1. Fall 2015 Course
  2. Discussion

Discussion

Herman Bergwerf | Wed, 09/30/2015 - 03:02
You might have read about my pet project: <a href="http://molview.org">http://molview.org</a> (free/open-source). Currently it only has integrations for PDB, PubChem and the Crystallography Open Database (you can also use the Resolver to create 3D structures from 2D structures). However, I want to add a lot of improvements soon and the sketcher will also get new features. I would really appreciate it if you share your experience from other drawing tools (like the ones listed in this module), so I can make the MolView sketcher as user-friendly as possible.

Leah Rae McEwen | Tue, 09/29/2015 - 18:37
Thanks, Alex. We are just updgrading our ChemDraw subscription to be able to connect in with SciFinder. I'd be interested to hear more about your experience with this off-list, my direct email is <a href="mailto:lrm1@cornell.edu">lrm1@cornell.edu</a>. Thanks to Jordi for several of these links. Very happy to keep adding to this list.

Perry Sharma (not verified) | Tue, 09/29/2015 - 13:30
I was just curious, where do we submit our assignments?

Alex Williams (not verified) | Tue, 09/29/2015 - 00:30
Are there any alternative word processors that have good chemistry fluency? It seems like it would be a popular product considering how unintuitive the interfaces are in word to represent molecular formulas.

Alex Williams (not verified) | Mon, 09/28/2015 - 23:46
In my pet molecule project at centre, where I had to explain a total synthesis of a large molecule, I really enjoyed the features of chemdraw. Primarily due to the integration with SciFinder. Being able to search in app via certain reactions is a godsend for anyone writing a large paper. Also, thanks for the link to Accelrys, I hadn't heard of that product before.

John House (not verified) | Fri, 09/25/2015 - 20:21
For the Group A, the assignment specified to use only two species. I wasnt too sure if this offered a truly representative analysis for the whole data set. However, I received similar results when analyzing the whole data set.

OLCC s12's picture
OLCC s12 | Thu, 09/24/2015 - 15:03
I completely agree with your response and it did take me a while to learn to use git because of the learning curve as you mentioned.

Ye Li | Thu, 09/24/2015 - 09:25
Hi Brian, Strictly saying, we can only say the difference in the means is significant if we run a statistical comparison test. However, as stated in the purpose of this exercise, "You should focus on documenting your process well so that others can reproduce what you did. The scientific value of your answer and statistical validation are not the focus of this practice. " So, depending on your current knowledge in statistics and the OCS concentration data in current atmosphere you can find, you may make you own decision about doing a detailed statistical comparison of means or just simply compare the value of the means. Thanks!

Dr. Briney | Thu, 09/24/2015 - 09:21
That's great that you are using git for version control! This are definitely more scientists getting into this, and similar, systems and I expect even more to adopt it in the future. However, I'm not sure we'll get to a point where every scientist will use a version control system like git, mainly because there is a lot of overhead to learn git and not everyone needs such a powerful system. For example, simple version control systems like labeling files with a version number - eg. "v01", "v02", ..., "FINAL" - are easier to adopt and can still help manage information (even though, as you noted, this takes more space). So, overall, I think we're going to see a lot more scientists adopt tools like git but it won't be everyone.