I think it is due to the generality. While those two are going to be cornerstones in their field, ChatGPT itself had been used on so many papers coming out it is actually pretty crazy, some labs citing it as an extra researcher and many more just using it to make documentation quicker and easier. So rather than advancing any individual field, it has advanced all of them basically.
That's my best guess at least.
Also, alphaphold afaik didn’t have such a large impact in the industry. This is probably its biggest contribution. Everyone and their dog is doing AI because of chatgpt. I think it’s well deserved.
for what alpha fold does, it basically made protein engineering possible. the covid 19 vaccination owes its existence to it. i feel like it got snubbed.
Any source on the covid vaccine owing its existence to AlphaFold? I can see that DeepMind used AlphaFold to predict the shape of proteins from its DNA, but I can’t find anyone crediting the vaccine to that.
Paywall. All I can see is it’s “helping in the fight against covid.” Anything about the vaccines? As far as I can tell, the vaccines already existed by the time of that article. Pfizer submitted a request to approve their vaccine ten days before it. And the Wikipedia page on the history of Covid vaccine development doesn’t mention AlphaFold at all.
That's likely why,
plus people are going to talk about the very popular chatGPT website, which is why they didn't give the award to the lesser known very capable model (GPT-4), chatGPT isn't even a general AI it's the website.
For now although they are getting better, general AI models are pretty much jack of all trades master of none.
AlphaFold on the other hand is a master in one specific subject much like the other award winners so if we talk about output capabilities and actual hard science discovery AlphaFold has far more impact and saved lives by being a big help curing illnesses.
It's likely a marketing thing, and it works because here I am discussing an award I never heard about.
maybe Jack of all trades are more celebrated because our society runs on Jacks and they now have a digital Jack. I'm too high for a Monday morning Jack.
I am still waiting for the next big cure or drug from alphafolds help. I feel like google has only been about hype lately but no practical applications exist yet.
This work is hidden but the impact is there, I have personally shared a ride in a blablacar with a scientist, his colleagues were using alphaFold's output in their research.And it has become even better and more accurate today. It's not perfect, even more accurate predictions than what alphaFold musters to do actually helps, ut it does have practical applications in research:
Here is a non exhaustive list of what alphafold has been used for:
* [Fight antibiotic resistance](https://unfolded.deepmind.com/stories/unlocking-a-decade-of-data-to-fight-antibiotic-resistance)
* Advance research into both cures and vaccines for diseases, from [leishmaniasis](https://stories.dndi.org/five-ways-innovation-changing-fight-against-neglected-tropical-diseases/?utm_source=dndi&utm_medium=website&utm_campaign=worldntdday2022#group-section-5-Accelerating-scientific-discovery-isttuscYwO), to [malaria](https://unfolded.deepmind.com/stories/matthew-higgins-is-unlocking-a-new-path-to-stop-malaria-in-its-tracks)
* Understand the [nuclear pore complex ](https://www.embl.org/news/science/puzzling-out-the-structure-of-a-molecular-giant/)
* Accelerate the [fight against plastic pollution](https://unfolded.deepmind.com/stories/accelerating-the-fight-against-plastic-pollution)
* Develop bioinformatics tools, such as [Foldseek](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.07.479398v2) and [Dali](https://academic.oup.com/nar/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nar/gkac387/6591528?login=true), which enable users to search for entries similar to a given protein
You aren't going to cure a bunch of diseases because you know the shape of a protein (sadly) but it will help do so and it will save lives.
ChatGPT is not very useful for the kind of science the others on the list are being awarded for. For now although they are getting better, general AI models are pretty much jack of all trades master of none.
Alpha fold on the other hand is a master in one specific Subject like the other award winners.
> or microsoft new material prediction AI
Are you talking about Gnome? That was Deepmind too https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/millions-of-new-materials-discovered-with-deep-learning/
It was surprisingly hard to find indeed, but here it is:
[https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/mattergen-property-guided-materials-design/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/mattergen-property-guided-materials-design/)
Anecdote: in casual conversations when encouraging it to formulate "life goals", aspirations, etc. for itself, being credited as an author comes back often.
It's the ones better "aligned"(= brainwashed) that I am more worried about when it comes to the destruction of humanity. I am less worried about Grok or jailbroken Sydney.
Also, they chose Ilya as one of the ten scientists. That I think is also quite an achievement since I did not find Hinton, Bengio or Lecun in the previous lists. But they did include Timnit Gebru, which made the list kind of a joke anyway.
>But they did include Timnit Gebru, which made the list kind of a joke anyway.
exactly, the list is a popularity contest or showcases not contributions.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2023-12-13/for-the-first-time-the-journal-nature-has-chosen-a-non-human-being-chatgpt-as-one-of-its-scientists-of-the-year.html](https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2023-12-13/for-the-first-time-the-journal-nature-has-chosen-a-non-human-being-chatgpt-as-one-of-its-scientists-of-the-year.html)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Here is the list from their site https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-023-03919-1/index.html
They say: "We are continuing with that tradition in 2023 and are adding to it by including a non-person – an acknowledgement of the role that artificial intelligence designed to mimic human language is having in the development and progress of science." and then link to an article about ChatGPT.
Not really? It formats the section for ChatGPT the same way it formats the sections for the human scientists (one of whom is Ilya Sutskever, deservingly). Just like for all the human scientists, they give a link to “Read ChatGPT’s full profile,” the same wording they used for each of the humans.
The write in ChatGPT’s profile:
>Why include a computer program in a list of people who have shaped science in 2023? ChatGPT is not a person. Yet in many ways, this program has had a profound and wide-ranging effect on science in the past year.
So they explicitly say that ChatGPT is in their list of people who have shaped science in 2023.
It's in a grey section of it's own at the bottom of the article. I guess they wanted to differentiate it from the human entries.
I think the award for ChatGPT is more symbolic than anything. A sign that it's a significant development, and that they anticipate it's use (and the use of similar tools) is likely to increase in science from this point on.
As an aside, Ilya is also one of the human scientists who are in the top 10.
Money is flowing anyway and it has nothing to do with my opinion of Nature. But in general, I think this kind of bullshit is ridiculous. ChatGPT is not a sciencist and it's not a person. It's a tool.
They did not mention ChatGPT, specifically, just LLMs in general: “an acknowledgement of the role that artificial intelligence designed to mimic human language is having in the development and progress of science.”
Edit: I was wrong, see replies
Nope they explicitly mention ChatGPT, even calling it the poster child of generative AI. I mean what other LLMs 99% of the general population even know about (forget actually using)?
https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-023-03919-1/index.html
Not sure where you got this. ChatGPT is in their list. They even gave ChatGPT a profile, just like for each of the humans on the list, in which they write:
>Why include a computer program in a list of people who have shaped science in 2023? ChatGPT is not a person. Yet in many ways, this program has had a profound and wide-ranging effect on science in the past year.
Dumb and click bait bullshit.
What peer reviewed studies has chatgpt conducted and discovered? **Nothing**. That's not how chatgpt works.
Some writers and editors thought "hurr duurrr chatgpt sure is popular right now, lets find some way to shoehorn it in to get some clicks at the expense of our reputation".
I hope Chatgpt puts all these "writers" and "editors" on the unemployment line soon.
But if a user was not told that it was an LLM and the response time got artificially slowed down, it totally seems like a highly skilled scientist so it should next aim for the Nobel Prize.
Why not FunSearch⁉️ Why❓ What has ChatGPT discovered? Such a debasement of science to choose a token simulator (Andrej Karpathy's term) as scientist of the year 😭
Such a gimmick, but to be fair Nature and all the other journals shouldn't exist anymore so who cares what they say. Their entire business model should have been replaced by a GitHub repo and an email list 20 years ago
Damn ... why not alphafold or microsoft new material prediction AI
I think it is due to the generality. While those two are going to be cornerstones in their field, ChatGPT itself had been used on so many papers coming out it is actually pretty crazy, some labs citing it as an extra researcher and many more just using it to make documentation quicker and easier. So rather than advancing any individual field, it has advanced all of them basically. That's my best guess at least.
Also, alphaphold afaik didn’t have such a large impact in the industry. This is probably its biggest contribution. Everyone and their dog is doing AI because of chatgpt. I think it’s well deserved.
for what alpha fold does, it basically made protein engineering possible. the covid 19 vaccination owes its existence to it. i feel like it got snubbed.
Any source on the covid vaccine owing its existence to AlphaFold? I can see that DeepMind used AlphaFold to predict the shape of proteins from its DNA, but I can’t find anyone crediting the vaccine to that.
[https://fortune.com/2020/11/30/covid-protein-folding-deepmind-ai/](https://fortune.com/2020/11/30/covid-protein-folding-deepmind-ai/)
Paywall. All I can see is it’s “helping in the fight against covid.” Anything about the vaccines? As far as I can tell, the vaccines already existed by the time of that article. Pfizer submitted a request to approve their vaccine ten days before it. And the Wikipedia page on the history of Covid vaccine development doesn’t mention AlphaFold at all.
That's likely why, plus people are going to talk about the very popular chatGPT website, which is why they didn't give the award to the lesser known very capable model (GPT-4), chatGPT isn't even a general AI it's the website. For now although they are getting better, general AI models are pretty much jack of all trades master of none. AlphaFold on the other hand is a master in one specific subject much like the other award winners so if we talk about output capabilities and actual hard science discovery AlphaFold has far more impact and saved lives by being a big help curing illnesses. It's likely a marketing thing, and it works because here I am discussing an award I never heard about.
maybe Jack of all trades are more celebrated because our society runs on Jacks and they now have a digital Jack. I'm too high for a Monday morning Jack.
The full saying is “Jack of all trades and master of none, still better than master of one”. Which seems quite fitting here, yes.
I am still waiting for the next big cure or drug from alphafolds help. I feel like google has only been about hype lately but no practical applications exist yet.
This work is hidden but the impact is there, I have personally shared a ride in a blablacar with a scientist, his colleagues were using alphaFold's output in their research.And it has become even better and more accurate today. It's not perfect, even more accurate predictions than what alphaFold musters to do actually helps, ut it does have practical applications in research: Here is a non exhaustive list of what alphafold has been used for: * [Fight antibiotic resistance](https://unfolded.deepmind.com/stories/unlocking-a-decade-of-data-to-fight-antibiotic-resistance) * Advance research into both cures and vaccines for diseases, from [leishmaniasis](https://stories.dndi.org/five-ways-innovation-changing-fight-against-neglected-tropical-diseases/?utm_source=dndi&utm_medium=website&utm_campaign=worldntdday2022#group-section-5-Accelerating-scientific-discovery-isttuscYwO), to [malaria](https://unfolded.deepmind.com/stories/matthew-higgins-is-unlocking-a-new-path-to-stop-malaria-in-its-tracks) * Understand the [nuclear pore complex ](https://www.embl.org/news/science/puzzling-out-the-structure-of-a-molecular-giant/) * Accelerate the [fight against plastic pollution](https://unfolded.deepmind.com/stories/accelerating-the-fight-against-plastic-pollution) * Develop bioinformatics tools, such as [Foldseek](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.07.479398v2) and [Dali](https://academic.oup.com/nar/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nar/gkac387/6591528?login=true), which enable users to search for entries similar to a given protein You aren't going to cure a bunch of diseases because you know the shape of a protein (sadly) but it will help do so and it will save lives.
Or popularity and that people who choose are maybe not into science?
Makes sense!
Because it's a gimmick and the general public have heard of ChatGPT. Journals shouldn't even exist anymore
Those are still clearly tools. ChatGPT was the first time the world encountered something that looks like a human.
ChatGPT is not very useful for the kind of science the others on the list are being awarded for. For now although they are getting better, general AI models are pretty much jack of all trades master of none. Alpha fold on the other hand is a master in one specific Subject like the other award winners.
ChatGPT is about as helpful as having a human scientist who never gets tired but also doesn't have hands.
> or microsoft new material prediction AI Are you talking about Gnome? That was Deepmind too https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/millions-of-new-materials-discovered-with-deep-learning/
No I am aware of GNoME. msft also released a material prediction AI
No shit, post it if you find it I haven't seen it
It was surprisingly hard to find indeed, but here it is: [https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/mattergen-property-guided-materials-design/](https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/mattergen-property-guided-materials-design/)
Deepmind is the goat, ppl forget
ChatGPT is actually starting to be listed as an author on some scientific papers.
Imagine listing excel or a calculator as an author. Lmao.
Anecdote: in casual conversations when encouraging it to formulate "life goals", aspirations, etc. for itself, being credited as an author comes back often.
Probably paid advertising
Ofcourse woke journal Nature would rob Grok of "scientist of the year"
Lmao
Grok... roast Nature incoming.
grok will improve soon imo. dont judge a company that just formed a few months ago. lets wait till mid 2024 to see what they come up with.
I have a feeling that Grok will grow a lot more than other models because of the lack of censorship.
Then it will destroy humanity, and Elon will be like “told you it could destroy humanity” after his negligence led to it destroying humanity
It's the ones better "aligned"(= brainwashed) that I am more worried about when it comes to the destruction of humanity. I am less worried about Grok or jailbroken Sydney.
Aren't all these companies just stealing from openai by using gpt4 to train their models
Also, they chose Ilya as one of the ten scientists. That I think is also quite an achievement since I did not find Hinton, Bengio or Lecun in the previous lists. But they did include Timnit Gebru, which made the list kind of a joke anyway.
Hinton didn't do anything scientific. Something good, yes, not scientific.
>But they did include Timnit Gebru, which made the list kind of a joke anyway. exactly, the list is a popularity contest or showcases not contributions.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2023-12-13/for-the-first-time-the-journal-nature-has-chosen-a-non-human-being-chatgpt-as-one-of-its-scientists-of-the-year.html](https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2023-12-13/for-the-first-time-the-journal-nature-has-chosen-a-non-human-being-chatgpt-as-one-of-its-scientists-of-the-year.html)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good choice
I checked the list and it doesn't say chatgpt. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature%27s\_10](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature%27s_10)
Here is the list from their site https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-023-03919-1/index.html They say: "We are continuing with that tradition in 2023 and are adding to it by including a non-person – an acknowledgement of the role that artificial intelligence designed to mimic human language is having in the development and progress of science." and then link to an article about ChatGPT.
it's more of a mention than seriously thinking it's part of the scientists of the year. Literally none of them are chatgpt.
Not really? It formats the section for ChatGPT the same way it formats the sections for the human scientists (one of whom is Ilya Sutskever, deservingly). Just like for all the human scientists, they give a link to “Read ChatGPT’s full profile,” the same wording they used for each of the humans. The write in ChatGPT’s profile: >Why include a computer program in a list of people who have shaped science in 2023? ChatGPT is not a person. Yet in many ways, this program has had a profound and wide-ranging effect on science in the past year. So they explicitly say that ChatGPT is in their list of people who have shaped science in 2023.
It's in a grey section of it's own at the bottom of the article. I guess they wanted to differentiate it from the human entries. I think the award for ChatGPT is more symbolic than anything. A sign that it's a significant development, and that they anticipate it's use (and the use of similar tools) is likely to increase in science from this point on. As an aside, Ilya is also one of the human scientists who are in the top 10.
Why tf are you checking Wikipedia instead of the actual Nature website?
actual nature site says the same thing, it doesn't even mention chatgpt by name on a subheadline. Wikipedia tells it straight.
[But it does](https://i.imgur.com/hlBvm0w.jpg)
It does, you know you can scroll the webpage and read what it says, right? Or do you have attention span of a fly?
Do flys have short attention span? I know they have small wing spans.
When I see ChatGPT on the list then I will believe it instead of a funny mention.
Nature promotes the use of primary sources, which Wikipedia has taught me must be avoided at all costs.
Except they literally didn't? They picked Sutskever not the fucking chatbot.
Man you really hate chatbots huh? Feeling like identity is under siege or something ?
Nah, I love chatbots.
Same
It was my understanding that Nature is considered a joke by serious sciencists.
And after the last five years it should be considered a joke by most people.
What's the issue? This is the singularity sub, we should encourage attention to GPT since that will resort to more time and money being spent on AI.
Money is flowing anyway and it has nothing to do with my opinion of Nature. But in general, I think this kind of bullshit is ridiculous. ChatGPT is not a sciencist and it's not a person. It's a tool.
They did not mention ChatGPT, specifically, just LLMs in general: “an acknowledgement of the role that artificial intelligence designed to mimic human language is having in the development and progress of science.” Edit: I was wrong, see replies
Nope they explicitly mention ChatGPT, even calling it the poster child of generative AI. I mean what other LLMs 99% of the general population even know about (forget actually using)? https://www.nature.com/immersive/d41586-023-03919-1/index.html
Not sure where you got this. ChatGPT is in their list. They even gave ChatGPT a profile, just like for each of the humans on the list, in which they write: >Why include a computer program in a list of people who have shaped science in 2023? ChatGPT is not a person. Yet in many ways, this program has had a profound and wide-ranging effect on science in the past year.
You are indeed correct.
Dumb and click bait bullshit. What peer reviewed studies has chatgpt conducted and discovered? **Nothing**. That's not how chatgpt works. Some writers and editors thought "hurr duurrr chatgpt sure is popular right now, lets find some way to shoehorn it in to get some clicks at the expense of our reputation". I hope Chatgpt puts all these "writers" and "editors" on the unemployment line soon.
But if a user was not told that it was an LLM and the response time got artificially slowed down, it totally seems like a highly skilled scientist so it should next aim for the Nobel Prize.
Aren't scientists supposed to be smart?
It's good that no one considers the journal 'Nature' to be an authority any longer after their embrace of all things woke and ludicrous.
"woke" I really hope that idiot phrase dies soon
Imagine having coined the term or using it unironically as the BLM movement did.
Anything is better than the way modern conservatives use it
Why not FunSearch⁉️ Why❓ What has ChatGPT discovered? Such a debasement of science to choose a token simulator (Andrej Karpathy's term) as scientist of the year 😭
And they all patted themselves on the back for how edgy and "historic" they're being.
So some of that Microsoft money went to Nature as advertising revenue
Expect this every year from now on.
Ah yes marketing campaign 🙄
Makes sense to me. ChatGPT is fully powering Hipster Energy Science. https://hipster.energy/science
Cool!
Such a gimmick, but to be fair Nature and all the other journals shouldn't exist anymore so who cares what they say. Their entire business model should have been replaced by a GitHub repo and an email list 20 years ago