Combining inductive logic programming, active learning and robotics to discover the function of genes

The paper is addressed to AI workers with an interest in biomolecular genetics and also to biomolecular geneticists interested in what AI tools may do for them. The authors are engaged in a collaborative enterprise aimed at partially automating some aspects of scientific work. These aspects include the processes of forming hypotheses, devising trials to discriminate between these competing hypotheses, physically performing these trials and then using the results of these trials to converge upon an accurate hypothesis. As a potential component of the reasoning carried out by an "artificial scientist" this paper describes ASE-Progol, an Active Learning system which uses Inductive Logic Programming to construct hypothesised first-order theories and uses a CART-like algorithm to select trials for eliminating ILP derived hypotheses. In simulated yeast growth tests ASE-Progol was used to rediscover how genes participate in the aromatic amino acid pathway of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The cost of the chemicals consumed in converging upon a hypothesis with an accuracy of around 88% was reduced by five orders of magnitude when trials were selected by ASE-Progol rather than being sampled at random. While the naive strategy of always choosing the cheapest trial from the set of candidate trials led to lower cumulative costs than ASE-Progol, both the naive strategy and the random strategy took significantly longer to converge upon a final hypothesis than ASE-Progol. For example to reach an accuracy of 80%, ASE-Progol required 4 days while random sampling required 6 days and the naive strategy required 10 days

The Capabilities of Chaos and Complexity

To what degree could chaos and complexity have organized a Peptide or RNA World of crude yet necessarily integrated protometabolism? How far could such protolife evolve in the absence of a heritable linear digital symbol system that could mutate, instruct, regulate, optimize and maintain metabolic homeostasis? To address these questions, chaos, complexity, self-ordered states, and organization must all be carefully defined and distinguished. In addition their cause-and-effect relationships and mechanisms of action must be delineated. Are there any formal (non physical, abstract, conceptual, algorithmic) components to chaos, complexity, self-ordering and organization, or are they entirely physicodynamic (physical, mass/energy interaction alone)? Chaos and complexity can produce some fascinating self-ordered phenomena. But can spontaneous chaos and complexity steer events and processes toward pragmatic benefit, select function over non function, optimize algorithms, integrate circuits, produce computational halting, organize processes into formal systems, control and regulate existing systems toward greater efficiency? The question is pursued of whether there might be some yet-to-be discovered new law of biology that will elucidate the derivation of prescriptive information and control. “System” will be rigorously defined. Can a low-informational rapid succession of Prigogine’s dissipative structures self-order into bona fide organization