Supercomputing researchers document evolution of AI hardware

As artificial intelligence transforms industries and national security, understanding the latest hardware capabilities is important for maintainind technological advantage.

AI accelerators — specialized systems designed to speed up capabilities such as neural networks, deep learning, and machine learning — have been a major area of development for nearly a decade. Since 2018, team from the Lincoln Laboratory Supercomputing Center (LLSC) has been conducting the Lincoln AI Computing Survey (LAICS, pronounced "lace"). Six papers later, LAICS continues to summarize current commercial AI accelerators and compare their peak performance and peak power.

"About eight years ago, we saw a sharp rise in the number of research AI accelerators described in research papers and commercial accelerators being announced, and we started to get questions about them from government sponsors of the laboratory's work. That was motivation enough to start the survey," says Albert Reuther, a staff member at the LLSC, which operates and optimizes the high-performance computing systems used by thousands of laboratory research staff.

Although AI accelerators are frequently used for processes such as machine learning, they also can enable other parallel applications, such as modeling the functions of molecules and speeding up simulations of fluid dynamics — processes that are very computationally expensive.

AI accelerator technology can come in a number of forms: central processing units (CPUs), graphics processing units (GPUs), application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), and dataflow accelerators. Each type of accelerator has slightly different capabilities. CPUs can be used for general-purpose computing, while ASICs can perform only very specific tasks. Dataflow accelerators, FPGAs, and GPUs are more flexible and can be configured for a variety of workloads. Efficiency and performance vary across the different types of accelerators depending on how they are designed. The goal of LAICS is to survey the technologies currently on the market and compare them to find the best accelerators for certain needs.

Led by Reuther, the LAICS team includes LLSC members Michael Jones, Peter Michaleas, Jeremy Kepner, and Vijay Gadepally. The team also collaborates with researchers across Lincoln Laboratory, including in the Advanced Technology Division and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance and Tactical Systems Division, to learn how accelerators support research and development for their missions.

The first paper in their series studied 57 accelerators, while the latest one looked at more than 120 accelerators. The main metrics the team uses to compare accelerators are the peak performance and power; then they sort accelerators by whether they're on a chip, card, or system. All the data in the papers are drawn from public sources, which can be challenging because some companies prefer to keep their performance and power data private. To keep up to date on the latest in the field, Reuther runs daily news and citation searches that report new technical press articles, company announcements, and industry presentations.

"It continues to surprise me how each year another five to 10 startups get funded and announced, and then release new AI accelerators," Reuther says. "One might think that the landscape is saturated enough, but then another batch of innovative accelerators is introduced."

In addition to summarizing the performance versus peak power of the current accelerators, each paper explores a new aspect of the field. For example, the paper published in 2022 investigated sources of performance increases, finding that they stem from smaller, denser transistor designs and the use of lower numerical precision (i.e., calculating fewer significant digits). The latest paper examined different architectural choices available, analyzing how the addition of certain components, such as more cores per processor or parallel performance, would change the system.

Reuther plans to continue the survey for the foreseeable future, stating that, in just the past few months, six new startups have announced their first AI accelerators.

"AI and the hardware it runs on are such hot topics, and it is important for Lincoln Laboratory to be an unbiased technical advisor for choosing and pursuing the right technologies," Reuther says. "Our AI accelerator surveys have helped many sponsors and government colleagues gain a better understanding of the AI accelerator landscape and make better research and acquisition decisions about them. This survey has also been very valuable to determine which GPUs we should consider for upcoming LLSC system purchases so it not only benefits our sponsors and mission programs, but also benefits all LLSC users."

The full set of papers and the accompanying datasets can be found here.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/RvFEA56

Chris Bourg named vice provost and Barbara K. Ostrom (1978) Director of the MIT Libraries

Chris Bourg, who has served as director of the MIT Libraries since 2015, has been named vice provost and Barbara K. Ostrom (1978) Director of the Libraries, MIT Provost Anantha Chandrakasan announced today.

“The title ‘vice provost’ signals the enduring importance of the MIT Libraries in the digital age,” said Chandrakasan. “While the ways in which the libraries meet the needs of our community might change as technology changes, their mission of protecting access to knowledge and information is as vital as ever.”

Thanks to a generous gift from Barbara K. Ostrom ’78, SM ’78, the position of the director of the libraries now has an endowment to help fund it in perpetuity. Bourg noted that the gift is especially meaningful for her, due to the sense of service she shares with Ostrom: they both completed Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) during their time as undergraduates — Bourg at Duke University and Ostrom at MIT — before going on to active military service.

“Barbara’s gift is an incredible acknowledgment of the progress the entire MIT Libraries staff has made toward our vision,” said Bourg, who noted that Ostrom had also supported an MIT Libraries initiative to highlight MIT’s women faculty by acquiring, preserving, and making accessible their personal archives. “Her generosity advances the libraries’ ability to support teaching, learning, and community-building at MIT well into the future.”

During her tenure, Bourg has emphasized digital access to content, a more open and equitable scholarly publishing landscape, and expanded support for data-intensive and computational research. She has helped both the libraries and the Institute adapt to AI-driven changes: she co-chaired the Working Group on Scholarly Content and Generative AI, charged with helping the MIT community navigate the legal, technical, and ethical issues involved when scholarly content is used to develop and train generative AI models. And she was a member of the Ad Hoc Committee on AI Use in Teaching, Learning, and Research Training, which issued its final report in August.

Promoting open scholarship has been a longstanding focus of Bourg’s career. In 2018, the libraries launched the Center for Research on Equitable and Open Scholarship, with Bourg serving as founding director. She co-chaired the 2017 MIT Ad Hoc Task Force on Open Access to MIT’s Research; its recommendations led to the creation of the MIT Prize for Open Data, co-sponsored by the School of Science, and the development of the MIT Framework for Publisher Contracts. Guided by the framework, MIT became one of the first major U.S. institutions to cancel a journals contract with Elsevier in 2020, standing by its open scholarship principles while saving the Institute millions of dollars.

Bourg co-chaired the 2016 Ad Hoc Task Force on the Future of Libraries and has guided the MIT Libraries toward the vision laid out by the task force report. Under her leadership, the libraries completed a major renovation of Hayden Library and the Building 14 Courtyard and launched MIT Reads, an Institute-wide reading and discussion program designed to foster empathy and belonging within the MIT community.

Prior to joining MIT, Bourg worked for 12 years in the Stanford University Libraries. Before Stanford, she spent 10 years as an active-duty U.S. Army officer, including three years on the faculty at the United States Military Academy at West Point. She received a BA from Duke, an MA from the University of Maryland, and an MA and PhD in sociology from Stanford. 

Bourg is a member of the board of the Center for Open Science, the external advisory board of the Stanford Data Science Institute’s Center for Open and Reproducible Science, and the board of Annual Reviews, a premier publisher of open review journals in 51 disciplines. She also currently serves on the national academies of Science and Engineering, and the Medicine Corrections and Retractions Committee, tasked with upgrading the scientific record.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/n7ugeUm

MIT announces the MIT for America initiative, to strengthen STEM education across the country

MIT is launching a new strategic initiative today: MIT for America, which seeks to strengthen STEM education nationally, at many levels of learning. 

Addressing a critical national need, the initiative ranges across STEM fields and will engage students from kindergarten through community college, preparing them to live and work in a world increasingly shaped by science and technology. MIT for America’s programs will develop new opportunities for student achievement in mathematics, hands-on design and fabrication, and constructive engagement with artificial intelligence. 

President Sally Kornbluth made the announcement today in a letter to the Institute community.

“A natural extension of the Institute’s long record of national service, MIT for America is grounded in our deep belief in potential over pedigree, of the transformative power of learning by doing and in the open sharing of knowledge,” Kornbluth wrote.

The initiative represents an Institute-wide effort to address the national challenge of improving STEM education and helping it adapt to shifting societal needs. MIT for America will leverage the Institute’s longstanding strengths to develop new programs and expand existing projects, while amplifying MIT’s impact on national education.

MIT for America’s faculty leaders emphasize that the initiative will support programs that can be scaled up and that provide direct, face-to-face guidance for learners and educators. 

“The goal is to provide programs that are both scalable and high-touch, and make an impact across the country,” says Professor Eric Klopfer, a faculty co-director of MIT for America and director of the Scheller Teacher Education Program and the Education Arcade at MIT. “All our programs take advantage of things we are well-positioned to do at MIT, and can be distributed around the country. That’s our guiding light.” 

Cynthia Breazeal, faculty co-director of MIT for America, professor of media arts and sciences, and the Benesse Professor of Research in Education, says the initiative “is about bringing high-quality access to STEM and AI education, from kindergarten to community college, across the United States. We live in an innovation-driven world, and it’s important to have an education that gives you access to it, whether that’s so you can be a fully engaged citizen or have the opportunity for economic mobility.”

Breazeal adds: “Talent is everywhere. We think opportunity should be, too.” 

The initiative is addressing large-scale needs in STEM education. Only 29 percent of U.S. students in grades 9-12 build circuits, and only 6 percent of students enroll in computer science classes, even though about 60 percent of high schools offer such courses. MIT for America intends to substantially help communities across the country build the bandwidth needed to further develop STEM knowledge and workplace skills. 

“This effort is about really rolling up sleeves and getting out there and engaging communities, and helping to build capacity across the United States,” Breazeal adds.

MIT for America features programs addressing three high-priority areas:

Mathematical thinking and problem solving: Work here builds on an existing program, the MIT for America Calculus Project, launched a year ago, in which MIT students and alumni volunteer to help provide calculus tutoring to students in school districts across the country. 

Living, learning, and working with AI: This area addresses multiple issues revolving around AI, including teacher education that helps instructors integrate AI into classroom learning in productive ways, and programs that enhance AI skills and STEM education in technical-vocational schools and community colleges. The MIT RAISE program (Responsible AI for Social Empowerment and Education) is a leader in this domain. 

Designing, making, and innovating: MIT for America plans to build out programs that encourage hands-on learning, design work, use of fab labs and makerspaces, and experiential learning, sometimes deploying tools such as national design challenges. 

“Across the U.S., we want to unlock opportunities and experiences where students are,” says Claudia Urrea, head of MIT for America and head of the MIT pK-12 Initiative. “We want to find people who have not had the opportunity to discover their talent.”

In the first case, the MIT for America Calculus Project provides a ready model of outreach with growth potential. About half of U.S. school districts offer calculus, but many of those districts may be under-resourced. The MIT for America Calculus Project has been growing in partnership with an increasing number of school districts, while MIT undergraduates and alumni have enjoyed participating in the program.  

“People have been really excited about the MIT for America Calculus Project, seeing both the impact that it has, and its model, which I think has resonated,” Klopfer says. “That’s really representative of what other programs could look like.”

In the second topic area, MIT for America can leverage burgeoning efforts such as MIT RAISE. The program helps educate teachers and engage students about implementing AI in ways that can complement the developing skills of students, enabling them to use AI in productive ways.

“RAISE is about providing materials and training for teachers that helps them have conversations and productive activities around AI,” Klopfer says. “It’s about understanding how AI works and discussing what the values are in your school. It has to be active, involving the students. If you try to force things, about AI one way or the other, that will fail.”

In an outgrowth of RAISE, MIT also launched a related program, Pathways for AI Training and Hiring (PATH), on Oct. 1. Starting with a partnership with Georgia State University, PATH aims to bring AI training to two-year and four-year colleges, to help students gain AI skills useful for workplaces. 

“RAISE has had a lot of success with scaling already,” Breazeal says, noting that about 1 million students were involved with RAISE’s Day of AI event earlier this year. “At MIT, we want to empower youth voices to shape the future. It’s an excellent example of our ability to do that.”

And in the third topic area, MIT for America can help produce substantial growth in programs aimed at hands-on learning. That may include more projects such as MIT’s Regenerative Futures Challenge, a global program stemming from MIT’s pK-12 Initiative, which give students the opportunity to create climate and sustainability solutions. Additionally, the Fab Foundation, which grew out of MIT’s Center for Bits and Atoms Fab Lab program, offers tools and curriculum to learners at 300 fab labs across the U.S.

“It’s about coming together in places where there are people who can work together, mentor each other, and learn by example,” Klopfer says. “That’s the kind of thing we want to be creating at scale. We want to build on that.”

All told, MIT for America represents a vigorous all-campus effort to enhance education through sustained outreach and knowledge-sharing. At MIT, partners in creating the initiative include the MIT Media Lab; MIT RAISE; the MIT pK-12 Initiative; the Office of the Vice President for Resource Development; and the Office of Innovation and Strategy.

The leaders of MIT for America presented an overview of the program in September at MIT’s Alumni Leadership Conference, and they say alumni activity around the new initiative will be another key to its success. 

“We really appreciate the support and engagement of our alumni,” Breazeal says. “We know they care about K-12 education and access to community colleges.” More broadly, she adds, “We do think this message will resonate with people all across the country.”

“I look forward to watching these programs flourish, evolve, and grow,” Kornbluth wrote to the community. 

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

Astronomers catch a star slowly snacking on a brown dwarf, 300 light years away

Like Earth, most planetary bodies circle their star in stable, detached orbits. These companionable systems can suddenly change when a planet comes too close to its star. In such a close encounter, a star can pull the planet in and swallow it whole. 

Across the galaxy, astronomers have seen plenty of stable, detached planetary systems. They have also observed a handful of stars quickly engulfing their planet. Now, for the first time, scientists have spotted a system that is striking a curious balance between the two extremes. And it’s revealing a new way that stars can interact with planetary companions. 

In a paper appearing today in Nature Astronomy, scientists at MIT and elsewhere have discovered a star leisurely snacking on a closely orbiting brown dwarf — a planet-like object that is more massive than a planet yet not quite as big as a star. 

The new system, named ZTF J0440+2325, is within the Milky Way galaxy, roughly 300 light years from Earth, and represents the first observation of a low-mass object that is slowly and steadily consuming material from another low-mass object. 

The rate at which the star is feeding from the brown dwarf suggests that this slow stellar cannibalism could carry on for hundreds of thousands, or even billions of years.

“When we think of stars interacting with planets or brown dwarfs, the picture is always that the star eventually swallows the other thing,” says Kevin Burdge, assistant professor of physics at MIT. “This is what will happen to the Earth when the sun becomes a red giant. But here, we’ve found an alternative: Instead of swallowing the thing up, the star can gradually eat it, for billions of years.”

The study’s MIT co-authors include Aaron Householder, Kaitlyn Shin, Saul Rappaport, Joheen Chakraborty, and Emma Chickles, along with collaborators from Caltech, the University of Hawaii, the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias and the Universidad de La Laguna in Spain, and the Harvard and Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

A “weird triangle”

The new system was spotted initially by the Zwicky Transient Facility. The ZTF uses a camera as part of a telescope at the Palomar Observatory, in California, to scan the sky for rapid changes in brightness, which could signal the presence of a supernova, a gamma-ray burst, or colliding neutron stars. 

Several years ago, Burdge was looking through ZTF data when he noticed a strange light curve, or pattern in brightness. Light curves for supernova resemble a bell curve, signaling the gradual brightening and then fading of a star as it bursts. But what Burdge picked out looked more like a triangle, that didn’t appear once, but again and again.

“I remember first looking at this and thinking: Stars don’t make triangular waveforms like this,” he recalls. 

At the time, he and his colleagues were focused on a different signal, which they identified as a “black widow binary” — a system in which an extremely dense, spinning neutron star is slowly consuming a much smaller companion star, similar to how its arachnid namesake plays with its prey. 

Burdge wondered whether the triangle signal might also be from a black widow. But the light from the signal was puzzling. In black widow binaries, the light appears to wobble, as a result of a very light, low-mass object, such as a small companion star, whipping around a much heavier object, such as a neutron star. 

“We weren’t seeing that whipping back and forth here,” Burdge says. “It didn’t make any sense. We couldn’t explain what this was.” 

But they had a hunch: Could the signal be coming not from a wobbly, David-and-Goliath system, but from a more balanced pair of objects, each with a similarly low mass? 

“If you have less mass in the system overall, things can gently orbit each other without whipping back and forth,” Burdge says. “That was the idea. But we never had any proof. And this weird triangle just sat for years.”

A slow and steady fireball

Recently, Burdge and Householder, a graduate student in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, decided to revisit the triangle mystery. From the original ZTF signal, they determined the location of its source to be within the Milky Way galaxy, around 300 light years from Earth. They focused multiple telescopes on the source, named ZTF J0440+2325. From these observations, they measured various properties of the source, including its wobble. Compared to black widows and other similar binaries, the wobbling from ZTF J0440+2325 was much smaller — but not insignificant. 

“That was the real clincher for this system,” Householder says. “When we measured that wobble, we found we were not seeing a black widow. This was a low-mass star that’s orbited by a brown dwarf. The wobble was too small in amplitude to be anything else.”

They determined that the star and the brown dwarf are extremely close, with the brown dwarf circling the star every 87 minutes, in an orbit that could fit within the diameter of the sun. Both objects are small by stellar standards. The star is around 85 times as massive as Jupiter, while the brown dwarf is around 25 times as massive. 

With two low-mass objects circling at such close range, the scientists wondered if one object could be pulling material from the other. Such a process, known as accretion, is most often seen around objects that are extremely massive, though small in actual size, such as black holes and neutron stars. When a black hole accretes, or draws material from a much smaller nearby object, it pulls the matter around it in a disk.

“The difference here is: The thing absorbing matter is not a tiny black hole but a star, which is relatively big in size,” Burdge explains. “So matter just pummels directly onto the surface, at very high speeds, like an asteroid hitting the moon.”

The team carried out simulations of possible accretion in ZTF J0440+2325. Taking into account the properties of the star and the brown dwarf, they simulated particles of matter on the brown dwarf, and how these particles should behave within the system over time, according to the laws of physics and equations of motion. 

“When we track those test particles, we see they indeed fall right onto the surface of the star,” Householder says. “This is the first time we’ve caught a low-mass star actively accreting from another low-mass object.”

What’s more, the team calculated that the brown dwarf must be feeding material to its star at a rate of about 1/100,000 of an Earth’s mass each year. That’s about 40 million dump trucks’ worth of material, or roughly 1.3 trillion one-pound burritos every second. While that may seem like a lot of matter to be losing, it is in fact a very small fraction of the brown dwarf. This rate, the researchers estimate, is actually quite slow and steady. Given the size of the system, they say the star could continue leisurely snacking on the brown dwarf, for billions of years. 

This slow accretion, they say, would resemble a steady stream from the brown dwarf, onto the star. The researchers realized that if they were to view the system from afar, the brightness from the system would chart as a triangle, as the brown dwarf and its stream of matter circles its star. 

“It’s like you’ve got this continuous fireball onto one of the objects, and as one orbits the other, that hotspot comes in and out of view, and the peak of the triangle signal is when you’re looking right at the fireball,” Burdge explains. 

With the mystery of the triangle light curve solved, the team hopes to spot similar slow-feeding systems nearby. 

“It’s inspiring a lot of new searches on our part,” Householder says. “I think we’re going to learn a lot about a different kind of way that planets and brown dwarfs interact with their host stars.”

This research was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/JngmS9q

Documenting the tech worker movement

Despite the “dot-com crash” in 2000, the tech industry remained an attractive career destination for many who believed technology represented the future. The digital age — defined by global connectivity and computers — had firmly taken hold, and over time, the tech industry emerged as a dominant force in the labor market. High-paying jobs for engineers, designers, and professionals across a wide range of fields became increasingly common. 

MIT PhD student JS Tan SM ’22 was among those who, upon graduating from Brown University and Rhode Island School of Design in 2015, joined the tech industry. 

“A lot of us had this idea that technology, and in particular the technologies related to the internet, had the potential for bringing about a more progressive version of the world,” Tan says. 

Google echoed this ethos to its employees with its once-famous motto, “don’t be evil,” as their informal corporate philosophy and code of conduct guideline. They’ve since dropped the tagline.

But in time, particularly with the start of the first Trump administration, some tech industry employees found themselves questioning if their employers were really intent on supporting policies to support a more democratic world. According to Tan, their willingness to publicly oppose their employers’ actions — at first successfully — is currently experiencing an anti-worker backlash. 

Now, Tan and his former tech industry colleague Clarissa Redwine have published a book on the rise and fall of the tech worker labor movement. “Against Tech Oligarchy: Worker Resistance in the World’s Most Powerful Industry” (Haymarket Books, 2026) chronicles how tech workers organized themselves, the effective strategies they used, and the effect the movement had on Silicon Valley labor politics over the past decade.

Documenting a movement from within

In 2017, Tan was working for Microsoft and Redwine for Kickstarter, when President Donald Trump signed an executive order suspending entry into the United States for nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries for 90 days, and suspending Syrian refugees from entering the country indefinitely. 

“As a whole, I think the tech sector really pushed back against this,” says Tan. “[OpenAI co-founder] Sam Altman participated in protests of this ban at the airport. In fact, the day before he joined these protests, he wrote in his blog that the tech industry needed to take a stand against the Trump administration, and particularly its immigration policies.” 

Altman’s Jan. 28, 2017, blog post read, in part, “Tech companies go to extraordinary lengths to recruit and retain employees; those employees have a lot of leverage. If employees push companies to do something, I believe they’ll have to. At a minimum, companies should take a public stance. But talking is only somewhat effective, and employees should push their companies to figure out what actions they can take.”

Tan says Altman’s words inspired tech workers across the industry to publicly voice their opposition and “push for the values they believed in.” For the next several years, workers staged walkouts and protested their employers’ contracts with U.S. military and immigration enforcement agencies, as well as workplace policies they considered sexist. 

“That was a time in which a lot of tech workers felt that their companies were walking back the values that they had initially promised,” says Tan.

Their objections initially met with some success. In 2018, following protests by Google employees, the company decided not to renew its contract for Project Maven, a Pentagon initiative using artificial intelligence to analyze drone surveillance footage. Nearly 4,000 employees signed an open letter to their CEO stating, “Google should not be in the business of war.”

Fast forward eight years. Earlier this year, more than 600 employees signed an open letter urging Google’s CEO to reject classified AI work with the Pentagon, citing concerns about potential uses including lethal autonomous weapons and domestic surveillance. 

“The way Google responded to them this time was to say, basically, ‘Too bad, we’re committed to working with the Pentagon,’” says Tan. “So, there is this kind of shift as to how Google is positioning itself politically, as well as to their employees.”

What happened to the tech industry employee leverage? 

Tan’s book outlines several events that he argues have negatively impacted their formerly strong influence. First, following interest rate hikes in 2022, the tech industry lost hundreds of billions in market valuation and set out to cut costs, the most significant of them being the expensive salaries of their employees. In other words, the labor market soured on tech workers, giving employers opportunity to wrest back control, Tan suggests. 

Second, he points to the drastic effect of agentic AI coding systems on the nature of their work, arguing that these tools have deskilled workers and made everyone much more worried about job security.  

“Tech workers had to face these shocks on their own. With a union or some ability to coordinate across workers and bargain as a group, they might’ve had more power to actually push back,” says Tan.  

Documenting the past to support the future

Tan enrolled at MIT in 2020, earning a master’s degree at the MIT Media Lab. He is currently a doctoral student in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning with a focus on the political economy of the tech sector.

At various points in their careers, Tan and his co-author had been involved with organizing in the tech sector. Redwine was a prominent organizer in the union drive at Kickstarter. She was fired from the company in 2019; Redwine said her dismissal was retaliation for her organizing activity, while Kickstarter denied that claim. One reason Tan and Redwine wrote this book is because they saw that the bandwidth for labor organizing among tech workers had hit a new low. 

“Tech workers want to have a say over the way their technologies are designed,” says Tan. “They want to be able to push for the right guardrails around technologies that they’re building. We wanted to use this book as an opportunity to analyze why it was that, within eight years, the tech worker movement had sort of fallen into this state of paralysis.”

They began writing the book in 2024, reliving the highs and lows of the past decade. This is Tan’s first book. He says writing it was an “exhilarating experience” and one that he profoundly enjoyed.

“It’s why, in part, I’m drawn to academia. To a large extent, I believe in the power of research and of writing. To have the opportunity to do this about a subject that I care deeply about has been an amazing experience.”

A book launch and discussion about “Against Tech Oligarchy,” co-hosted by the Department of Urban Studies and Planning, will take place on Oct. 26.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/guhQo4B

The next generation’s guide to the new space economy

On the first day of class 16.445J/STS.468J (Entrepreneurship in Aerospace and Mobility Systems), David Mindell, MIT professor of aeronautics and astronautics (AeroAstro) and the Frances and David Dibner Professor of the History of Engineering and Manufacturing, asked his students to take a look at an image of a textbook. The cover featured a bright and inspiring collage of rockets, planets, and all manner of futuristic air- and spacecraft. The title: “Entrepreneurship in Aerospace: A Guide for Founders and Investors.”

“This is the most up-to-date guide on the topic,” Mindell said, describing the book’s treatment of the concepts and procedures involved in innovating in aerospace, an industry experiencing a renaissance of entrepreneurship led by venture-backed startups and rapid innovation, and one that, whether or not we realize it, we all depend on every day. 

Konark Chopra, a graduate student in MIT’s Leaders for Global Operations Program, raised his hand. “Sounds great — how can we get a copy?”

“It doesn’t exist,” replied Mindell. “You’re going to write it this semester.”

After conducting over 50 interviews with founders, operators, engineers, and investors across the aerospace industry, the class pulled it off. The 100-page industry report, titled “Entrepreneurship in Aerospace,” provides comprehensive insight into what it actually takes to build an aerospace venture today, and makes predictions about what is needed in the near future.

The challenge to produce the report was inspired by the bestselling guide “Disciplined Entrepreneurship: 24 Steps to a Successful Startup,” by Bill Aulet, professor of the practice in the MIT Sloan School of Management and managing director of the Martin Trust Center for Entrepreneurship. Originally published in 2013, the book provides an outline for entrepreneurs in any industry to cultivate skills for success. “Entrepreneurship in Aerospace” builds on Aulet’s framework to provide an industry-specific guide. “Aerospace is its own special industry with a unique set of constraints and aspirations,” says Mindell.

“Putting together this report let the students learn what they won’t get from a regular class about aerospace entrepreneurship,” he says. “This is the view of the industry from the young people building its future. I’m incredibly proud of what they’ve accomplished.”

Betting on the known unknowns

During spring 2026, while the class was in session, major developments were shaping the aerospace sector, from NASA’s Artemis II mission to SpaceX’s launch of what would become the largest initial public offering in history. “The entire industry landscape shifted like crazy during the semester,” says Mindell, as just one of the reasons that the report was especially timely. 

The report argues that the volume of capital, talent, and policy attention directed toward aerospace is “structurally different from any prior point in the industry’s history,” creating a pivotal moment for the next generation of entrepreneurs and investors.

The report further outlines five predictions about the new space economy: terrestrial infrastructure for compute, manufacturing, and energy will move off-world; autonomous systems, robots, and humans will continue to work together, but with humans in a supervisory capacity; venture capital investment will run ahead of economic justifications; government investment will become the fastest way for young companies to fundraise; and that we are years away from a global regulatory framework for space companies to operate within. Each prediction, or “bet,” includes a section on “where serious people disagree,” laying out relevant counterarguments to their conclusions.

As a guide, the report also translates its findings into practical tools, including a diagnostic for determining how many independent breakthroughs a company needs to succeed. “One of my favorite tools from the report is the miracle count,” says Chopra. “If your company needs one breakthrough to work, that’s a venture bet. If it needs three, that’s a research project pretending to be a startup.”

The report’s findings were informed both by existing research and by interviews with current aerospace professionals. Students were graded, in part, on how many people they spoke with. Their interviews focused on what excites people about the industry, reasons for their optimism (or pessimism), and how people are working within their organizations to address the challenges they see. 

The experience also allowed the students to expand their professional networks, practicing a core entrepreneurial skill while gaining insider perspectives.

“We sought out people from different corners of aerospace and were always asking, ‘Who else should we talk to?’” says Nicole Lee, a graduate student in AeroAstro. “Not only was I able to reconnect with people in my own network, but I got to introduce classmates to those contacts, and then benefit from the networks they brought in, too. That exchange was a big part of what made the interview process, and the class, so special.”

Engineers as entrepreneurs

The report’s authors — 16 classmates from the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, MIT Sloan School of Management, and Wellesley College — bring a range of academic backgrounds and career ambitions to the project, using those different perspectives to connect the realities of aerospace engineering with the economic forces impacting the industry. Their research interests and experiences range from spacecraft propulsion and human spaceflight to investment banking and military operations. Collectively, they have worked across organizations like NASA, SpaceX, Blue Origin, Boeing, and a range of startups.

“What I’ll remember most is the team,” says Chopra. “Everyone showed up with their own wisdom and a willingness to challenge each other, learn from each other, and simply have fun. Those are the teams we hope to keep building with.” 

For Lee, those industry experiences support the report’s predictions about where the field itself is headed. “Entrepreneurship in space is going to involve a much broader group of founders, engineers, researchers, policymakers, and operators,” says Lee. “Everyone working in space can take something away from understanding the entrepreneurial mindset and the cultural shift we’re seeing in commercial space. A much wider range of people will be shaping entrepreneurship in the future. I think that shift has already started with us.”

Mindell sees value in that entrepreneurial mindset, regardless of whether the students go on to found companies of their own. “I don’t know if every student in this class is going to found their own company, and I don’t expect them to, but I do expect them to drive their own careers forward,” he says. “And I think for the moment we’re at, providing that opportunity is the best thing MIT can be doing for our students.”

For Chopra, who has had his sights set on founding an aerospace company for as long as he can remember, the findings from the report are immediately applicable. “The heart of a business, a sustainable business, is the demand. What do the customers want? Sure, I could build cool technology, but if we don’t have anyone buying it, it’s a project, not a company.”

Now armed with a clear and evidence-backed picture of the landscape, Chopra wants the report to generate even more activity across the industry. “If our industry report inspires one person to go out and found a company, or invest in a company, or even think about entrepreneurship in aerospace, it’s a pretty big win.”

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

MIT class project turns into an FDA-cleared treatment for tremors

In 2017, a man named Michael walked onto stage in front of a packed Kresge Auditorium at MIT and attempted to draw a spiral, a common test doctors use to diagnose Parkinson’s disease. His tremors, caused by the disease, made the exercise difficult. 

Then, Michael put on a wristband device made by a team of MIT students as part of 2.009 (Product Engineering Processes), who were presenting their prototype that evening.

Michael pressed a button and the device produced a subtle vibration. The vibration sent signals up his wrist and into his brain. His tremors dramatically decreased, and within seconds he was able to draw the spiral with much more precision, to a roaring ovation from the audience.

“When this device is turned on, I feel like I used to feel when I didn’t have Parkinson’s disease,” Michael told the crowd. “It’s an amazing, amazing feeling.”

The performance was so impressive that the student team received requests from classmates and others asking where they could buy the device for family and friends living with tremors. Unfortunately, the students had to explain there was only one — for the time being.

The event set off a near decade-long journey that began by leveraging MIT entrepreneurial resources like MIT Sandbox, MIT FUSE, and the MIT Venture Mentoring Service. In 2020, the student team turned into an official company, Encora Therapeutics. But there were still dozens of hardware iterations ahead. Then there were clinical trials. In one trial, 78 percent of patients reported benefits after 90 days of home use.

This February, nine years after Michael’s brave demonstration, all that work finally paid off: The FDA cleared Encora’s device to help adults with essential tremor, a condition similar to Parkinson’s that causes shaking, often in the hands. 

“It’s been a long and difficult — very difficult — journey, but also very rewarding, especially when we get feedback from patients,” says Daniel Carballo ’18, SM ’20, an Encora co-founder and vice president of strategy. “We hear stories from patients about how they’ve struggled with their condition and how much they benefit from this. It reminds us why we keep going.”

From classroom to commercialization

The three founders of Encora who are still with the company are Carballo, Allison Davanzo ’18, and Kyle Pina ’18. They were each seniors in 2017 when they enrolled in 2.009, MIT’s popular product-design class.

The semester began with a brainstorming session in which groups of about 17 students were asked to come up with dozens of potential product ideas. Carballo proposed a wearable device that used mechanical vibration to send signals to the brain to reduce tremors. The initial idea was to help patients with Parkinson’s disease.

“It was one of hundreds of throwaway ideas,” Carballo recalls. “The initial concept was inspired by classes I had taken in robotics around neural control of movement. I had a preliminary understanding of how an electromechanical device might interact with the body’s control systems and feedback loops that control movement to relieve pathological control of movement.”

The team eventually whittled their long list of ideas down to a few. Carballo’s idea was finally selected by a vote of 16-1 — with Carballo the only dissenting vote.

“I tried to explain to the team that this was so far-fetched that there was no way, in one semester, we would be able to make anything,” Carballo recalls. “Thankfully, I got outvoted.”

Through most of the semester, Carballo’s pessimism looked justified. At every class milestone, the team lagged behind other teams. Then, the week before final presentations, they met Michael, whose severe hand tremors were the result of early-onset Parkinson’s.

“He was a home renovator, so he worked with his hands, but his tremors had progressed to the point that he struggled to turn a screwdriver, use a drill, or even fill out paperwork,” Carballo recalls. “He had become reliant on his wife and daughter not only to run his business, but to help him with everyday activities.”

By this point, the 2.009 team had a prototype that would vibrate to send mechanical feedback to the brain. Carballo described it as “a foamcore box with a Raspberry Pi chip and some wires coming out.” When Michael put on the device and turned it on, his tremors dramatically decreased.

“It was like a light switch turned on and his tremors stopped,” Carballo says. “His wife and daughter started crying. A week later, he was gracious enough to repeat the process on stage for the final presentations.”

The presentation — and the outpouring of interest from people who wanted it for loved ones with Parkinson’s — made the team determined.

“It showed us there were a lot of people with this problem that could really benefit from this,” Carballo says. “A subset of the team became possessed. It would have been such a shame to know this could exist and to have it never leave the classroom.”

Some team members began using MIT’s entrepreneurial resources to commercialize the technology, initially focusing on Parkinson’s. They ran their first clinical trial with 20 Parkinson’s patients in 2022 in collaboration with MassGeneral Brigham. But they soon learned more patients are living with essential tremor.

“It was a greater unmet need,” Carballo says. “There are a lot of drugs being developed for Parkinson’s disease, but essential tremor hasn’t experienced that same innovation.”

Today scientists think tremor is caused by malfunctioning signals in the regions of the brain responsible for interpreting sensory input and coordinating movement.

“In these diseases, neurotransmitter deficiencies result in this pulsed signaling in the brain that manifests as tremors that are basically pulsed motor outputs,” Carballo says.

One current approach to target those signals is surgery that involves drilling holes in the skull to insert electrodes that drive new electrical patterns in the brain. Encora’s watch-like product targets the same brain regions with mechanical vibrations at the wrist.

“We’re applying mechanical stimulus, basically vibration, to stretch receptors in the wrist, which tell your body where it is in space,” Carballo explains. “The stimulation causes the receptors to activate and send a patterned signal to peripheral nerves of the wrist, that then carry the signal to the peripheral nervous system and into the central nervous system, to the same regions of the brain targeted by surgery.”

In 2024, Encora ran a randomized control trial with 47 patients living with essential tremor. Last year, the team ran a 59-person trial where patients used the devices at home. In both trials, more than 70 percent of patients experienced meaningful improvement.

The results were promising enough to gain what’s known as 510(k) clearance from the FDA for use as a medical device, in February of this year.

Helping patients

Most patients see rapid benefit when using Encora’s device. Patients have described the device as life-changing. Some say it allows them to do tasks they haven’t been able to do in years.

“We see some patients using the device 12, 14 hours a day,” Carballo says.

Today, Encora is focused on building a national sales force and working to secure coverage from insurers. As the company ramps up production, the product will finally become available for patients who qualify.

Further down the line, Encora hopes to fulfill its original mission of helping mitigate tremors in patients with Parkinson’s. Carballo believes the approach also holds promise for many other patients.

“There is a surprisingly long list of diseases that this could work for,” Carballo says.  “The most obvious are neurological movement disorders, but the bigger picture of wearable neuromodulation is a rapidly growing field that has seen therapeutic benefit across a broad range of diseases. We see this as a platform technology.”

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