Talk:Demis Hassabis

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 07:57, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Accuracy of #2 U14 Claim

The claim that Hassabis was #2 U14 seems questionable. Refer to the relevant FIDE rating lists on olimpbase: , . As well, see his rating profile on olimpbase: . He was among the leading U14 players in 1990, no question, but not #2; more like #5 in Jan 1990, when excluding Borislav Benev (whose DOB came to light in time for the Jul 1990 list). A claim that he was #2 U14 in England at that time, behind Jonathan Parker, would be more accurate. Also note that he seems to have no presence on FIDE rating lists pre-dating 1990, while Judit Polgar jumped from 2365 to 2555 between the Jul 1988 and Jan 1989 lists. Hassabis would have been U12 when she was 2365. 65.92.40.237 (talk) 04:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

References

Theme Park Golden Joystick Award

The article claims that Theme Park won a Golden Joystick Award. This claim is dubious, as the page Golden Joystick Awards does not list Theme Park. Thus, I am removing mention of the Golden Joystick Award. Thatsme314 (talk) 05:45, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

“simulation sandbox games”

It says “….inspired a whole genre of simulation sandbox games”. Maybe I’m thick and I’m the only one who doesn’t know what that means, but should it not have a link to explain what sandbox games means? ChatGPT tells me Minecraft is an example of a Sandbox game, could we not at least have “eg Minecraft” and a link to that? I think most people would understand Minecraft at least. Rustygecko (talk) 22:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I didn't know either. Sure, you can add a link to "sandbox game". You can also add a link from "simulation" to "simulation video game" if you want. Alenoach (talk) 01:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Is he chemist ?

I mean probably something is missing in the article, I would not really assume that someone who has no Phd in chemistry field could get a Nobel prize in chemistry. 91.82.0.224 (talk) 15:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

He isn't, which has caused a fair bit of controversy in the chemistry community. This doesn't really influence the article though. Jantokiilo (talk) 21:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

No, he is not, and his work was an AI program development, it has nothing to do with chemistry. One might argue this is an application of AI to chemistry, but again, protein structure prediction is not chemistry. The Nobel Prize press release [1] even say this: With its help, they have been able to predict the structure of virtually all the 200 million proteins that researchers have identified. What? All proteins? The journalist does not know what he is talking about. And even "200 million" is a misinformation. A lot of models in the AlphaFold database have low reliability scores or unfolded and should be discarded [2]. Even more create obligatory oligomers in vivo, like potassium channels, and their monomeric models in the database are not very useful. My very best wishes (talk) 16:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

The precision of AF models is also a big concern. As an exercise, one can compare this model in AF database with the model of the same protein generated by AlphaFold-3 server (or AF-2 multimer). Something like TM/US-align shows that only ~600 residues of ~1100 in the models generated by different versions of AlphaFold can be superimposed, and even that partial superposition has an rmsd as large as >6A. But again, this protein does not exist alone (as presented in AF database), but a part of a very big multi-protein complex. My very best wishes (talk) 16:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)