We reviewed a recent research paper discussing how AI is slowly becoming part of the cannabis research process. Below is the summary of the entire report: Scientists are now using advanced computer programs to study the connection between using Cannabis and certain mental health issues. They want to understand if there's any relationship between them. To grow and study Cannabis in a lab, researchers use a method called "in vitro micropropagation". But the current methods are complicated and time-consuming. They hope to find better ways to grow Cannabis using new computer techniques to analyze data. Studies have investigated the link between cannabis use and psychotic disorders using Machine Learning frameworks. One useful tool they use is called "Artificial Neural Networks" (ANNs). These networks can help simulate plant growth in different lab conditions and predict the best conditions for growth. They are very helpful in many aspects of studying plants, including Cannabis. Despite the potential benefits, there aren't many studies on growing Cannabis in the lab. Most of the current methods are kept private by the Cannabis industries. This presents an opportunity to create new and consistent ways to grow Cannabis in the lab that others can use. Different techniques like somatic embryogenesis, genetic transformation, and others can help achieve this goal. Background: Cannabis is a plant that originally comes from India and is known for its special compounds called cannabinoids and terpenes. These compounds can affect our body's systems and have medicinal or mind-altering effects. People use Cannabis for various purposes, both for business and medical reasons.
I don't really see the point growing pot in vitro but there must be one somewhere. I enjoyed the 5% pot of the 1960s just as much as I do the more potent pot of today, maybe more. I suppose it would be good to find any link between mental illness and smoking pot but I doubt it'll change anyone's behavior, especially among psychotic smokers. Good question, Vee. Who is we, anyway? I'm guessing since this is a review paper, the OP is one or more of the eight authors of the paper. Or maybe the AI machine, it could identify as a we.
