Comment What is the performance? (Score 2) 49
In a Claude Science demo, Oliver Vince, PhD, co-founder at Basecamp, uploaded a sample patient microbiology report. When given a simple natural language prompt, the platform designed peptides, predicted their efficacy, and provided a shortlist of candidates most likely to succeed in experiments in minutes.
This is a meaningless statement. I too can create a tool to generate a list of peptide candidates with minimal effort. It may even be somewhat useful if it based peptide sequences on homology searches or some other relevant biology instead of random string generation. This has been an active area of research for than 20 years. In order for this to be newsworthy. Claude has to be better than what already exists. How many novel candidates does it generate that actually have useful antibiotic properties? Do I have to screen through a list of 100 candidates to find one that actually works? If so, that’s not much better than a BLAST search and it costs a lot more. What is the strain selectivity of the new antibiotic? Is it broad or narrow spectrum? How easy is it to manufacture? Are there any toxic side effects?
Assuming a new antibiotic is actually what’s needed, instead of using one of the many beta-lactams or combination therapies that already exist, generating the candidate is the first and easiest step of a long and expensive process to developing a novel drug.