MIT affiliates elected 2026 American Geophysical Union Fellows

Three MIT affiliates — Anthea Coster of MIT Haystack Observatory, Carolyn Ruppel ’86, SM ’86, PhD ’92 of the MIT Energy Initiative, and César Terrer of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering — have been elected as fellows of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) for 2026. 

The AGU also honored eight additional MIT alumni as new fellows: Claudia Benitez-Nelson PhD ’99; Robert Howarth PhD ’79; Douglas J. Jerolmack PhD ’06; Tamara Shapiro Ledley; Galen A. McKinley PhD ’02; Mark David Schmitz PhD ’02; Frederik J. Simons PhD ’02; and Dawn Y. Sumner PhD ’95.

With some 60,000 members in more than 135 countries, the AGU is the world’s largest professional organization for Earth and space scientists and annually elects less than 0.1% of its membership to fellow status. Fellows are chosen from among AGU members who “have made exceptional contributions to Earth and space science through a breakthrough, discovery, or innovation in their field.” AGU Fellows are recognized for their scientific eminence, demonstrated through breakthroughs, discoveries, or innovations that advance the Earth and space sciences. Fellows also act as external experts, advising government agencies and other organizations outside the sciences.

Anthea Coster

Anthea J. Coster is an MIT principal research scientist and Haystack Observatory assistant director emerita.

Coster joined MIT in 1984, originally at MIT Lincoln Laboratory. At Haystack, her career work focuses on atmospheric physics across the ionosphere, magnetosphere, and thermosphere, along with space weather effects and coupling across these different parts of the complex Earth system. She has been responsible for numerous breakthrough contributions in global navigation satellite signal (GNSS) applications to geospace research, including the first GNSS observations of storm-enhanced density across the heavily populated continental United States. She is a recent winner of the Appleton Prize from the International Radio Science Union.

One of the nomination letters for Coster’s AGU Fellowship states, “recognizing that high-level conferences alone were insufficient to provide the necessary training for researchers in developing nations, she co-founded the annual GNSS workshop series (since 2009) in partnership with Boston College and ICTP [the Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics], training 40–50 participants yearly from developing countries … Through the U.N.-sponsored International Space Weather Initiative (ISWI) and other programs, she has participated in numerous public outreach initiatives, consistently working to make space science accessible to diverse audiences worldwide.” Her nomination also mentioned “[h]er efforts in bringing space physics to South America, Africa, and tribal Alaska ... as does her work with advocating for opportunities for women and underserved populations,” and highlighted her integrity, work excellence, respect for colleagues, and collaboration efforts, as well as her public outreach activities.

Carolyn Ruppel

Carolyn Ruppel, who earned three degrees from the MIT Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, is currently the deputy director of science and technology at the MIT Energy Initiative (MITEI). Ruppel, a life member of the AGU, is an expert on gas hydrates, an icelike combination of water and concentrated methane that sequesters an estimated 15% of Earth’s massive methane budget. Before joining MITEI in 2025, she held positions at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (1992-93), Georgia Tech (1994-2006), and the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS’s) Woods Hole coastal and marine research center (2006-2025). In her current position, Ruppel supports Director William H. Green in leading MITEI’s strategic and technical activities. She coordinates among member companies, MIT researchers, and MITEI’s internal teams to manage its portfolio of energy research, education, and outreach.

Starting in 2010, Ruppel led the renowned USGS Gas Hydrates Project, focusing on the resource potential of these shallowly buried and widely distributed deposits, as well as possible feedbacks among warming climate, gas hydrate breakdown, and release of methane (a greenhouse gas) to the ocean and atmosphere. In 2011, Ruppel wrote the supplementary paper on gas hydrates for the MITEI study on “The Future of Natural Gas.” Ruppel also led the influential study debunking catastrophic scenarios for massive gas hydrate breakdown due to global warming and co-discovered over 700 seafloor methane seeps on the U.S. Atlantic margin. Ruppel’s other scientific contributions have been in the fields of continental rifting, subsea permafrost distribution, hydrate reservoir dynamics, and marine heat flow and acoustics.  

César Terrer

César Terrer is the TianFu Group Career Development Professor and associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at MIT.

Terrer studies the land carbon sink: The roughly 30 percent of annual carbon dioxide emissions that plants and soils absorb each year, and whether that will hold through this century. It is one of the largest uncertainties in climate projection. Earth system models disagree about the fate of the land sink by an amount comparable to decades of emissions, largely because they represent the biology that governs it through assumptions rather than measurements. Terrer’s group replaces those assumptions with data, combining global observations — CO₂ experiments, soil inventories, forest plots and satellites. That work has shown that soil nutrients limit how much extra carbon plants take up as CO₂ rises, about three times less than models had assumed; that plant and soil carbon trade off against one another rather than accumulating together as models assume; and that animals are part of the carbon cycle, with tropical forests that have lost their seed dispersers regrowing less than a quarter as much carbon as intact ones. His group is now testing whether soils, rather than vegetation, account for most of the recent land sink. 

All of Terrer’s first-author papers are cited in the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. NASA selected him to co-lead the modeling and data synthesis working group for PANGEA, the scoping study shaping the agency’s next tropical field campaign, and Apple, Cargill, PepsiCo, Inditex, and other organizations have sought his advice on natural climate solutions.

Alumni honored

The eight additional MIT alumni honorees elected AGU Fellows graduated from the following departments:

Claudia Benitez-Nelson PhD ’99 — Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences (with WHOI);

Robert Howarth PhD ’79 — Biology (with WHOI);

Douglas J. Jerolmack PhD ’06 — Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences;

Tamara Shapiro Ledley PhD ’83 — Meteorology;

Galen A. McKinley PhD ’02 — Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences;

Mark David Schmitz PhD ’02 — Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences;

Frederik J. Simons PhD ’02 — Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences; and

Dawn Y. Sumner PhD ’95 — Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.

AGU Fellow awards will be presented at the AGU Fall Meeting in San Francisco in December.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/kdvcnBs

Scene at MIT: Beautiful, intricate, creative quilts

The MIT Quilt Show, put on as a collaboration between the Crafters’ Circle, MIT Makerspaces, and the MIT Women’s League, and funded by the Council for the Arts at MIT, ran for three days in Lobby 13 Oct. 5-7 and drew 950 visitors.

“We got wonderful feedback throughout the show, and it was tremendously gratifying to see the MIT community turn out en masse to support this art form,” says Jane Halpern, show organizer and communications officer for the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.

The exhibit featured around 40 quilts and quilt-adjacent works from about 20 members of the MIT community, plus collaborative works such as an astrophysics community quilt, assembled by graduate student Swati Ravi, and an American flag featuring the embroidery work of refugees, assembled by Anh Vu Sawyer MBA ’20 and her husband Philip.

While the quilt show was a one-time event, Halpern encourages MIT community members who are interested in adding more quilts to their lives to join the Crafters’ Circle Slack channel; check for class listings in the Makerspaces; and visit the New England Quilt Museum in nearby Lowell, Massachusetts.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/isPN3m2

Studying bacteria and the cells they infect

Most biologists who study pathogenic microbes have focused on strains such as Escherichia coli or Staphylococcus aureus, which are not only important for human health, but also relatively easy to grow in the lab. 

Rebecca Lamason, an MIT associate professor of biology, wants to take a more expansive approach that includes bacteria that are more challenging to study. Tackling those microbes, she says, can help scientists learn more about the huge diversity of strategies that pathogens have evolved to interact with their hosts. 

In her lab, she has devised new tools for analyzing pathogens such as Rickettsia parkeri, a tickborne bacterium that causes a mild form of spotted fever. She also studies Listeria monocytogenes, a microbe commonly linked to foodborne illnesses.

From studying these microbes, she hopes to learn more about the many strategies that pathogens have devised to take over host cell machinery, which also offers insight into the fundamental functions performed by those host cells.

“We cannot learn everything from a single type of bacterium or a single type of cell,” Lamason says. “There’s a rich diversity of biological mechanisms that are out there, and I think we have just barely scratched the surface on that.”

In just one recent example, her lab found that R. parkeri can form very tight connections with a cell structure called the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), which mimics some of the interactions that the host cell’s own organelles have with the ER. They’re still puzzling out the reason for this interaction, which hasn’t been seen with other microbes.

“It’s one of those things too where we had gone into the microscope room to look at something else to ask a different question, and we discovered this other unexpected interaction,” Lamason says. “This has been a really fun experience, and it’s also very common when you’re doing cell biology experiments: you see some phenomenon that you didn't expect.”

How systems interact

As a high school student, Lamason was drawn to cell biology and physiology, and she decided she wanted to pursue a PhD even before she knew exactly what that career path would look like.

“I didn’t have anybody in my family that had a PhD or worked in science, and so I didn’t really know what it took or what it was to get a PhD, but for some reason I wanted to do it,” she says. 

Her father was in the military, so her family moved quite a bit, mainly between Florida, California, and Virginia, before settling in Pennsylvania. After graduating from high school, where she was the editor-in-chief of the school newspaper, Lamason spent two years at a local community college before transferring to Millersville University to finish her bachelor’s degree.

At Millersville, she majored in molecular biology and biotechnology and worked in a lab studying chlorella viruses, which infect algae.

“We were characterizing different variants that we could isolate from a pond that was next to the building, so we were looking at very simple questions, but that experience allowed me to see what it was like to ask questions, what it was like to work regularly in a lab,” she recalls.

To gain more experience before applying to graduate school, she worked as a research technician at Hershey Medical Center for a couple of years, in a lab studying zebrafish as a model to understand the genetics of cancer.

As a PhD student at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, where she studied immunology, Lamason realized that what she liked most about biology was studying how different biological systems interact with each together.

“The immune system was an interesting way to get that, because there were all these moving parts, all these cells that had to talk to each other to mount an effective immune response,” she says. “Studying immunology helped me realize what I liked more and more was cell biology. How does the cell, a really complex environment, respond to these external signals and commit to a program or a response that then supports some kind of function?”

For her postdoc, she chose a lab where she could look at those questions through the lens of host-pathogen relationships, at the University of California at Berkeley. 

“What really excited me about pathogens is that they are these wonderful little cell biologists, who often have to navigate the complex environment of the host cell and have evolved unexpected ways to solve problems,” she says. “If they have to get through a barrier, or they have to tell the cell not to die or they have to turn off a response, they have evolved distinct ways to do this.”

Working with Matthew Welch, a cell biologist at Berkeley, she began studying the two organisms that are now the focus of her current research: R. parkeri and L. monocytogenes.

R. parkeri, similar to viruses, cannot survive outside of a host cell and is fully dependent on the host cell machinery to replicate itself. L. monocytogenes, on the other hand, can survive and replicate on its own.

“These constraints shape the biology and the types of interactions that these organisms can use to cause infection,” Lamason says. “That’s what really got me interested in these two very different bacteria and in studying the different cellular and bacterial factors that drive a specific outcome.”

Solving technical challenges

In her lab at MIT, which she started in 2017, Lamason has identified many of the host proteins and other factors that help those two species of bacteria perform functions such as moving between infected cells, which they each do in different ways. In order to do much of this work, Lamason and her students, postdocs, and technicians have had to develop new techniques for studying these microbes. 

Until recently, there was no way to target specific genes in R. parkeri cells, but using CRISPR, Lamason’s lab developed the first technique for doing so, in 2024. That has made it easier for them to delve into the roles of specific genes of interest. They also developed ways to label bacterial proteins that are secreted into the host cell, making it much easier to pick them out from the cells’ own proteins.

“My lab recognizes the technical challenges that face our field, and so sometimes we’re building things to solve problems and sometimes we’re just chasing down really interesting observations and trying to understand how it works,” Lamason says.

When looking for faculty jobs, Lamason was drawn to MIT by the sense of collaboration she found. When members of her lab need to learn a new technique, or explore the workings of a cell organelle the lab hasn’t studied before, they can find help from one of the many other MIT labs that have expertise in different aspects of biology.

“That’s been the key to our success — not only attempting and having these riskier ideas, but having the support of the community to help us think about how do we execute on those,” she says. “There’s this wonderful community of scientists to help you think through and complete the kind of work that you want to do and also to push you to think bigger about how to approach a problem.”

When she’s not puzzling out biology problems, Lamason likes to take to the ice as part of a women’s hockey league in Boston. She took up the sport as a beginner a few years ago, in part as a way to take her mind off the everyday stresses of academia.

“It’s a good challenge, and a good way to get out of the lab and the office and give you something else to think about. If my grant got rejected, if I was having a bad day at work, it was a good way to shut my brain off for a little bit and focus on staying upright,” she says.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/gS1y0s5

Pinning down the structure of quark-gluon plasma, the universe’s first fluid

In the first fraction of a second following the Big Bang, matter existed as a trillion-degree plasma of quarks and gluons — subatomic particles that zinged around at close to the speed of light. This roiling soup lasted for just a few microseconds, before the particles coalesced into more stable protons and neutrons. 

To study this primordial fluid, scientists recreate quark-gluon plasma in large particle accelerators, where ions are smashed together at close to the speed of light. These collisions create droplets of plasma roughly the size of an atomic nucleus, that exist for only tens of septillionths of a second.

One way scientists study this plasma is by tracking other particles, such as heavy quarks, that are not part of the plasma but happen to move through it. The way a heavy particle moves through a fluid should tell something about the microscopic structure of the fluid itself. This general relationship was established famously by physicist Albert Einstein in 1905. 

But in such extreme conditions, where particles are moving at close to the speed of light, something in Einstein’s theory starts to break down; there are interactions within the plasma that the theory can’t quite capture.

Now, physicists at MIT and the University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB) have taken up where Einstein’s theory left off. They have worked out a theory that predicts how a relativistic particle, moving at close to the speed of light, is likely to be pushed and pulled by a fluid as it flies through it. 

The researchers envision that the new theory could be applied to predict how a heavy quark will move through quark-gluon plasma. Such predictions could then be compared to experiments to characterize the microscopic structure of quark-gluon plasma, and what kind of fluid must have existed in the universe’s first moments.

“Our result reveals a new source of information carried by heavy quarks in rare, unusually large changes in their motion,” says Jean Du Plessis, a graduate student in MIT’s Center for Theoretical Physics – a Leinweber Institute. “How often those large changes occur depends on the microscopic nature of the plasma, raising the possibility that they could provide a new way to learn what the quark-gluon plasma is actually like inside.”

Du Plessis and Bruno Scheihing-Hitschfeld of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics at UCSB report their findings today in Physical Review Letters. 

A path from pollen

In 1905, Einstein developed a theory to describe a particle’s motion through fluid and how that motion can reveal the fluid’s microscopic structure. His theory was inspired by the botanist Robert Brown. In 1827, Brown observed a surprising phenomenon: Grains of pollen appeared to randomly jiggle and swirl when suspended in seemingly still water. This curious jittering of particles in fluid was later named “Brownian motion.” 

Einstein’s 1905 theory showed that Brownian motion was a product of invisible, microscopic forces within the fluid. A particle’s motion is a balance between the drag that the fluid exerts on the particle to slow it down, and the random kicks within the fluid that keep the particle moving. These random kicks, Einstein argued, must come from microscopic forces within the fluid, exerted by none other than the atoms and molecules that make up the fluid. The energy of these microscopic particles can add up to kick and jostle larger particles. 

Since he first published his theory, scientists have applied Einstein’s explanation of Brownian motion to characterize a host of fluids, including quark-gluon plasma. Like most other fluids, it was assumed that a particle moving through quark-gluon plasma should experience a similar balance of microscopic kicks as a grain of pollen moving through water. 

This balance is represented by a bell-shaped probability distribution, where a particle is most likely to experience medium forces of kicks (the highest point of the bell), and an equally low probability of the most extreme kicks (the tail ends of the bell), as the particle moves through and eventually settles into a fluid. 

“Einstein showed that the drag and the random kicks must balance in just the right way for a particle eventually to come to the same temperature as its surroundings,” Du Plessis explains. “For the types of fluids he was thinking about, he was correct. But for particles that are moving at relativistic velocities, this relationship breaks down. And we’ve known for 20 years that something is missing. So we have to go beyond the work that Einstein did.”

Kick speed

In their new study, Du Plessis and Scheihing-Hitschfeld calculated the forces that a heavy quark would likely experience if it flew through a fluid at relativistic speeds, close to the speed of light. They did so by carrying out calculations of the strong nuclear force, which is the fundamental force that pulls together quarks and gluons. 

The team started with a scenario of a relativistic heavy quark flying through a gas of weakly interacting quarks and gluons. The weak interactions made this a manageable starting point for their calculations.

For this starting scenario, they calculated the heavy quark’s strong nuclear force and how much its momentum is likely to change as it moves through the gas of quarks and gluons. This calculation produced a curve, or a probability distribution of the quark’s changes in momentum. The same curve can represent the quark’s probability of being kicked with various force; stronger kicks cause bigger changes to the quark’s momentum. 

The curve that the researchers calculated was bell-shaped, similar to what Einstein found with other fluids, only for small kicks. And, unlike Einstein’s bell-shaped curve, what the team found showed a tilt for heavy quarks moving at relativistic speeds. The tails at either end of the curve were uneven, and revealed a surprising imbalance in the kinds of kicks that a heavy quark would experience.

“The usual Brownian picture assumes that large kicks become exceedingly rare,” Du Plessis says. “For heavy quarks, however, these rare kicks are more common than the bell curve predicts, and are not equally likely in opposite directions: A large kick that slows the quark down more than expected from drag is more likely than an equally large kick that leaves it moving faster than expected.”

The team carried out the same calculation in plasmas made up of different particles. They found that the same tilted curve applies, regardless of the makeup of the plasma. Furthermore, they found that this same structure was already hiding in an earlier calculation in a strongly coupled plasma, despite the differences in the microscopic physics.

“This is the first time that this seemingly universal structure was realized and really formalized,” Du Plessis says. “This gives a concrete path forward for how to better understand the quark-gluon plasma, using heavy quarks.”

In terms of what this means for the universe’s first fluid, Du Plessis says that primordial quark-gluon plasma is likely “more strongly interacting than this Brownian motion way of modeling it would suggest. It’s more like a liquid and less like a gas.” 

This research was supported, in part, by the Office of Nuclear Physics in the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science, the U.S. National Science Foundation, and the Simons Foundation. 

de MIT News https://ift.tt/7rqRJQk

Clearing up a robot’s fuzzy memory

In an emergency, a human might someday ask a robotic assistant to fetch a wall-mounted defibrillator located down the hall. But if the robot has incorrectly labeled the defibrillator as a fire extinguisher in its stored memory, it may not know where to find the life-saving device.

This robotic assistant could benefit from a new memory system created by MIT researchers. The system identifies entries in a robot’s memory that might be wrong and corrects the descriptions of mislabeled objects. 

In the future, this method could make household or industrial robots better able to perform complex, multistep tasks, such as clearing a dining room table or working alongside human collaborators to assemble a piece of machinery. 

Called UQ-DAAAM (which stands for Uncertainty Quantification for Describe Anything, Anywhere, at Any Moment), the system compares multiple descriptions of the same object, seen from different viewpoints, to quantify the robot’s uncertainty about what it saw. 

It then selects additional views to reduce the uncertainty and combines these captions into a more accurate description of the object, which it saves to memory.

The researchers also employed a special technique to streamline this process so a mobile robot can continually update uncertain memory entries in real time. 

When compared to baseline methods, UQ-DAAAM boosted the robot’s confidence and improved the accuracy of its answers to questions about objects, their locations, and when it saw them. 

“Contrary to ChatGPT, when we think about physical AI, it is not enough to simply put a disclaimer cautioning that sometimes the robot might be wrong. Allowing a robot to know what it doesn’t know is going to be essential for this technology to be deployed safely and have a positive impact on society,” says Luca Carlone, an associate professor in MIT’s Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AeroAstro), principal investigator in the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS), director of the MIT SPARK Laboratory, and the senior author of the paper presenting UQ-DAAAM.

He is joined on the paper by co-lead authors and MIT graduate students Harry Zhang and Nicolas Gorlo. The research will be presented at the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 

Amending memory

This new method builds on the researchers’ prior work, DAAAM, a robot memory system that uses a vision-language model (VLM) to richly describe objects in scenes a robot captures with its onboard cameras. These descriptions are stored as detailed captions in a 3D map-based representation of the robot’s environment that it can call upon later to answer questions. 

But the robot sometimes sees objects only partially or from far away, or its camera might capture blurry or poorly lit images. In these cases, DAAAM might describe these objects incorrectly, such as by mistaking a gray chimney for a squirrel perched on a rooftop.

“With no way to correct itself, this wrong memory would persist as the robot proceeds in its environment, which could impact downstream applications,” Zhang says.

UQ-DAAAM integrates uncertainty quantification into the DAAAM framework. It allows the robot to measure its confidence in the accuracy of object descriptions and fix incorrect captions as it travels through an environment.

While on the move, the robot constantly collects and stores images of the world around it. Many of these images show the same objects captured from different angles. UQ-DAAAM uses these additional viewpoints to identify and correct unreliable descriptions.

First, it calculates the VLM’s confidence level in the words it generated to describe a potentially mislabeled object. Then, it measures consistency by comparing this description to captions of images that describe the same object from different vantage points.

“We fuse both sources of uncertainty into a single number that captures how certain the VLM is in its overall understanding of the object,” Carlone explains.

If that number exceeds a certain threshold, the uncertainty is too high, and UQ-DAAAM will refine the caption by using additional images of the object.

It does this using a heuristic, or simple rule, that determines which additional viewpoints will reduce the robot’s uncertainty about the object. For instance, it might choose an image captured a few frames later that clearly shows smoke emanating from the chimney. 

The researchers mathematically proved that this heuristic can identify the best frames to select without rerunning the VLM, dramatically reducing the amount of computation. 

“The key challenge Nico and Harry had to overcome is how to combine VLMs with uncertainty quantification into something that is running in a fraction of a second on a robot that is moving,” Carlone says.

Remembering with confidence

Once it has identified additional captions that will reduce its uncertainty about the object, the system uses an LLM to fuse them into a single object description. To boost accuracy, the LLM puts more weight on new captions and those with less ambiguity.

This refinement step is able to resolve ambiguities for about 92 percent of the objects in the robot’s environment, while only requiring two additional captions per object. It increased the accuracy of object descriptions by 5 percent compared to the state of the art.

UQ-DAAAM also provided more accurate answers to questions about the objects it observed, where it saw them, and when it last encountered them than baseline methods.

“Performing this uncertainty quantification procedure across the entire map the robot generates allows it to improve its understanding of what it has observed,” Gorlo says.

Next, the researchers want to use UQ-DAAAM to guide different types of robots, like mobile robotic manipulators, and apply their uncertainty quantification techniques to other domains. 

In addition, they are studying the use of UQ-DAAAM to identify areas of high uncertainty the robot could revisit to improve its understanding of the environment. They are also exploring uncertainty quantification in systems that predict the future state of a robot’s environment.

This research is supported, in part, by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory and the U.S. Office of Naval Research. Carlone is currently on sabbatical as an Amazon Scholar; this article describes work performed at MIT and is not associated with Amazon.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/smuy2bi

Mentees, colleagues, friends share remembrances of Susumu Tonegawa

Before he passed away on July 11, Susumu Tonegawa had been a professor at MIT for more than 40 years. At a memorial service Oct. 16, colleagues, mentees and other friends spanning almost the whole arc of his illustrious MIT career gathered with members of his family to celebrate his life with recollections and stories that praised not only his science and achievements, but even more so his humanity.

The picture that 16 speakers collectively painted was one of a man who simultaneously demanded excellence and yet consistently demonstrated kindness and a joyous enthusiasm for science (and art and baseball). 

Although he was a 1987 Nobel laureate for his breakthrough immunology research and is renowned for his groundbreaking research on memory, the testimonials dwelled little on his awards. Instead, they focused on a much more personal and intimate degree of inspiration and impact. 

Scientist and mentor

Picower Professor Myriam Heiman, director of The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory that Tonegawa founded as MIT’s Center for Learning and Memory in 1994, had been a colleague of Tonegawa’s for 15 years. But she shared that his work in the fields of immunology and memory had been an inspiration to her long before that — ever since she was an undergraduate student at Princeton University. There, she studied his work to explain the diversity of antibodies during an immunology class at the same time she was reading a Proust novel dedicated to how memory and art can restore and make immutable what would otherwise be lost to time.

Professor Amy Keating, head of Tonegawa’s home department of Biology, hailed his passion for molecular biology as an inspiring example for students. She noted that he took big risks to learn the emerging subject in the 1960s by moving across the Pacific Ocean to enroll in graduate school in San Diego. And while he achieved historic results by applying molecular biology to both immunology and neuroscience, he only did so after persisting through worries that he and his fellow PhD students shared about the future of the field when they graduated in 1968.

Much like Tonegawa learned molecular biology from the ground up, former graduate student Arvind Govindarajan PhD '05, now at McKinsey & Co., joined Tonegawa’s lab in 1999 based on his curiosity about the brain, rather than based on having had any prior neuroscience training. He affirmed that Tonegawa encouraged his mentees to be ambitious and to dream big, even if they didn’t start out familiar with the subject matter. Govindarajan quoted Tonegawa as saying, “It is irrelevant what you know. It only relevant what you want to work on.” And similarly encouraged him to “have no fear, if the problem is interesting, go forth and do it, but when you publish, it has to be perfect.”

Another early mentee, Tom McHugh PhD '01 of the RIKEN Center for Brain Science in Japan, similarly described Susumu’s assertive encouragement, quoting Tonegawa as saying, “A journal doesn’t make your paper good, your paper makes the journal good.” But McHugh also noted that Tonegawa advised against ever resting on one’s laurels by often quoting the Japanese proverb: “after victory, tighten your helmet.”

Although Tonegawa pushed for excellence, even down to the details, 1980s mentee Juan Lafaille of New York University reminded the gathering, “he was, at least, as demanding of himself as he was of us.”

And Tomás Ryan, a postdoc in Tonegawa’s lab from 2010 to 2016, emphatically seconded the idea that Tonegawa’s advice was not only worth receiving, but also passing on. He shared a list of seven lessons that guide how he runs his own lab at Trinity College in Dublin, from where he flew in to join the ceremony.

“In Ireland we often say, you should never meet your heroes, you’ll only be disappointed,” Ryan said. “For me, the exception to this maxim was Susumu … I was incredibly fortunate to have Susumu as a mentor.”

Builder of communities

Many other speakers remembered Susumu as a community builder, not least because he founded the Picower Institute. 

MIT School of Science Dean Nergis Mavalvala praised Tonegawa for building a community of neuroscience at MIT that has had impact well beyond his pioneering work on how memories are stored, recalled, and associated with feelings and relationships. The Picower Institute today comprises 16 labs and about 400 people, and hundreds more have trained in its labs over the decades.

“It takes a vision bigger than your own science and your own lab to be part of founding something this influential, and I really admire him for that,” Mavalvala said. 

Matt Wilson, the first professor Tonegawa hired into the “Center for Learning and Memory,” recalled Tonegawa’s absolute confidence. Wilson for instance, didn’t bother renovating any lab space, because he believed (correctly, it turned out) that Tonegawa would deliver on the promise of an entirely new building (Building 46).

“The thing that really struck me was not just his infectious enthusiasm, but the absolute certainty that he had that this was going to be a success, that this was going to have impact,” Wilson said. “We built everything from scratch.”

Govindarajan recalled how Tonegawa involved himself deeply in the design of Building 46, working with architect Charles Correa to make sure every lab space would be the best it could be. And MIT Corporation member and longtime Tonegawa friend Barrie Zesiger fondly recalled a story about how when the building was new, Tonegawa stood with her at a huge window overlooking the train tracks that run directly underneath. They stayed perfectly still with their hands on the window as the train ran under, but after it passed he was elated that the vibrations were so minimal.

“It was like a child, the joy on his face,” she recalled. 

Biology Professor Chris Kaiser recalled how as an assistant professor he worked with Tonegawa when he was recruiting young faculty to the new learning and memory center, including Wilson, Troy Littleton, and Elly Nedivi.

Zesiger said, “He loved his learning and memory colleagues — loved them all, all of you.”

Honest, joyous, and kind

Picower Professor Li-Huei Tsai, among the later of Tonegawa’s Picower faculty recruits, said she frequently sought his advice during her 17 years as Picower Institute director. He was “unfailingly honest,” yet warm and supportive, she said. And he never lost his sense of wonder.

“I came to value that honesty enormously,” Tsai said. “It is only now beginning to sink in that I will no longer be able to turn to him for his sage advice.’’

Longtime and current lab member Michele Pignatelli also admired the childlike passion and wonder that Tsai and so many others recalled. He recounted how, when he first learned from Tonegawa’s wife Mayumi that Tonegawa had passed away, he initially felt heartbreak and anxiety, but that quickly transitioned to “an overwhelming sense of gratitude.” 

“Working with Susumu has been the greatest honor of my life,” Pignatelli said. “We will keep the flame burning.”

In his own personal tribute to Tonegawa, Peter Mombaerts PhD '92, a graduate student from Tonegawa’s immunology days who is now the director of Max Planck Research Unit for Neurogenetics in Frankfurt, was one of the few to dwell even for just a moment on Tonegawa’s Nobel Prize. But he did so only to make the point that Tonegawa did not suffer from “Nobelitis,” a loss of humility and perspective said to sometimes afflict those who’ve achieved their field’s highest honor.

In an especially poignant anecdote illustrating Tonegawa’s capacity for humility and kindness, current lab postdoc Quentin Ferry shared that he has a young daughter with a set of disabilities that often leave people unsure of how to interact with or understand her. She is often therefore left out. But at a lab cookout last summer, Ferry heard his daughter laughing. Tonegawa was playing with her joyfully.

“He didn’t see a condition to be nervous around, he saw a little girl who wanted to play,” Ferry said. “We will all remember Susumu’s brilliance. What I wish is that we also carry forward his kindness.”

Memorial fund

At the memorial, Picower Institute director Myriam Heiman announced that a generous donor has pledged $100,000 to launch the Susumu Tonegawa Memorial Fund, an endowed fund that will provide enduring support for curiosity-driven research at the Picower Institute. 

Additional gifts will help grow the fund and expand its long-term impact, ensuring that Tonegawa's spirit of scientific discovery continues to inspire future generations of researchers. To contribute, give online or email memorial-gifts-office@mit.edu.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/9aU6gLn

Dream, build, destroy, repeat

The MIT Combat Robotics Club (CRC) uses the tagline “build, battle, destroy, repeat,” which is a pretty spot-on description for a club that embraces learning opportunities through destruction. 

“We make fighting robots,” explains Ryan Duarte, the 2025-26 CRC captain and current captain of a sub team for CRC’s ARES robot. “We try and make something indestructible to kill someone else's creation [that] they've tried to make indestructible … and they're trying to kill ours. In other competitions, the winner is who scores more points. You can tell at the end of a match by looking at [the robots] who the winner is.” 

The club, which was founded in 2001 and is housed in the MIT Edgerton Center, was rebooted in 2023 with new members and designs. CRC sub teams compete in the National Havoc Robot League (NHRL) Professional Robot Fighting League. Competitions are hosted approximately every two months, including “house battles” on campus for the MIT community and local teams. Fans of the hit show “BattleBots” might remember some of CRC’s past robots, including Uppercut, SawBlaze, the Dentist, and Overhaul.

ARES, named for the Greek god of war, competes in the 30-pound weight class (other NHRL categories include the 3lb and 12lb weight classes). The robot combines a “Beater Bar,” or vertical spinner, with a compact, dual redundant poly-v belt brushless weapon power system on a high-performance brushless four-wheel drive with lightweight aluminum, titanium, and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene chassis. 

Abi Dixon, 2026-27 CRC captain, says the fighting machine was created from “from steel, titanium, aluminum, and passion.” The robot was a top seed going into last winter’s 2025 NHRL World Championships, but failed to emerge victorious. “Our two losses with ARES were against two opponents which shared a similar weapon type which our underdeveloped armor couldn't withstand,” says Duarte. The team saw the losses as an opportunity to make improvements. 

 “A unique thing about our outlook for these competitions is that no matter how poorly a match goes on our end, afterwards the dominant emotion is still pride,” says Dixon. 

“Being in this community and on this team has changed me,” she says, because “how can you put so much energy, so much love, so much blood, sweat, and tears into a machine and then be totally OK with putting it inside the cage and it exploding, and then literally picking up your pride off the floor, smushing it all back together, and getting back in there? You grow an understanding of finding the wins, even when things look like a complete loss.”

ARES, captained by Duarte, along with fellow Department of Mechanical Engineering (MechE) undergraduates Henry Dang, Kendall Binkley, and Liam Gault, has been undergoing improvements. The team took second place at an April competition and third in October. CRC is simultaneously upgrading ARES and another robot, KRATOS, while continuing progress toward a next generation of robots. 

At MIT, the CRC is open to everyone regardless of year, major, or prior experience. It is entirely student-run, self-taught, and highly collaborative. Participants engineer tough, reliable, performant systems and have an opportunity to learn a variety of skills, from computer-aided design and finite element analysis to CNC machining and welding. 

“Before MIT, I never had the opportunity to independently say, ‘I'm going to make this,’ and complete everything in the engineering process from start to finish. CRC embodies that vision, and solidified my desire to become an engineer,” says Eleni Morales, CRC team member, 2025-26 co-manufacturing chair, and undergraduate in MechE.

CRC welcomed 54 new members this fall semester. As an onboarding exercise, the new members are building 1-pound, or “ant weight,” combat robots in teams of three students. 

“We remain committed to making the team accessible for students with all levels of technical experience (including none!) through a structured onboarding process that prioritizes each and every member feeling as though they have technical ownership over a part of their sub team’s robot,” says Dixon.

The team will host their third annual MIT Combat Robotics House Battle on Nov. 14 at the new Met Warehouse. 

de MIT News https://ift.tt/jkTYdDK