No part of this article involves AI making independent discoveries. The researchers used ML to map muscle contractions to wing motion.
It's interesting, but a far stretch from what OP wrote for the title.
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
5 points (55.8% liked)
Futurology
1808 readers
184 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They also built a robotic insect wing to test it, so it seems robotics should get at least as much “credit” as AI. You know, inasmuch as it makes any sense to “credit” a tool used by people for a discovery.
Where's the love for massive datasets in painfully slow excel workbooks?
And researchers have been ml to analyze data for decades now. It's not a remotely new thing and I think they're purposefully being vague to try and trick people into thinking an LLM did this because it's the big AI buzzword right now.
Yep. This is yet more “AI will cure cancer” hype
No part of this article involves AI making independent discoveries.
My reading of this is the opposite.
Although there were competing hypothesis, nobody knew how insect wing hinge mechanisms worked. Now they do, and the fundamental insight was provided via AI.
I think this is both a fundamental discovery, and one we can attribute to the AI, more than the humans involved.
The “insight” provided is useless theory without testing or humans checking it over, so why not credit robotics with this discovery instead of/in addition to AI if you’re hellbent on removing people from the process?
Yeah, don't anthropomorphize computers, they hate that.
Ah so it looks like “independent ai discoveries” in research might be the new “no cgi/special effects” in films, like just acknowledge all the people who worked day and night to make the end result, it doesn’t detract from the final result if it was a group effort.
I’m thinking OP clearly didn’t read/understand the article or it’s deliberately sensationalising the paper, yet weirdly simultaneously denigrating it as basic science.