Dear Alberto, Pedro and All,

I could not follow this discussion in the past 3 weeks since I was engaged
in other activities, but again ß with respect to my other question
regarding the value of the FIS exchange as a forum and virtual currency,
please find below two articles (December 2017) that could inspire your
imagination:


https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-08589-4

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2017/
581948/EPRS_IDA(2017)581948_EN.pdf


I believe that data-driven research is just a fashion and that new
commercial trends like cryptocurrency technology will be driven by
regulation to a different direction, namely the one that is the discussed
in the articles above. Indeed, the whole idea is not new at all. I actually
found myself as the inventor of a precursor solution to blockchain back in
1999. And this idea alone stems from analogies I have driven from active
networks and attributed graph grammars back in the 1980ies..., long before
there was an Internet Protocol at all. So, honestly, I do not believe that
data will be the top of the knowledge pyramid, and to have data we create
the models and invent theories also by analogy and intuition, the methods
that folks like Poincare and Einstein were working with pen and paper on.
Computers and AI/ML will remain just tools, but they will never become wise
as people or even animals. By the way, we are planning another special
issue on Integral Biomathics in 2019 in the footsteps of the previous ones
in 2013, 2015 and 2017 --

2017 JPBMB Focused Issue on Integral Biomathics: The Necessary Conjunction
of Western and Eastern Thought Traditions for Exploring the Nature of Mind
and Life <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00796107/131>  *

* free promotional access to all focused issue articles until June 20th,
2018
and devoted to animal and natural intelligence. I just wish to inform you
earlier about this. An official call will be distributed in this forum
later this year.

I wish you a Happy Easter!

All the best.

Plamen


____________________________________________________________


On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 11:46 PM, Alberto J. Schuhmacher <
ajime...@iisaragon.es> wrote:

> Dear Plamen, Pedro and Collegues,
>
> I am enjoying a lot this forum.
>
> I absolutely foresee Scientific Blockchain as a continuously growing list
> of scientific records and contributions (blocks) linked and secured using
> cryptography, somehow a kind of peer reviewed process. Would you be able to
> publish it in a journal based on their scientific value?
>
> Dataist-machines won chess players but still are learning Science, they
> are completing their “Bachelor”. Their use for biomedical applications is
> growing everyday. For example, their accuracy for in biomedical imaging
> diagnosis will be similar to humans soon. For other applications, such as
> genetic predisposition and health prediction/prognosis the conversion to a
> fanatic dataism may abuse of “predictivity” and forget the relevance of the
> organism-environment. It will take some time for machines to complete their
> “Philosophical Doctorate”. Technology could be ready soon for data driven
> hypothesis but our knowledge of fundamental aspects of life are still weak.
> All the best,
> AJ
>
>
>
> El 10-03-2018 21:05, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ escribió:
>
> Dear Plamen and Colleagues,
>
> If it can be feasible, I would very much welcome what you propose. Yes, it
> would be great developing a general articulation amongst all our exchanges.
> Roughly, I feel that a fundamental nucleous of neatly conceptualized
> information is still evading us, but outside that nucleous, and somehow
> emanating from it, there are different branches and sub-branches in quite
> different elaboration degrees and massively crisscrossing and intermingling
> their contents. A six-pointed star, for instance, radiating from its inner
> fusion the computational, physical, biological, neuronal, social, and
> economic. The six big branches in perfect periferic colussion and
> confusion. Could a blockchain, along its full develpment in time, represent
> a fundamental cartography of the originating fusion nucleous?
>
> About dataism enchantment, well, too many times we have been said "look,
> finally this is the great, definitive scientific approach"--behaviorism,
> artificial intelleigence, artifficial catastrophe & complexity theory, and
> so on. Let us wait and see. Welcome in the extent to which it really
> responds to unanswered questions. And let us be aware of the technocratic
> lore it seems to drag.
>
> This was my second cent for the week.
>
> best--Pedro
>
>
>
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 10:30:01 +0100 "Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov" wrote:
>
> These are wise words, Pedro.
> What I was meaning with my previous posting on FIS was that there is a
> foundational emerging technology - blockchain - that could give us,
> scientists organized in fora like FIS, IB, IS4IS etc. to become a valuable
> currency of the future. I am speaking not about finances or resources like
> petrol, gold, water, etc. What we are doing all the time with the exchange
> of ideas online are in fact transactions, often with huge potential. Why do
> not try to elevate them to the level that they deserve?
>
>
>
>
> I am not sure if the FIS forum members can follow me. Can you?
>
>
>
>
>
> All the best.
>
>
>
> Plamen
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 6:15 PM, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ <
> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es <https://mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>>
> wrote:
>
>
> head>
>
> Dear Alberto,
>
>
>
> Many thanks for the kickoff text. I will try to produce a couple of direct
> comments.
>
> You have reminded me of the early 70's, when I first approached science. A
> few computers had made their entrance in the university halls. During those
> years, and for some decades to come, a new mantra was to be ensconced:
> modeling, simulations. Thanks to computers, we had a fascinating new tool;
> a mathematical machine that was opening a new window to the world of
> science, equivalent to the telescope or the microscope in the scientific
> revolution. Now, almost 50 years later, after having provoked their own
> "information revolution" it seems that computers are more than a new tool.
> Dataism coupled with artificial intelligence, deep learning and the other
> techniques, have taken them to the command post, so that they are becoming
> direct "agents" of the scientific progress. And this is strange. They have
> already defeated masters of chess, of go and of other contests... are they
> going to defeat scientists too? Are they the "necessary" new lords of all
> quarters of techno-social complexity?
>
> You have depicted very cogently the new panorama of biomedical research,
> probably the mainstream, and I wonder whether this is the most interesting
> direction of advancement. In some sense, yes (or no!), as it is where big
> biomed companies, technological firms, and management establishment are
> pointing at. It is easy to complain that they are leaving aside the
> integrative vision, the meaningful synthesis that facilitate our
> comprehension, the "soul" in the machine... But we have been complaining in
> this way at least during the last two decades. So I really do not know.
> Fashions in science come and go: maybe all of this is a temporary illusion.
> Or a taste of the science of the future.
>
> In any case, it was nice hearing from a biomedical researcher in the wet
> lab.
>
> Best wishes--Pedro
>
>
>
> On Tue, 06 Mar 2018 21:23:01 +0100 "Alberto J. Schuhmacher" wrote:
> blockquote>
>
> Dear FIS Colleagues,
>
> I very much appreciate this opportunity to discuss with all of you.
>
> My mentors and science teachers taught me that Science had a method, rules
> and procedures that should be followed and pursued rigorously and with
> perseverance. The scientific research needed to be preceded by one or
> several hypotheses that should be subjected to validation or refutation
> through experiments designed and carried out in a laboratory. The Oxford
> Dictionaries Online defines the scientific method as "a method or procedure
> that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting
> in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the
> formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses". Experiments are a
> procedure designed to test hypotheses. Experiments are an important tool of
> the scientific method.
>
> In our case, molecular, personalized and precision medicine aims to
> anticipate the future development of diseases in a specific individual
> through molecular markers registered in the genome, variome, metagenome,
> metabolome or in any of the multiple "omes" that make up the present
> "omics" language of current Biology.
>
> The possibilities of applying these methodologies to the prevention and
> treatment of diseases have increased exponentially with the rise of a new
> religion, *Dataism*, whose foundations are inspired by scientific
> agnosticism, a way of thinking that seems classical but applied to
> research, it hides a profound revolution.
>
> Dataism arises from the recent human desire to collect and analyze data,
> data and more data, data of everything and data for everything-from the
> most banal social issues to those that decide the rhythms of life and
> death. "Information flow" is one the "supreme values" of this religion. The
> next floods will be of data as we can see just looking at any electronic
> window.
>
> The recent development of gigantic clinical and biological databases, and
> the concomitant progress of the computational capacity to handle and
> analyze these growing tides of information represent the best substrate for
> the progress of Dataism, which in turn has managed to provide a solid
> content material to an always-evanescent scientific agnosticism.
>
> On many occasions the establishment of correlative observations seems to
> be sufficient to infer about the relevance of a certain factor in the
> development of some human pathologies. It seems that we are heading towards
> a path in which research, instead of being driven by hypotheses confirmed
> experimentally, in the near future experimental hypotheses themselves will
> arise from the observation of data of previously performed experiments. Are
> we facing the end of the wet lab? Is Dataism the end of classical
> hypothesis-driven research (and the beginning of data-correlation-driven
> research)?
>
> Deep learning is based on learning data representations, as opposed to
> task-specific algorithms. Learning can be supervised, semi-supervised or
> unsupervised. Deep learning models are loosely related to information
> processing and communication patterns in a biological nervous system, such
> as neural coding that attempts to define a relationship between various
> stimuli and associated neuronal responses in the brain. Deep learning
> architectures such as deep neural networks, deep belief networks and
> recurrent neural networks have been applied to fields including computer
> vision, audio recognition, speech recognition, machine translation, natural
> language processing, social network filtering, bioinformatics and drug
> design, where they have produced results comparable to and in some cases
> superior to human experts. Will be data-correlation-driven research the new
> scientific method for unsupervised deep learning machines*? *Will
> computers became fundamentalists of *Dataism*?
>
> Best regards,
>
> AJ
> p>
>
> ---
> Alberto J. Schuhmacher, PhD.
> Head, Molecular Oncology Group
>
> Aragon Health Research Institute (IIS Aragón)
> Biomedical Research Center of Aragon (CIBA)
> Avda. Juan Bosco 13, 50009 Zaragoza (Spain) br> email:
> ajime...@iisaragon.es <https://mailto:ajime...@iisaragon.es>
> Phone: (+34) 637939901
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis@listas.unizar.es <https://mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es>
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis@listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis@listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to