[quote]Also, as @lumin pointed out, with an Open Source AI definition that does not mandate training data, you end up with the paradox that Open Source AI could not be used in Science at all (open or not).
[/quote]
Yes, that’s true. And it will be a limitation for models that want Open Science AI systems to use their model - it won’t happen. Just like there are limitations on the compatibility between some permissive “open source” and copyleft “open source” licenses that do not allow for certain combinations. But these are restrictions based on the requirements of the user. If I’m building an open science model, I cannot provide aspects of reproducibility if I rely on a foundation model that is MOF Class III. That doesn’t prevent me from using that IP or some of it. Maybe I don’t use that Class III model itself, but I borrow some of the Apache 2-licensed model architecture code because it was well done. I can do that and build an Open Science AI System using just that Open Source AI System’s model architecture code. That is possible - if the model architecture has an open source license. Per my other point to @samj, some of this will be useful/not but the fact that it has an open source license on it allows me to use/modify/improve however I want under the terms of that license. I’m also not requried to use any of it so if there are artifacts in the data transparency missing and I don’t like that, I just won’t use that model.