4 ms·

Is it a scientifc result if it isn't reproducible? Would the result have been accepted if it was submitted by an unknown?

• learnstats2 6y ago
  The reproducible part is that they can consistently fold proteins - which they can. The fact that they're not telling anybody else how they did it stops it from being public science, but doesn't stop it from being science.
  • ISL 6y ago
    There are two terms that may be conflated in this particular discussion. Reproducible: Can it be done again? Replicable: Can someone else do it? AF2 appears to be reproducible, but not yet replicable. https://phys.org/news/2019-05-replicability-science.html#:~:text=Reproducibility%20means%20obtaining%20consistent%20computational,has%20obtained%20its%20own%20data https://phys.org/news/2019-05-replicability-science.html#:~:....
    • YetAnotherNick 6y ago
      > Can someone else do it? > but not yet replicable. Why not? I don't see a blocker except for the money to create a team and the computational resources. I think AlphaGo/Zero was harder to replicate than this, still Leela's team managed to get it working.
      • NeutronStar 6y ago
        How do I replicate the code (procedure) if I can't see the code (procedure) ?
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]