Nature/Science publishing (was Re: A Plea To John K! )

Arne Elofsson arne at
Sun May 7 17:16:40 EST 1995

I do not think Nature/Science would be to scared about publishing
something that turns out to be wrong, it would not be the first time.
(Our lab can never forget Rubisco ): )

I do neither think it is that hard to make a "proof" that you have 
solved the protein folding problem. Standard cross-validation and
accurate prediction of some 10 (or 100) different structures would
satisfy me. The problem is that almost everything published in this
area only shows one (or a few) examples, (and in some cases people
even change their potential functions between different examples).
This only proves that if you spend enough time playinh around with 
something you can get it to work.

Besides even if you only predicted five structures to an accuracy of
1.0 A I am pretty sure that Nature/Science would (and should) publish it.
They have published much worse papers than that in this field.


               From: Arne Elofsson
         Email: arne at   			

More information about the Proteins mailing list