Previous discussion summary - virtual cells and organisms
AI in Science: virtual cells and organisms
We are currently discussing the following message for Foundations about virtual cells and organisms. The most useful virtual organism is clearly a digital human model, a worthwhile task that will benefit all of us, but also a challenge that will require the effort of a large part of the biomedical scientific community.
Message draft:
"Subject: A non-financial role for [Foundation Name] in advancing virtual cells and organisms.
Dear [Foundation Name],
We know from your support for [example] that you care about research related to virtual cells and organisms. A core constraint today is data and progress hinges on organizing knowledge. Much of biology cannot be compressed into simple equations; it lives in detailed, distributed expertise—often held by small groups. If captured and structured by AI and human scientists working together, that expertise becomes data. As LLMs demonstrate, ideas shared with language are data and they can help define what is known, what is uncertain, and what to measure next.
Our request is straightforward and non-financial: please agree to speak with the leaders of the scientific institutions whose researchers contribute the most compelling ideas to a shared, community-run discussion about the components of digital cells and organisms. Institutional leaders have told us they welcome foundation engagement and can ensure proper recognition for their scientists. The discussion platform will be co-governed by participating institutions and foundations, ensuring transparency and scientific stewardship.
This is an opportunity to help design a responsible path for the field, position your foundation for constructive leadership, and accelerate an outcome with global benefit.
As a precedent, consider the community pathway from the Protein Data Bank to AlphaFold—an advance enabled by shared datasets and collective norms: https://www.cellcomm.org/from-pdb-to-alphafold
If you are interested, please let us know. If not, could you share your main concerns? We will circulate them to the hundreds of scientists, economists, and historians engaged at cellcomm.org and report back with proposed solutions."
A diagram shows the positive feedback loop generated by the message:
The diagram shows a high-level architecture. The sub-problems that compose it are being defined by the participants.
See comments received from Vivek Agarwal, Country Director for India at the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change.
We have received input from historians and economists underscoring the relevance of the work of Margaret C. Jacob (Jacob, 1997) and Joel Mokyr (Mokyr, 2016). Research in the history of science and in economic history has shown that open science and the broad circulation of knowledge were central to the transition from the Scientific Revolution to the Industrial Revolution, generating a mutually reinforcing cycle between scientific discovery and technological innovation. Mokyr’s contributions were recognized with the 2025 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. Today’s most advanced AI models are not publicly accessible, raising concerns that reduced scientific openness could dampen innovation and, ultimately, economic growth.