Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

SCIgen should be close enough. Nobody really reads the whitepaper, anyways.

https://pdos.csail.mit.edu/archive/scigen/



sort by: page size:

Yeah, it felt like I was reading a SCIgen paper (http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/).

You can even write a scientific paper! Try this http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/ :)

That's always the best choice. Here's the paper itself: http://life-sciences.biu.ac.il/files/life-sciences/media/nna...

Searching on the title and appending 'filetype:pdf' for Google will often return a preprint or a copy from the authors' institutional website.

As for the content - wow, amazing work. I'm no biotechnologist but this seems like the gateway to an algorithmic approach to medicine. I wonder if it could be turned around to measure intra-cellular processes and send out signals by producing nonreactive chemical tracers...oh yes, it's addressed on page 4.

How long before we see biological botnets? Fascinating stuff.


Then you might also want to look at the "lambda papers":

http://library.readscheme.org/page1.html


I think this http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.2317/E-39.1 is the paper they mention, sadly though I can't find a version of it without the pay wall.

Thanks you - just discovered Scigen, these links are incredible


You can try sci-hub.cc if it's a scientific paper. Works most of time.

Here it is directly from MIT instead of the cancerous researchgate silo: http://web.mit.edu/afs.new/athena/course/2/2.75/resources/ra... (the 1998 version to be fair but the sole addition seems to be some infographic of the contents)

In the paper you find a link to a GitHub repo that should have all results being reproducible

If I may suggest: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/02/02/1014871108.abst...

I didn't even read the pop-sci article.


Or, hypothetically, an unscrupulous person could go to r/scholar, check the right sidebar for the link to libgen, and search by the DOI, which in this case is 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.12.013 ...but I'm sure nobody here would stoop to such things.

This one suggests so: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055...

Released as a partial report last year; a quick search didn't find if it had been completed yet or not.


While I appreciate biotech articles being on hacker news, this one is nothing I would expect on the frontage. Three of the authors have interest in the company that makes HD-map. This in combination with being linked as a preprint without peer review makes me look twice. The wording „complete protection“ does the rest.

Does anyone have information if this was ever peer reviewed?


That link also has a link to the authors and the paper preprint.

Another thing I like is NPI - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.06279.pdf. At the end, you can find NPI vs Seq2Seq charts


there was veeery recently a bio paper that got pushed to arXiv. I don't have the link, since I saw it float by on a facebook feed, but I will look for it.

> Unfortunately the actual paper at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096516.... is paywalled in the usual way.

Searching for

    "title of article" PDF 
is usually pretty effective (and is in this case ;-) ). In CS you'll find a PDF hosted on the author's home page like 99% percent of the time. Other fields are more spotty, but this approach is still pretty effective.
next

Legal | privacy