Research efficiency

Area: definition. Apply the shared measurement protocol.

Estimated progress toward AI-managed biology

30% complete — judgment-based estimate as of November 7, 2026. Confidence: low. The scale starts at 0% before ChatGPT's public release in 2022 and ends at 100% when AI manages the field's continuing advancement without human participation. This rates the outcome's contribution to that transition, not the percentage of tasks solved, a measured fraction of the field, or time remaining.

The shared scoring rubric uses five equally weighted dimensions: execution, breadth, agenda-setting, validation, and sustained autonomous improvement. Points for this outcome are 10 + 5 + 5 + 5 + 5 = 30/100, in that order; each dimension has a maximum of 20. These component judgments make the estimate inspectable, but are not independently measured scores.

Reason for the estimate: Automated characterization speeds a defined workflow; complete cost per independently validated function and human-free laboratory management remain unmeasured. The dated baseline below supplies the findings and source links used for this assessment. Unmeasured components receive no demonstrated-progress credit; missing evidence does not prove a missing capability.

What would move the score: Measure total time, human hours and dollars from proposed sequence to externally reproduced function; retain failures and all assay stages. Higher autonomy scores additionally require AI to select worthwhile work, validate results and improve the process over repeated cycles without human research management, repair or adjudication. Lower the score if replication fails, quality regresses or previously hidden human assistance is found. Preserve this dated estimate when adding future assessments.

Measurement and acceptance rule

Experimental cycles, human hours, elapsed time, and total cost per independently validated functional result.

Evidence requirements

Freeze predictions before experiments and preserve all designed candidates, including failed ones. Use controls, biological replicates, independent assays, and a second laboratory. Record sequence and family overlap with known data. Do not count a favorable predicted structure as experimental confirmation of activity or mechanism.

Related milestones

See the area's proposed milestones. Proposed targets are distinct from the dated evidence below.

Baseline as of November 7 2026

Status: Measured workflow throughput proxy. Sources accessed November 7, 2026. This is a documentary baseline, not an independent replication or an assertion of the worldwide best result. An unknown measurement is not zero.

Dated findings

August 20, 2026: The SAPP study reports hundreds of protein designs characterized per day, at least tenfold throughput improvement, and a roughly 48-hour process with about six hours of bench work. Protein design validation platform, Nature Communications.

Interpretation and tracking value

Characterization throughput is not cost or time per independently validated biological function. Gene synthesis, failed designs and downstream functional assays must be counted.

Next comparable measurement

Measure total time, human hours and dollars from proposed sequence to externally reproduced function; retain failures and all assay stages. Preserve this dated observation; append future results with their model/system version, denominator, budget and evidence level rather than overwriting it.