26-08-2025, 07:04 PM
Hi Ruby,
thank you very much for your kind words! I agree with you: AI must be introduced into research because it allows us to experiment with many more ideas in a shorter time. At the same time, however, I see it only as a tool — the researcher remains the one who leads the reasoning and makes the methodological decisions.
In my study the DNA analogy is meant as an example of a logical and schematic structure, not as a biological claim. My aim was to test whether the structural patterns I intuitively perceived in the manuscript could also be confirmed at a logical–mathematical level. And, so far, the results seem to support this impression.
But of course I fully agree with you: it will be very interesting to hear the opinions of specialists in mathematics and genetics on this approach.
Best regards,
Simona
thank you very much for your kind words! I agree with you: AI must be introduced into research because it allows us to experiment with many more ideas in a shorter time. At the same time, however, I see it only as a tool — the researcher remains the one who leads the reasoning and makes the methodological decisions.
In my study the DNA analogy is meant as an example of a logical and schematic structure, not as a biological claim. My aim was to test whether the structural patterns I intuitively perceived in the manuscript could also be confirmed at a logical–mathematical level. And, so far, the results seem to support this impression.
But of course I fully agree with you: it will be very interesting to hear the opinions of specialists in mathematics and genetics on this approach.
Best regards,
Simona
