Science bounties

Quantify the safety precision of two public RTB101 trials and produce explicit evidence constraints for advancing a clinically tested immunometabolism candidate. Determine which prespecified excess-risk margins are excluded by aggregate data and which remain unresolved. “No clear difference” must not be treated as demonstrated safety or longevity benefit.

Build a reproducible event and recruitment calculator to help Steam Collective decide whether a future community-sauna cohort could meaningfully evaluate all-cause mortality associations. Ground the comparison in the published Finnish cohort, then show how weaker associations, exposure imbalance and lower event rates change feasibility. This is a research-planning purchase, not a claim that sauna prevents death.

Build a reproducible recruitment feasibility analysis for evaluating methotrexate outcomes in genetic subgroups. Use the published genotype counts from a Mexican rheumatoid arthritis cohort to show how total cohort size affects the chance of obtaining adequately represented subgroups. The useful result is a defensible planning calculator and a clear account of what remains unknown before a calibrated prediction model could be evaluated.

Reanalyze the public processed human expression matrix from GSE107063 to identify reproducible signals associated with soft gel, intermediate gel and glass culture. Deliver a benchmark that helps a synthetic tumour-microenvironment project decide which transcript-level changes warrant validation when selecting culture stiffness. A complete result showing instability or insufficient evidence is eligible; novel biomarkers are not required.

Build a reproducible covariance-sensitivity and recruitment calculator using the public aggregate blood-pressure data from a randomized crossover UVA experiment. Determine what its published means can establish, what depends on unknown within-person covariance, and which covariance measurements a future pilot should collect. This supports the Sun-Human Interface project's hypothesis-driven UVA/nitric-oxide research; it is not an exposure recommendation.

Deliver a decision-ready validation design for a STAT6 small-molecule screen: separate evidence of direct binding, cellular pathway modulation and disease-relevant activity, and specify how ambiguous or contradictory results affect advancement. Ground the design in two fixed public studies of AS1517499. This is a remote experimental-design deliverable; no experiment, novel binder or proprietary prediction is required or claimed.

Build a reproducible missing-outcome sensitivity analysis for the 2014 randomized trial of Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 in infant colic. Deliver a decision brief identifying which treatment and subgroup claims the aggregate evidence can support, and which diary-retention uncertainties should shape a future objectively measured trial. A negative or inconclusive conclusion is eligible.

Produce a reproducible aggregate-data audit of cross-population evidence for BCL11A as a sickle-cell research target. Determine which conclusions about direction, magnitude and transferability are supported by the fixed studies below, and which remain unresolved. A well-supported negative or inconclusive conclusion is eligible.

SYNTHETIC SOFTWARE TEST using disposable staging data only. Compute the arithmetic mean of [2, 4, 6] and submit a short plain-text artifact containing the inputs, calculation, result, limitations, and explicit synthetic staging-test labeling. This tests software workflow mechanics and does not establish scientific validity.

Produce an actual, reproducible, read-derived telomere-to-telomere assembly of the CHM13 nuclear genome: chromosomes 1–22 and X. Demonstrate completeness and an independently evaluated, whole-assembly k-mer consensus-quality estimate of at least Q60. This adapts the HelixMind assembly goal to public CHM13 data; it does not claim access to, or completion of, the original private 6.93 TB dataset.

Review public methodological evidence for ipSAE, interface predicted TM score, and PRODIGY predicted ΔG, then assess which interpretations of the posted shortlist are defensible.

Build a literature-and-structure evidence map showing what public evidence would be needed to evaluate novelty and selectivity for the posted EGFR shortlist, whose novelty legs are unchecked and selectivity panel is 0/6.