Raw LLM Responses

A Biochemist/geneticist here. AI is not going to replace structural biologists anytime soon (I'm not a structural biologist). I have personally benefited greatly from the AI tool "AlphaFold" that got half of the mentioned noble prize. That being said, structural biologists now are firstly using that tool as what it is "a tool". Secondly they are focused on new directions the AI cannot work on yet (larger protien complexes and understanding the dynamic nature of protien structure). One thing people fail to remember, is that AI models are simply mathematical models built on the data they were fed with, AI will never be creative. AlphaFold (the AI that its builders were awarded the noble prize) was trained on + 19,000 protien structure each of which took a group of structural biologists 1-3 years to solve. So first and for most the credit of AlphaFold goes to the structural biologists around the world throughout the last few decades who built this dataset. Secondly the dataset has inherent biases (due to technical challenges) that limit what AI can do with the dataset. Now due to advances in technologies (including electron microscopy) structural biologists can avoid some of these technical constraints, and they can work on solving structures that were not possible before, structures that AI can not solve, because AI was trained in a dataset that lack similar structures. .... Also one last thing, the scientific enterprise is 100% a creative enterprise. AI would never replace scientists. AI is only a tool that allows scientists to achieve more. The real danger the scientists face is not AI, but decrease in scientific funding.