Funny to see that they did not include Fable 5 in their GeneBench and LifeSciBench comparisons because "it does not answer advanced biology questions and refuses the majority of questions in this eval".
The microbubbles in scuba diving that cause the bends are the ones trapped in joint space fluid. That fluid doesn't circulate at a useful rate, so unfortunately you can't really "burst them somewhere else" =(
This is a great puzzle game. I think it actually teaches the concept of "piece coordination" in chess very well.
One suggestion is to have all enemy pieces move simultaneously. I expected that the losing condition is that I am threatened and there are no unthreatened squares to move (checkmate).
However, since the opponents move one-at-a-time, I found that even if I moved to a safe square, sometimes I could be both threatened and captured in the same move! Which is somewhat different from normal chess, since now you have to consider the possible orders in which the opponents move. So even moving to unthreatened squares could be a game over.
In real-life, before the election there is a margin of error on the support of a bloc.
If you interpret a "tie" in this game as "either party could win within the margin of error", then it becomes a lot closer to solving the problem that gerrymandering algorithms try to solve in real life!
The game stores and allows you to see the RNG seed that controls the run's events and layout. The developers want players to be able to share seeds that produce interesting runs.
That requirement is what made this problem difficult for the devs to solve.
The only reason I think biotech companies are not yet raising hell (and invoking the False Claims Act) is that Thermo Fisher's antibodies are already known to be notoriously bad, and everyone serious seems to have to validate everything themselves.
I'd treat this about the same as datasheets for mechanical or electrical parts.
When I buy an electronic component as a regular consumer I expect the datasheet "typical" values to be accurate 90% of the time. I can imagine larger industrial customers would really raise a stink if it's worse than that. However, any critical components in my circuit must be verified and "binned", and that's on me.
Be rest assured Ben’s previous job was in the medial imaging industry. While he worked on MRI machines rather than ionizing radiation, I think he’s very well aware of the dangers of X rays and has many projects dealing with ionizing radiation. There’s a lot of bad safety science YouTubers, Ben isn’t one of them :)
Funny thing: it’s actually rare to get radiation damage to human hands and feet since there’s not too much growing tissue there!
I’m not a mathematician, so could someone explain the difference in usage between Lean and Coq?
On a surface level my understanding is that both are computer augmented ways to formalize mathematics. Why use one over the other? Why was Lean developed when Coq already existed?
Presumably they want to eventually put a human inside it, in which case having a humanoid robot to work off of wouldn't change the aero calculations and designs too much. The article talks about specific design considerations to avoid the exhaust gases.
Both OA and RA involve some inflammation (-itis means inflammation). RA is more T cell driven inflammation (and clinically visible) while OA is more macrophage driven. Mechanical wearing still makes the joint unhappy at the cellular level- you just don’t see it big and red as a symptom like in RA.
Glad to see this! We need better treatments for OA short of a joint replacement.
I'm not too surprised that this treatment works. It's essentially like localized steroids to just the joint- killing off the immune cells causing inflammation.
Good features is that it's localized (so no systemic immunosuppression) and the risk of cancer is low since you rarely get radiation-induced cancer in joints because there's not enough dividing cells. Unfortunately heading to radiotherapy is a logistical challenge, but there are enough people suffering from OA that would happily do this to get relief.
I'm not too impressed with this article since it doesn't really give a definition for computing, just picks a few similarities between what we see as computing (in the practical sense) and what cells do.
It's a shame because there *has* been a lot of deep work done on what kind of computer life is.
People often use the Chomsky Hierarchy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chomsky_hierarchy) to define the different types of computer vs automata. Importantly, a classical Turing machine is Type-0 on the Chomsky Hierarchy. Depending on what parts you include from a biological system, you could argue it's anywhere from Type-0 to Type-4.
Interestingly, the PhD thesis of well-known geneticist Aviv Regev was to show that certain combinations of enzymes with chemical concentration states are enough to emulate pi-calculus, and therefore are Turing machines!
https://psb.stanford.edu/psb-online/proceedings/psb01/regev....
While I think most of the examples are incredible...
...the technical graphics (especially text) is generally wrong. Case 16 is an annotated heart and the anatomy is nonsensical. Case 28 with the tallest buildings has the decent images, but has the wrong names, locations, and years.
Winner by default!