 (AlphaFold3 vs Vina, Gnina, etc.), see my rebuttal here (I'm the author of Vina): https://olegtrott.substack.com/p/are-alphafolds-new-results-...
Gnina is Vina with its results re-scored by a NN, so the exact same concerns apply.
I'm very optimistic about AI, for the record. It's just that in this particular case, the comparison was flawed. It's the old regurgitation vs generalization confusion: We need a method that generalizes to completely novel drug candidates, but the evaluation was done on a dataset that tends to be repetitive.
Comment · 1 year ago
> According to Stack Overflow developer survey [0] Rust is at 12.5%, ... So definitely not niche.
The annual survey is very popular in the Rust community. Its results are often used for advocacy. Participation by Rust developers is very high. So what you have is a classic case of a selection bias.
Comment · 1 year ago
They started with N >= 120x3 tasks, and gave each task to 4-9 humans. Then they kept only those 120x3 tasks that at least 2 humans had solved.
Comment · 1 year ago
> a mistake of the 1983 Ada standard ... which has been removed
The article was written in 2011, and the trick still seems to work in a 2024 version of GNAT.
> Both "unchecked" Ada and "unsafe" Rust
But the `Conversion` function isn't using `Unchecked_*`. That's the point of the article. The type safety hole is in "safe" Ada.
Comment · 1 year ago
> but Ada's real strengths lie elsewhere. Its strong typing,
Ada is not actually type-safe: https://www.enyo.de/fw/notes/ada-type-safety.html
* Top 1% and one of the winners in the biggest ML competition (Department of Homeland Security, $1,500,000 prize fund)
* Created the most cited molecular docking program (45,000 citations), widely used in drug discovery.
https://olegtrott.com