Pissed me off since day one that got by with that "solving" shit. Not to downplay what they did, but it had little to do with the problem as it's been understood to mean.

And to be clear I do think it was nobel worthy.

▲

HarHarVeryFunny a day ago | parent | next [-]

Yes, they have a probabilistic model, not an analytical solution.

OTOH I don't think they made up the "solved" label - the CASP benchmark had always considered reaching the AlphaFold level of predictive accuracy (within error tolerance of our ability to experimentally verify via X-ray crystallography etc) as "solving" the problem.

	▲	chermi an hour ago \| parent [-]
		CASP is explicitly structure prediction. That's not the folding problem.

▲

moralestapia a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I do not think it was Nobel worthy for Hassam et. al.

David Baker is the GOAT of that field, it should have been awarded to him only.

▲

chermi a day ago | parent [-]

I know baker's work quite well, no it shouldn't have

▲

moralestapia a day ago | parent [-]

Can you name others that deserved it more?

	▲	chermi an hour ago \| parent [-]
		For what? I thought your trying to argue only baker deserved solo compared to what happened? If you're asking about solving the actual folding problem? Probably Dill, Onuchic, Wolynes, maybe Sosnick would be top of my list off the top of my head. Anfinsen if he was alive.