The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Francisco Crick in Paradiso
Open accessOverview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The paths taken by evolution do not follow the logic that humans use to design devices.
“However, the paths taken by evolution do not follow the logic that humans use to design devices (Brenner, 1996).”
From Large Language Models and the Reverse Turing Test (2023) · cites this paper as Brenner, 1996
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Large Language Models and the Reverse Turing Test
Sejnowski, T. J. (2023) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco_a_01563 · Cited by 169
“However, the paths taken by evolution do not follow the logic that humans use to design devices (Brenner, 1996).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Brenner, S.
- Corresponding author
- Brenner, Sydney
- Venue
- Current Biology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-09
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1202
- ISSN
- 0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2044053388
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 3.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Current Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Evolution and Science Education
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Keywords
- Richard Dawkins, evolution, natural selection, selfish genes, atheism, Francis Crick, evolutionary biology, science and religion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
