IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nature/v427y2004i6971d10.1038_nature02236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Functional genomic hypothesis generation and experimentation by a robot scientist

Author

Listed:
  • Ross D. King

    (University of Wales)

  • Kenneth E. Whelan

    (University of Wales)

  • Ffion M. Jones

    (University of Wales)

  • Philip G. K. Reiser

    (University of Wales)

  • Christopher H. Bryant

    (The Robert Gordon University)

  • Stephen H. Muggleton

    (Imperial College)

  • Douglas B. Kell

    (UMIST)

  • Stephen G. Oliver

    (University of Manchester)

Abstract

The question of whether it is possible to automate the scientific process is of both great theoretical interest1,2 and increasing practical importance because, in many scientific areas, data are being generated much faster than they can be effectively analysed. We describe a physically implemented robotic system that applies techniques from artificial intelligence3,4,5,6,7,8 to carry out cycles of scientific experimentation. The system automatically originates hypotheses to explain observations, devises experiments to test these hypotheses, physically runs the experiments using a laboratory robot, interprets the results to falsify hypotheses inconsistent with the data, and then repeats the cycle. Here we apply the system to the determination of gene function using deletion mutants of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and auxotrophic growth experiments9. We built and tested a detailed logical model (involving genes, proteins and metabolites) of the aromatic amino acid synthesis pathway. In biological experiments that automatically reconstruct parts of this model, we show that an intelligent experiment selection strategy is competitive with human performance and significantly outperforms, with a cost decrease of 3-fold and 100-fold (respectively), both cheapest and random-experiment selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Ross D. King & Kenneth E. Whelan & Ffion M. Jones & Philip G. K. Reiser & Christopher H. Bryant & Stephen H. Muggleton & Douglas B. Kell & Stephen G. Oliver, 2004. "Functional genomic hypothesis generation and experimentation by a robot scientist," Nature, Nature, vol. 427(6971), pages 247-252, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:427:y:2004:i:6971:d:10.1038_nature02236
    DOI: 10.1038/nature02236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02236
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/nature02236?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Filippo Caschera & Gianluca Gazzola & Mark A Bedau & Carolina Bosch Moreno & Andrew Buchanan & James Cawse & Norman Packard & Martin M Hanczyc, 2010. "Automated Discovery of Novel Drug Formulations Using Predictive Iterated High Throughput Experimentation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, January.
    2. Pat Langley, 2019. "Scientific discovery, causal explanation, and process model induction," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 18(1), pages 43-56, June.
    3. Steve O'Hagan & Joshua Knowles & Douglas B Kell, 2012. "Exploiting Genomic Knowledge in Optimising Molecular Breeding Programmes: Algorithms from Evolutionary Computing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Erevelles, Sunil & Fukawa, Nobuyuki & Swayne, Linda, 2016. "Big Data consumer analytics and the transformation of marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 897-904.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:427:y:2004:i:6971:d:10.1038_nature02236. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.