I do not understand how it is supposed to work.  Put aside the issue of foregone innovations, let us say I seek to access an AI from overseas.  Am I allowed to visit their website?  So many sites have AI behind them, including Chinese open source AI.  Do all of those sites get banned?  And how?  Firewall imposed on Americans?  And we cannot put the good open source models on our hard drives?  How enforced?  Does the government have to read the creation logs of the model (how can they?), and then decide whether I can use that model or not?

What if Anthropic licenses its IP to an independent subsidiary in the Cayman Islands and they keep on using code to improve the AI?  Or maybe only foreign nations are allowed to have the best models and the really fast rates of improvement?  How are multinationals supposed to operate across borders?  (Presumably you cannot just use the RSI of your foreign affiliate, but then the whole MNC is crippled and eventually rendered uncompetitive?)  How are we to keep “AI sovereignty” for Americans?

Does this whole thing mean that regular companies can use AI to write code, but the main labs cannot?  Solve for the equilibrium there.  Or the whole code writing function goes away for everybody?

I do not find this to be a workable idea.  I think it is “people wanting to do something that sounds reasonable and less scary,” without thinking through the practical details.  I have made a related point before, but one does best with AI policy when you start with the stuff that otherwise you might put into your last two or three paragraphs of an essay (“It remains to be seen how…but we are all human beings and surely we should not give up hope…”).  Even if you believe in a deal with China, and I do not, we (and others) now know competitors can catch up more quickly than we had thought, at least if they think they have a chance of winning.  They might even buy some space compute from Elon.

C’mon people, I know for many of you this is a difficult take to swallow, because it feels like “we don’t care enough” if we do not take some dramatic steps.  Nonetheless the reality is that, a long time ago, we made a whole series of decisions that imply…we have no other choice than to just see this one through and get it more or less right.  The longer we deny that truth, the harder it will be for all of us.

The post Banning self-recursive improvement in AI models? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to K.. I think the fear is that self improvement ... by mento
• Btw, Klein is not opposed to RSI per se. He is opposed to ... by BC
• This piece focuses primarily on whether Americans will be ... by Rob
• Ezra Klein is committing fraudulant, credulous journalism on ... by patrick
• In reply to Zoroto. When Mao died in 1976, China was a very ... by Steve Sailer
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• Obama on agentic AI
• Further results on AI and labor market reallocation
• Muse

 

This paper documents how artificial intelligence has affected stocks and flows in the U.S. labor market. Combining CPS and JOLTS data with AI exposure and adoption measures from OpenAI and Lightcast, respectively, we construct labor force stocks, worker flows, and market tightness by AI exposure and adoption. Since the introduction of LLMs, workers with high AI exposure and adoption have experienced larger declines in job-finding and job-switching rates than other groups, while their within-job activity switching has increased noticeably relative to others. The positive effects of AI on nominal wage growth and hours worked attenuate markedly in the post-LLM period, suggesting that LLM-driven reallocation has operated through within-firm task reorganization and a reconfiguration of labor inputs, alongside weaker demand for workers most exposed to AI. To quantify LLM-driven reallocation pressure, we construct individual-level hirability and separability indices and showthat dispersion in job-finding prospects has risen markedly since 2023, largely driven by the AI factors. The natural rate of unemployment—recovered from the trend components of unemployment inflows and outflows by AI exposure and adoption, as well as from a theoretical model of structural unemployment—is estimated to have risen by about 0.1-0.2 percentage point since the introduction of LLMs, albeit with considerable uncertainty.

That is from a new NBER conference paper by Hie Joo Ahn and Nicholas A. Carollo.  Via Inclusive Productivity Network and Alex Imas.

The post Further results on AI and labor market reallocation appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• “on 'AI(sic)'”…therefore there was no intent to ... by patrick
• In reply to rayward. >…positive effects of AI on nominal ... by Mitchell
• In reply to Brent Buckner. Agreed. Even here in the balmy ... by bazza
• My son graduated cum laude with a degree in mathematics, then ... by John J
• In reply to bigot. Yes; why use data when we can just ask AI ... by JW
• Plus 8 more...

Related Stories

• UK productivity higher than we had thought
• Internet diffusion and religious decline?
• Callum Williams on cybersecurity prices

 

2. “[The Mises] library now has a permanent independent home: https://freecapitalists.org/. It holds 945 books, 3,374 journal issues and 2,732 recorded lectures, all free, in PDF, EPUB and MOBI, with the rights recorded per work.”

3. “They invited me to come see it for myself at Sopchoppy’s annual worm grunting festival, which draws thousands of visitors.” (NYT)

4. The (small) movement to return Europe to Latin.

5. Political pro-Trump bias in Polymarket?

The post Monday assorted links appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Jay. Thank you, Jay. 🙂 Yes, your comment made ... by Kaz Stanczak
• In reply to JD. “small character set – you don't need ... by Ricardo
• 2. Mises Library. Never has so much been written about so ... by ElsieT
• 4. Latin makes far more sense as the Lingua Franca of Europe ... by Peter Akuleyev
• In reply to ARAD. Thank you, but I disagree: (1) We need ... by Kaz Stanczak
• Plus 10 more...

 

The essay makes for hard reading and I acknowledge NHJ’s courage in writing about her mistakes and the cost to her child. The piece is raw and true when talking about her personal choices, but the larger story in which NHJ embeds her personal history is mostly false. The problem isn’t funding. The failures she documents are failures of management and accountability, not lack of resources. NYC spends upwards of $40k per pupil on average, the highest of any large district in the country. Moreover, schools in NYC with lower-income students get more than the average. PS 307, where NHJ initially sent her child, is currently funded at just over 52k per student, far above the national average.

Nationally, there haven’t been big gaps in funding within states by race or income for decades. NHJ has reckoned with her failing her own child but she has not yet reckoned with the failure of her entire educational philosophy.

The role of ideology in blinding NHJ is dramatic. NHJ’s daughter earns high grades in her math classes but she fails standardized tests. Most parents, especially conservatives, know what that means. The classes are a lie. But NHJ is blinded by ideology and assumes it’s the standardized tests that are biased. It’s only when her daughter demands to go to a better school that she and her daughter confront the truth:

Najya knew very little algebra and had huge gaps in many of the building blocks of math that she should have learned in elementary school, like mastery of long division and fractions.

The confrontation is almost disastrous:

My child’s confidence wilted like an unwatered plant. She started to develop an almost debilitating anxiety around taking tests. She became sullen at school and began to act out. For the first time ever, I got messages from teachers about Najya’s behavior.

Fortunately, Najya battles back and recovers but much more could be said here about the costs of social promotion, DEI and mismatch on the so-called beneficiaries.

Ironically, NHJ invokes the heroic history of Black Americans integrating schools to justify keeping her own child in a segregated one. Painful.

NHJ thought that she and her husband–politically connected, astute people who were not afraid to speak up–could do well for their daughter and the other kids in the school. But in the end she has written a great piece on why voice fails–even a powerful voice–in the absence of the threat of exit. Hannah-Jones could have saved herself some grief and her child a poor education by reading my post The tragedy of Jonathan Kozol.

It’s been said that Ayn Rand’s heroes don’t exist, but her villains do. Case in point. Hannah-Jones says that she and her husband “felt an obligation to make educational decisions based on the collective good.” But she wasn’t just sacrificing herself for her ideology; she was sacrificing her child, who had no choice in the matter. “I don’t think she’s deserving of more than other kids,” she said in 2017. Nearly a decade later, Najya reminded her that in the abstract your child may not deserve more than other children, but she is nevertheless entitled to expect more from you. “Sometimes I wish instead of always thinking about other kids, you would have thought about me.” You don’t have to be a Randian to think that your child should not be sacrificed to the collective good, but it doesn’t hurt.

The post The Tragedy of Nikole Hannah-Jones appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Sure. I was struck by the hypocrisy of this ... by Parker
• The NYT closed the comment section when it reached 1619 ... by JF
• In reply to bazza. A significant amount is administration and ... by Jim
• Cf., Dickens’ character Mrs Jellyby, in Bleak House. Mrs ... by Dan Richards
• In reply to superdestroyer. filial piety runs deep by jc
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• My excellent Conversation with Annie Lowrey
• UK productivity higher than we had thought
• Emergent Ventures India, 19th cohort

 

“If we are thinking about AI just in terms of how do we cure cancer or get better energy, you can do that without having agentic AI and having it just roaming free in the internet.”

As Roon noted: “this sounds completely incoherent to me”

From Rob Saker:

An agent is a system that can plan, use tools, write code, query data, run experiments, check its own work, and keep going. That is how the work gets done. Treating “agentic” as optional decoration, as if the serious version of AI is a polite chatbot locked in a box while the unserious version “roams free on the internet”, is the kind of sentence you write when you’ve heard the buzzwords and never watched a lab actually use the technology. You do not cure cancer with a model that only answers questions. You cure cancer with systems that can read the literature, propose hypotheses, design assays, analyze results, rewrite the next experiment, and do that loop a thousand times faster than a human postdoc. That loop is agentic. Strip the agency out and you are left with a very expensive autocomplete.

I agree with those points, but my main concern is different.  How would we enforce such a prohibition on commercial agents?  Set up a Chinese-like firewall that bans Americans from accessing sites with foreign agents?  Monitor all those sites over time, so we know which suppliers to ban?  Ban VPN as well?  Give our government the power to inspect hard drives, in case agentic functions might be embedded there?  Set up FBI “phishes,” luring Americans in with the prospect of agent access from abroad, and then arresting them, as we do with child ****?

Something else?  How about insisting that all American (and foreign?) web sites set up tough captcha problems, so that agents may not be used (ha ha)?

You might also ask how an AI “agent” is to be defined, after all even O3 had some “agentic” abilities, such as opening up museum web sites to see which exhibits are on.  Is it typing things into boxes and filling out forms that is to be prohibited?  How much regulation of software would that require, how would that regulation actually occur, and what else would end up being restricted?

I do not think Obama intends to be supporting massive restrictions on freedom of speech and civil liberties.  Rather this is a good example of how some political factions will simply have “ideas about what might be good,” without having freedom concerns — or for that matter practicality and civil liberties concerns — center of mind in the first place.

And this would cause the immediate bankruptcy of both Anthropic and OpenAI, right?

I can readily imagine that, upon the advent of agentic AI, we need some significant changes in our cyber laws.  Now would be a good time to both commission and also cite some peer-reviewed academic literature on this matter!?  That is not an impossible thing to do, yet our public discourse seems oddly resistant to the notion.

Addendum: And do not forget the classic Gwern piece, remarkably early in its prescience.

The post Obama on agentic AI appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Tyler’s Agentic Loop. And honestly? That's rare. by Murex
• In reply to stasi. It reads more like a speaking tick: ... by Tedious D
• In reply to Gilligan. And Obama addressed that, so, no, you ... by Tedious D
• OK, but what about the reciprocal of what is being said here? ... by Tom DeMeo
• In reply to Tyler’s Agentic Loop. AI will be an extremely ... by jmkd
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• What Regulatory Capture Actually Looks Like
• When discussing AI policy, start with China
• Callum Williams on cybersecurity prices

 

2. Secretariat as GOAT.

3. Dead brains and the piano??

4. “A real contribution of AI is showing the critical weaknesses of humans and human structures.”  But can we take it?

5. When did the Chinese reach New Zealand? (speculative)

6. “Everyone needs to realize we are fighting the summation of the last 100 years of war that never got settled they just slowed down at times”

7. “you have no idea how fast the world will accelerate AI progress if a world war began” — no major war (in addition to the status quo) would be one excellent move in the direction of AI (and other) safety.

The post Sunday assorted links appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Marmot. And I'm all broke up about it. by Atherton Fats
• In reply to JD. That would explain the constant hostility of ... by mkt42
• In reply to dearieme. But the Irish got there after the North ... by JD
• Not exactly breaking news but you can be a Nobel Prize winning ... by diz
• In reply to mkt42. Phillip K Dick wrote a number of short ... by Agorabum
• Plus 10 more...

 

Kudos to the team!

The post Muse appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• The stock market agrees. Too bad it's a Meta product, and ... by Jonathan Doensky
• all well and good until the prototypical, malign META focus ... by ktm
• In reply to mento. How do you manage the 'password reset' ... by Gilligan
• In reply to JW. Everyone watches the NFL on Sundays, no? by mobile
• Is Muse something so universally known that it needs no ... by JW
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• Obama on agentic AI
• Internet diffusion and religious decline?
• Scott Beaulier interviews me, in part about Wyoming

 

I observed, for example, that when I got an invitation to travel to give a talk in a different time zone, it mattered what time zone I was in when I got the invitation.  if well rested, in my home time zone, I would think, No big deal, about making a long trip and would likely accept.  However, if I was jet-lagged in a different time zone when the invitation came in, and in reach with the misery of travel, I would be far more likely to decline.

…Perhaps you’ve noticed when taking a long-haul flight that waiting for a connecting flight feels much worse if your layover is close to your final destination.

That is from the new and very stimulating The Opposite of Happiness: How Bad Feelings Make and Break Us, by George Loewenstein.  A very Smithian book I might add.  Reading this book, one also wonders if the researchers who do behavioral economics are more depressed than average?  (“I’ve met many depressive characters in my life, but one of the most reliably miserable people I’ve ever known is my friend and collaborator Matthew Rabin.”)

The post Empathy gaps appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Dismalist. And they are replaced by a continual ... by mkt42
• In reply to If only. Individuals with DSDs (disorders of ... by PollyLeritae
• In reply to S. Those who systematically violate the ... by Dismalist
• In reply to Dismalist. Yes, that was a reasonable position 30 ... by S
• In reply to If only. There are no mammals that produce both ... by Anti-Gnostic
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• My very interesting Conversation with Jared Diamond
• The polity that is Singapore
• My excellent Conversation with Annie Lowrey

 

UK productivity rose at almost twice the pace previously estimated in the decade after the 2008 global financial crisis, according to new official figures that make Britain look much less of an international outlier.

Output per hour worked, the main measure of labour productivity, grew by an average of 1.3 per cent per year between 2009 and 2019, the Office for National Statistics said on Thursday. The ONS had previously estimated average annual growth of 0.7 per cent over the period.

The figure is based on a new “component-based” methodology that has already been adopted by many other national statistics institutes. It draws on a range of data sources to improve the ONS’s count of both the number of workers contributing to UK output and the number of hours worked.

Here is more from Delphine Strauss at the FT.

The post UK productivity higher than we had thought appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Bill Allen. The new estimates of hours could ... by M
• In reply to Dismalist. It's probably easier to solve a work ... by M
• So UK productivity grew rather faster after 2008 than we ... by Peter
• In reply to D. Measured productivity rose. But nobody has any ... by Dismalist
• In reply to Dismalist. if you have the same amount of stuff, ... by D
• Plus 8 more...

Related Stories

• Further results on AI and labor market reallocation
• Very good news
• Callum Williams on cybersecurity prices

 

…this month, Singapore launched a scheme promising actual cash to citizens as a reward for logging reading time on a government website.

It’s unlikely to make you megabucks – you have to rack up 50 reading sessions of at least 15 minutes to earn one Singapore dollar (£0.59), with only one logged session allowed per day. But behavioural scientists and psychologists told the Guardian such a scheme could still help boost a habit in precipitous decline…

We all know reading has long-term benefits, but a key element of the Singapore scheme hinges on introducing a short-term reward for the activity, mimicking the immediate dopamine hit of scrolling. In fact, the “gamified” element may be “smarter” than the financial reward offered, says Patrick Taylor, director of education at the Behavioural Insights Team (which originated in David Cameron’s Cabinet Office, also known as the “nudge unit”). “Having a manageable 15-minute daily goal, built around existing routines like commuting or bedtime, with streaks and tracking to keep progress visible” are the aspects that could make the scheme a success, he says.

Here is the full article.

The post The polity that is Singapore appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• Depending on what is required to log reading time on a govt ... by BC
• In reply to Floccina. The US has the most powerful and ... by Anti-Gnostic
• I have been a voracious reader since I was 10 years old. I have ... by Dismalist
• In reply to Crikey. Nay, Trump is leading the counter ... by Dismalist
• How do they ensure people actually read vs. just click the ... by Gilligan
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• Empathy gaps
• My excellent Conversation with Annie Lowrey
• My very interesting Conversation with Jared Diamond

 

2. Bergen County (Korean) fact of the day.

3. AIs cracking superforecasting.

4. Gregor Benko, RIP (NYT).

5. Joshua Saxe on the increase in cyber risk.

6. Lichtenstein political infighting heats up (FT).

7. Risk, the biggie.  And on the Suwalki gap.

The post Saturday assorted links appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to Elad. Thank you:). My point was only that ... by Kaz Stanczak
• In reply to Kaz Stanczak. And you'd be wrong. Many in Tenafly ... by Elad
• # 3. AIs cracking superforecasting I took a one-day ... by vmsmith
• In reply to mkt42. Thank you for an engaging debate, mkt42:) ... by Kaz Stanczak
• In reply to tpe123. Indeed. The covid pandemic showed us how ... by MikeP
• Plus 10 more...

 

My position on AI is merely the conservative, skeptical position of 2006, updated with intellectual honesty for the reality of late 2026. And that position, if you need me to spell it out, is as follows:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

It seems to me that the Singularity has already started; it’s just wildly unevenly distributed. Yes, I still unload the dishwasher and clip my toenails. On the other hand, in whatever years I have left, I don’t expect that I’ll ever again prove a theorem because I’m actually needed to prove it. If I do, it will only be for my or others’ enjoyment or edification.

The test is this: if we took the news of these past few weeks and sent it back in time twenty years, would I agree that it looked like the beginning of an AI Singularity? The intellectually honest answer is: yes, absolutely. But then that’s all we need. No backsies.

I feel like it would be healthy for everyone to stop grinding their ideological axes, their sentiments about Dario Amodei or Sam Altman, for long enough simply to acknowledge that the wonders and terrors are here. They couldn’t be here more clearly if the sky had turned reddish-orange like in the Matrix movies.

It’s here clearly enough that, when I put my kids to sleep at night, I now feel it in the pit of my stomach: what sort of future can they possibly have? What could they learn today that could possibly be relevant to that future? (Yesterday, my 13-year-old daughter joked unprompted that, if she wants to become a mathematician, it now looks like she has maybe two more weeks.) Certainly when my grad students want to discuss what sort of careers might await them on graduation, I no longer have any clue what to tell them.

…For anyone who says AI doom sounds like an apocalyptic religion, that the rationalists/Singulatarians seem like a Bay Area cult, that Eliezer Yudkowsky gives off the vibes of a messianic prophet: yes, yes, and yes. But crucially, today you’re no longer being asked to believe in arguments and extrapolations, but only in the front-page news. Accepting the reality of the coming machine god after it’s solved Navier-Stokes and dozens of other longstanding open math problems (while dramatically ramping up in capability every month), is sort of like accepting Jesus after he’s returned to earth on the gleaming cloud. It’s the epistemic bare minimum.

Yes, there’s still enormous uncertainty about what the rest of our lives will look like, but as far as I can tell, there’s no longer any real uncertainty that it’ll all mostly revolve around AI, and the extent to which we succeed or fail at directing its power toward human flourishing.

By any accounting that doesn’t stack the deck, Eliezer Yudkowsky was right about what the greatest challenge facing civilization in our lifetimes was going to be, and you and I were wrong about it. Why I was wrong is a question I’ll ask myself every day in whatever time remains. But, you know, at least I updated once the prophesied wonders and terrors actually started arriving! If you haven’t done likewise, why haven’t you?

The post The Age of Wonders and Terrors appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to y81. Are you sure about that? Can you glimpse ... by Joe
• I agree that we're living through a singularity. On the other ... by Drew
• In reply to Naveen_K. I code with AI 10 hours/day for work ... by Andy
• In reply to Joseph Ferguson. On the contrary, LLMs are ... by Sinister
• On AI and all technology, the future is already here, it's just ... by ed o
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• Obama on agentic AI
• UK productivity higher than we had thought
• METR, EA, and others being attacked

 

Using a panel of 81 countries across six World Values Survey waves (1990–2022), we examine whether growth in internet diffusion is associated with religious decline. We construct a six-item composite religiosity index, align annual macro series to wave periods, and estimate country fixed-effects models with one-wave lags and a broad set of modernization, demographic, welfare-state, and cultural controls. We also estimate models separately for individual dimensions of religiosity. Across specifications, lagged internet penetration is negatively associated with religiosity within countries over time. These results remain robust under period dummies and in models estimated without lags, although reverse-ordering tests indicate that prior religiosity can also predict later internet use. Associations are strongest for denominational belonging and self-identification as a religious person. Overall, internet diffusion emerges as a robust macro-level correlate of within-country religious decline.

Here is the full article by Miran Lavrič and Tibor Rutar.  Via the excellent Kevin Lewis.

The post Internet diffusion and religious decline? appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to anonprof. I wonder how much of the fraternal and ... by Bob
• In reply to Sure. I think Christianity in particular has got ... by Anti-Gnostic
• In reply to Anti-Gnostic. Has not really shown up in the ... by Sure
• In reply to Gilligan. I suspect, though, that they go the ... by Sure
• There is a bit of a cabal whose theory is that Islam is about ... by j mct
• Plus 10 more...

Related Stories

• Further results on AI and labor market reallocation
• Banning self-recursive improvement in AI models?
• Obama on agentic AI

 

Rishabh received his grant to build a platform for real-time updates from Delhi courts, making judicial activity easier to track and understand.

Hari and Naveen received their grant for Archgen AI, an agentic ecosystem connecting legacy EDA tools with AI workflows for semiconductor chip design.

Shubh, 18, received his grant to scale robotics using world models.

Sarthak Ahuja received his grant for Hypertensight, a smartphone-based system for detecting hypertensive retinopathy, now deployed in over 18 Indian villages. His project was also published in the International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering in 2024.

Michaela Talwar, received her grant for AltShows.com, an artist-run ticketing and discovery platform for India’s alternative arts ecosystem.

Avyukt Jindal, 16, received his grant to develop a nonlinear operator framework and pursue related work in condensed matter and other fields.

Anirudh Anilkumar, 29, and AV Surya Vardhan, 26, received their grant for Fe-rry, developing IoT-enabled modular point-of-care diagnostics for blood testing anywhere.

Bhanvi Kumar, a fourth-year Biotechnology and Biochemical Engineering undergraduate at IIT Kharagpur, received her grant to study cellular reprogramming and cancer cell-state transitions.

Samanvya Hooda received his grant for nuclear strategy research in the Indo-Pacific using Mandarin sources and quantitative methods.

Pradyumn Chaudhary received his grant to build a low-cost, customizable augmented-reality prototype for practical use.

Jay Handa, 16, received his grant to build SMAC (Swing Match AI for Coaches), an AI-powered golf swing analysis platform for coaches.

Sajeeva Ratnam Nepala, 28, founder of Helen Bikes, received his grant to develop a series-hybrid pedal system for the first fully electric hubless bicycle.

Hitendra Singh, cofounder of Spantrik, received his grant to develop reusable rockets, including the Leapfrogger demonstrator; he has built and flown over 100 high-powered rockets.

Avi Mohan Kumar Shuklaa, 17, received his grant for a solar-powered AI elephant deterrent using seismic and radar sensor fusion, already field-deployed in Jharkhand.

Surya Uthkarsha, 14, received his grant for Flake AI, infrastructure that converts websites into editable designs and reflects changes in the underlying codebase.

Kritarth Agrawal received his grant for Sakshya, an AI-powered document-intelligence platform for India’s compliance and regulatory ecosystem.

Tejas Pugalia, 13, received his grant to advance his research on the Ramanujan-tau function and prepare for the International Mathematical Olympiad.

Arnav, 17, from Navi Mumbai, received his grant to build a $200 diagnostic pen intended as an alternative to a $3,000 Parkinson’s scan.

Arjan Chaudhary, 15, received his grant for GGameChamps, which structures competitive-gameplay data for analytics and AI use.

Satadru Chakrabarty, Ph.D., received his grant to develop an affordable multiplexed point-of-care diagnostic using de novo antibodies for liver-function testing in rural India.

Varun Bajpai received his grant for the Biological Data Network (BDN-04), a bio-integrated communication architecture exploring human muscle tissue for data transmission.

Semil Vaghasiya, 24, received his grant to develop sensor-free, 3D-printed hoof pads that use wear-deformation to predict equine injuries.

Kanukant Om Gupta and Mansi Gupta received their grant for Clearquik, to make customs clearance in India simpler, more transparent, and legitimate.

Parth Anand, 15, received his grant for research on temporal hallucinations in large language models across Western and non-Western domains. His paper was accepted for an oral presentation by the Society for Study for Artificial Intelligence and Simulation Behaviour XTAI symposium.

Shadman Sakib received his grant for youth development, communication, practical career guidance, and accessible learning initiatives in Bangladesh; his content reaches over 160,000 subscribers.

Sk Reezaal Arafat, 16, received his grant for Project SATARK, a decentralized agricultural fire-interception grid combining AI, IoT sensors, and a local response network in rural West Bengal.

Manan Gupta received his grant for Artemis, a proactive AI layer that lets users control their digital life through a phone call.

Srijal Dutta received his grant for ZSMC Co., an independent research initiative working across emerging technologies and engineering.

Those unfamiliar with Emergent Ventures can learn more here and here. The EV India announcement is here. More about the winners of EV India second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth , sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth cohorts. To apply for EV India, use the EV application, click the “Apply Now” button and select India from the “My Project Will Affect” drop-down menu.

And here is Nabeel’s AI engine for other EV winners. Here are the other EV cohorts.

If you are interested in supporting the India tranche of Emergent Ventures, please write to me or to Shruti at srajagopalan@mercatus.gmu.edu.

The post Emergent Ventures India, 19th cohort appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• > develop sub-angstrom optical MEMS sensors for next-generation ... by Action Figure

Related Stories

• The Tragedy of Nikole Hannah-Jones
• Scott Beaulier interviews me, in part about Wyoming
• Those new service sector jobs

 

The post Scott Beaulier interviews me, in part about Wyoming appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

       

Comments

• In reply to rayward. The bulk of the water use goes to things ... by Agorabum
• In reply to Wayfaring Stranger. are the result of ... by Both
• Hard pivot to wyoming after burning all yur credibility on ... by Nervous Nelly
• In reply to mkt42. Yellowstone is top tier. I recommend going ... by Jumfrey Tuckins, President of Bugling
• In reply to Diogenes. So we shouldn't solve problems? The ... by Wayfaring Stranger
• Plus 9 more...

Related Stories

• Banning self-recursive improvement in AI models?
• Further results on AI and labor market reallocation
• The Tragedy of Nikole Hannah-Jones