View source for 2015.10.09 Spontaneous Chat

<p><em>( Link back to [[Dev Chat]] archive )</em></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>On Science, Preparing Players for Labs, Puzzle Progression, Educational Walkthrough Chats, Nando's Top Lab Designer Badge Idea, &amp; Dangles</strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Xnessax: collaborate&nbsp; [12:41 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Probably not well B. However, Minecraft is soley for entertainment. EteRNA has a primary focus on science, which is achieved through entertainment, not entertainment that happens to have some scientific value occasionally&nbsp; [12:42 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: This is why I'm saying&nbsp; [12:42 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: The EteRNA game needs to change&nbsp; [12:42 AM]</p>
<p>Xnessax: oh.&nbsp; [12:42 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Remove the pointless elements&nbsp; [12:42 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: And make the elements we want to be used work playing&nbsp; [12:42 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: we should include the study of reaction equilibrium constants?&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: right?&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: That's science&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>Xnessax: well see ya&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>Xnessax: good days guys&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>Xnessax: bye&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: seeya xness&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: That's not what I mean Brourd&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: I mean things with actual scientific value&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: The issue I have&nbsp; [12:43 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Is that chellenge puzzles, for the most part, help nobody&nbsp; [12:44 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: The vast majority is jsut grinding&nbsp; [12:44 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Not helping players or scientific endeavors&nbsp; [12:44 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Probably include a few calculus questions about the rate of reaction between the backbone of RNA and 1-methyl-7-nitroisatoic anhydride as well? [12:45 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Did you not read what I just said? :P [12:45 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: haha [12:45 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Well, these are all things that are important to the science, no? [12:45 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: That't NOT what I meant! [12:46 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon:&nbsp; a science study page isnt actualy a bad idea brourd [12:46 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Indeed, the rate of reaction between 1M7 and the hydroxyl group is the basis of SHAPE and single-hit statistics. [12:46 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Can you try reading past your literal interpretation of what I'm saying for once? -_- [12:46 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: maybe a weekly test at dif levels&nbsp; [12:46 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: And equilibrium constants are important for the labs that we are currently doing. [12:47 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: and to have a complete and full understanding of the science, knowing what these concepts are and how they work are incredibly important. [12:47 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I understand what you mean when you are suggesting to remove the challenge puzzles. They are essentially time sponges for raising the rank of a player and providing that initial sense of accomplishment for continued support of the game. [12:48 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: And it is true that the initial rise in ranking may be misleading, considering the first thing that occurs after solving all of the challenge puzzles is a vast wasteland of 100 point time sponges. [12:50 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: YAY i just got closer to my design! [12:50 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: hi LFP6 and Brourd! good to see you. :) LFP6 it's true there are way more challenge and player puzzles than any one person needs to solve alone. I like that there is variety, and people should not feel... [12:50 AM]</p>
<p>...obligated to solve all of them. if you'd like to help out with increasing the scientific focus around here, Jen Pearl and I are working on making a second weekly time slot for curriculum and walkthroughs. if you'd like to help teach classes on important skills your help would be most appreciated!!&nbsp;</p>
<p>Elves: congrats Astro :) [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: However, removing them and devaluing them doesn't change anything besides a few point totals. [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: this no more than 3 greens in a row is erking me [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: so if there's a few times and days of the week that work well for you and you'd like to attend and / or help give walkthroughs just let me know! [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: thats all im lacking now&lt;&gt; [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: What you want to do is create a workflow that points players towards the "science" part of the game, but you still have not defined what that means. [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: oH hi elvs [12:51 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: i don't think puzzles will be removed since people already completed them. the workflow is what the linear puzzle progression is attempting to address I think, exactly for this reason, so players know what to... [12:52 AM]</p>
<p>...focus on that will help in labs and not just for points</p>
<p>Elves: hi :) [12:52 AM]</p>
<p>Astromon: I love to give walkthrough&lt; [12:52 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I just pointed out that science is essentially a bunch of calculus, memorization, critical thinking and the ability to look up references when you need it. Is that what you mean by 'science.' [12:53 AM]</p>
<p>Brourd: And if we make the labs analogous to a single-player survival Minecraft experience, simply telling them to play it, or pointing them towards it won't fix anything. [12:54 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: awesome! and thanks astro for starting this alternate chat time thread - if anyone who wants to participate can please post times that work best, we will try to pick one central to everyone's needs ( of course... [12:54 AM]</p>
<p>...it's not possible to meet all - but we'll try to figure out what works for as many as possible ) https://getsatisfaction.com/eternagame/topics/hi-here-is-where-you-can-tell-the-devs-what-is-the-best-times-for-you-to-attend-a-dev</p>
<p>Astromon: no more than 3 c's in a row and he has 4 c's locked together hahaha [12:54 AM]</p>
<p>DevChat T-02h</p>
<p>Astromon: what a trickster! [12:55 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: i think maximum gamification is what LFP6 is after which can make some things easier, but only with enough dev time to execute, so I think limited development resources means we have to choose carefully what... [12:56 AM]</p>
<p>...features Nando, John, &amp; Omei take the time and resources to implement.&nbsp;</p>
<p>LFP6: The problem I see is with scores and ranking. Challenge puzzles specifically are given way too much weight, I personally think scores will need to actually change [12:57 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Elves, have you read my topic? [12:57 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: LFP6 that's why we added sort by lab score as the default score view instead [12:57 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: https://getsatisfaction.com/eternagame/topics/improving-the-eterna-game-and-workflow-to-be-more-effective [12:57 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: thanks LFP6! yes, I think it would be good to collab with Ben Keep on the puzzle progression which addresses the workflow issues you talk about with the limited resources we have [12:58 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: I think I saw you posted on that thread too but I haven't read yet [12:58 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Elves: The issue I see is a bad gameplay workflow. I don't think that we'll really be able to get where we need to be unless it's actually reworked [12:58 AM]</p>
<p>Elves: yes, the puzzle progression is itself a reworking of the workflow, and to my understanding is intended to be a deliverable of exactly what you are requesting [12:59 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Switch out the energy model puzzle workflow for a better developed game around analysis and design [12:59 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: I would like to see what you think about what I presented in that topic [12:59 AM]</p>
<p>LFP6: I've gone a bit farther on what I'd like to see than I have in the apst [1:00 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: it may not have all the bells and whistles but we don't have resources to to a ground up redesign, so we need to build on the framework we have until such time as we can afford more major overhauls of the UI.... [1:00 PM]</p>
<p>...the puzzle progression project is your best bet to accomplishing your workflow improvement goals</p>
<p>Astromon: im going to name my design R2d2 [1:00 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I'm partially confused by what you mean by "switch out the energy-model puzzle workflow" [1:00 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: lol astro!!! :D [1:01 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: :D [1:01 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: beep boop beeb beeb [1:01 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Brourd: The workflow where the primary goal is to solve a puzzle base don the energy model, then go to the next one [1:01 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: AKA the primary 'game' being presented right now [1:01 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Machinelves is right. The most you'll get at this point in time is work put into the puzzle progression system they have in place. [1:01 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I'm still confused. Isn't that how design in the lab works? [1:02 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: You solve the puzzle, submit, and move on? [1:02 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: From what I've seen, the most significant things going on is analysis [1:02 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Which there is no framework for [1:02 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: And design PAST the energy model [1:02 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Which are apperantly horrible at many points [1:03 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: That's silly, it's almost like you want us to throw away the computer model thart gives us the prediction of how RNA folds. [1:03 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: thanks Brourd, and if you know of any other sidebar projects that are relevant to this please let us know! [1:04 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: sidebar projects? [1:04 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: LFP6 I do hear you in wishing and envisioning what could be better, so it's great to get those ideas out there. I think it would be awesome if you review Ben Keeps [1:04 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: work on puzzle progression [1:04 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Yeah [1:05 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Erm, Elves, I think the sidebar was what I mentioned? [1:05 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: it looks like there's already quite a few comments in this thread from you &amp; others, so if you think of any other ways to make that walkthrough accomplish the goal of funneling players into the science side,... [1:05 PM]</p>
<p>...that would be a huge help!</p>
<p>Elves: sorry for confusion i meant different sidebar :D [1:05 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: just as an adjective [1:06 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Brourd: But form my understanding, it seems that the model can't be used as the sole factor in design? [1:05 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: or some grammar word thingy [1:06 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: I mean I am not aware of all projects in the queue so if there's anything else in addition to puzzle progression that would help focus people on the science goals, that would be great. but as stated, puzzle... [1:07 PM]</p>
<p>...progression project = closest match to your current goals</p>
<p>Brourd: While I'm no scientist (yet) I'm fairly certain that the modeling of how RNA folds is based on a significant amount of experimental data and theories about the dynamics of molecules in solution, and is far more complex and deep than the MFE structure that is output by the algorithm. [1:07 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: *your goals = LFP6 [1:07 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: why not have a question and answer thing about rna at each puzzle to clear it! [1:07 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: and you have to look up ref to answer the question somtimes&nbsp; [1:08 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: You can have Nando verify if what I just said is true or not :P [1:08 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: @LFP6: I recently proposed a different idea aiming at re-balancing the game globally, without needing to scrap any of it [1:08 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: we can have a ref book to study from sortof [1:08 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: I completely agree with you that no rewards in labs is a big problem [1:08 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: @astro It would be interesting to have a khan academy style quiz category of puzzle, but that would probably require content creation &amp; UI mods. but definitely something to think of for the future [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Nando Oh? [1:08 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: so why not just do that? [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: @nando awesome! what was the proposal / link? [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: and not using points [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Just doing what? [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: just a leader-board per round [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: pionts for labs huh yeah [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: good idea [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: players are ranked by their global performance in the round [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: yeah nando nice [1:09 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: all that reach top 10 in any round get a badge [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: ahh that's a great idea!!&nbsp; [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: i like that [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Sounds too simple and easy, nando. [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: hahah [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: ranks! woohoo [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: and every single Top Lab Designer gets another fancier one [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: and badges! [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: badges for lab designs hmm [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: I think this would create enough drive, at least for some [1:10 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: that would be a way to incentivize in the gamification manner LFP6 is pointing out, and also ensure that energy is spent on things useful to the research [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: it sure would [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Much like these knives I sell that can cut a tomato, bar of gold, and the core of a neutron star right in half. [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: Brourd! how did you get a hold of a neutron star!!! :D [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: haha&nbsp; [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: @B: lol :D [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: If you buy now, you'll get two sets for the price of one! [1:11 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: is that because you cut the knives in half? [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Nando: Interesting. But I'm just wondering, is EteRNAScore the global metric? [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: @B: can you predict its next starquake, cause I'd rather be a 100K lightyears away when that happens [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: And is a high EteRNA Score the thing that we want? [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: *The primary thing [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: That would make an excellent gimmick for an info commercial, machinelves! [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: We is actually meaning the EteRNA staff [1:12 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: @LFP6: I'd go with the actual experimental scores, say the best 20 a single player gets in a round counts towards his global score for the round [1:13 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: As long as that is what the end goal is [1:13 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: From what I had seen, there was some issues with the metric [1:13 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Being that we were looking more for data good or bad, not jsut a high score? [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: @LFP6 not always, but I think the score calculation for switches is different than single state. at first when we did lab leaderboards we considered highest score average instead of # of synths, and for that... [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>...reason I think went with # of synths. But a high score is indicative of effort, and since many players aim for that, it would incentivize them. Maybe we can reward for lowest score as well? and that way we simply get more data!!</p>
<p>Brourd: Every scientific experiment has a certain degree of uncertainty, that much is certain. [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Or is that just for voting? [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>Jennifer Pearl: hi [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: I don't think that just because there are scores, all players will forget to actually do science (experiment, use controls which will fail, etc) [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Where people should still experiment, but it doesn't matter that that isn't in the scoring? [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: the idea is just to create a motivator [1:14 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: lol Brourd i would probably have way too much fun writing satirical infomercials [1:15 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: this would focus efforts in labs and not challenges, which produce 0 data as you pointed out [1:15 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: I wouldn't complain with doing this [1:15 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: mmhmm [1:15 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: Lol elves, it's pretty easy to make a 0 score design I think [1:15 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: hogla would disagree with that :P [1:16 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: haha [1:16 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I'll point this out right now, LFP6. Trying to force players to be scientists won't work, unless there is a compelling "creative mode" involved with it. [1:16 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: even with switch constraints? for me still being new to it, i don't even know about how i would score, i'm just trying to meet the constraints! [1:16 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: But, anyhow, I think it would work better, I would just personally like to see more of a game &amp; additional tools developed around analysis [1:16 PM]</p>
<p>salish99: hi [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Jennifer Pearl: Just posted strategy markets for same state NG2 and NG3 to penalize design with statistically poor performing predicted stacks [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: join the club Elves&lt; [1:16 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: hi salish! [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: haha [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Brourd: Yes, of course. I'm just saying that the primary game shouldn't be the thing with no scientific value and little value to the player [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: hahaha yeah. i will keep trying though, i'm determined to figure it out. :D [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: *shouldn't be presented as [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: you will! [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: Omei has been volunteered for the analysis bit, John and I are the slaves for everything else :) [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Jennifer Pearl: I havnt tried the new ones yet so busy and I have a real bad internet connection at home [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: hi Jen! awesome, congrats on the strategy market post [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: if you ever want to do sort of a walkthrough id be happy to help [1:17 PM]</p>
<p>salish99: Elves, can you send a link? [1:18 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: a link to which? [1:18 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: @LFP6 the puzzle progression is i think going to be the new primary game and funnel. so please give Ben Keep feedback on how to ensure it has scientific value! [1:19 PM]</p>
<p>Jennifer Pearl: I just figured out a great algorithm for being able to pick out just the good stacks that have some desings in a low score range but mostly in the very high score range [1:19 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: awesome jen! [1:20 PM]</p>
<p>LFP6: @Elves; Got ya [1:20 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: here's a link to the puzzle progression thread https://getsatisfaction.com/eternagame/topics/new-puzzle-progression [1:20 PM]</p>
<p>salish99: thx [1:20 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: np!&nbsp; [1:20 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: cool. And thanks for your feedback LFP6, I hear you and hope we can find a happy path forward to directing players immediately to activities with value to the current research, with respect to our available... [1:22 PM]</p>
<p>...development resources ( thank you devs!! )</p>
<p>Elves: here is a link to the Das Lab presentation this morning by Johan btw https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZDfhqsskas&amp;feature=youtu.be [1:22 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Did they mention when the next round of experimental data will be released? [1:24 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: they're "working on it as we speak" [1:24 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: ooo if my memory is correct ( which is doubtable ), I think Johan said something to the effect of thank you for your patience and soon. Maybe somewhere in there was a more useful date? :D&nbsp; [1:24 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: ahhh thanks Nando :) [1:25 PM]</p>
<p>Nando: I also heard mention of "weekS" [1:25 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: It's good to know that we are not speaking. Must mean they are done. [1:25 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Or does that mean they are not working on it? Oh, the multitude of choices. [1:25 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: what are dangles [1:27 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: What do you think dangles are? [1:28 PM]</p>
<p>Elves: ok all links &amp; vid added to the monthly meeting wiki page :) http://eternawiki.org/wiki/index.php5/Monthly_Eterna_Meeting [1:28 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: And what they refer to. [1:28 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: unbonded nt's [1:28 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Is there any specific location that these unbound residues must be in? [1:29 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: the end of stacks? [1:29 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: like dagleing [1:30 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: So then, would that mean the unpaired residues in a hairpin loop are dangles as well? [1:30 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: well no [1:30 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: What about in an internal loop? [1:30 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: prob not [1:31 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: So, your final choices are exterior loops and internal 3+-way junctions. [1:31 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: exterier loops would be my guess [1:31 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: That would be the most popular answer as to what dangles are then. [1:33 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: i dont hink i have a dangle in my design yet hmm [1:33 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: oH okay [1:33 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Do you know what the external loop is? [1:34 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: eli was saying somthung about g dangles [1:34 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: not really [1:34 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: The external loop is the structure of the RNA that is not contained within a structured fold. In many RNA structures, the 1st and last residue would be an example of dangles in an external loop. [1:35 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: i know what an end loop is an to switch the gc's in them [1:35 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: And that is the definition of dangles that Eli is referring to. [1:36 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: http://prntscr.com/8plrlw [1:36 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: is that rt^? [1:36 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: Correct [1:37 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: cool&nbsp; thx [1:37 PM]</p>
<p>Brourd: I guess I should go write a paper about violent crime or something *mumble* *grumble* [1:37 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: oh so those 2 locked bases are dangles [1:38 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: once c and ones A [1:38 PM]</p>
<p>Astromon: its part of that 4 in a row thing &lt;&gt; [1:38 PM]</p>
<p>[[Category:Community Chat]][[Category:Dev Chat]]</p>