Three from MIT named 2026 Goldwater Scholars

Three MIT rising seniors have been selected to receive a 2026 Barry Goldwater Scholarship, including Deeksha Kumaresh in the School of Engineering and Anna Liu and Charlotte Myersin the School of Science. An estimated 5,000 college sophomores and juniors from across the United States were nominated for the scholarships, of whom only 454 were selected.

The Goldwater Scholarships have been conferred since 1989 by the Barry Goldwater Scholarship and Excellence in Education Foundation. These scholarships have supported undergraduates who go on to become leading scientists, engineers, and mathematicians in their respective fields.

Deeksha Kumaresh, a third-year biological engineering major, is an undergraduate researcher at the Hammond Lab. The Hammond Research Group at the MIT Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research focuses on the self-assembly of polymeric nanomaterials, with a major emphasis on the use of electrostatics and other complementary interactions to generate multifunctional materials with highly controlled architecture.

“Hands down, the mentors I’ve encountered have been the most significant part of my MIT journey,” Kumaresh says. “I’m also extremely grateful to the Hammond Lab, which has provided a supportive environment where I can make mistakes, learn, and grow as a researcher. I treasure the spontaneous conversations with lab members (about science or life) and their willingness to treat me seriously as an independent researcher, even as an undergraduate.”

Kumaresh is mentored by Paula Hammond, dean of the School of Engineering, Institute Professor, and professor of chemical engineering. Kumaresh's career goals are to pursue an MD/PhD. In the long term, she seeks to lead a bioengineering research lab to predict the efficacy and side effects of cancer therapies by developing systems-level computational and biological preclinical models.

“Receiving this scholarship has been incredibly meaningful, because it offered me the chance to reflect critically on my post-graduate goals and receive recognition for my journey for them,” Kumaresh says. “Earning this scholarship has welcomed me into a tight-knit community where I’ve already found so much guidance. Everyone is genuinely curious about everyone else’s interests and are eager to lend a hand however they can.”

Anna Liu, a third-year chemistry major, is an undergraduate researcher in the Radosevich Group. The overarching objective of the group’s research is to develop new catalysts, strategies, and reagents for synthetic chemistry. By designing and synthesizing new molecular compounds with unknown structure and function, the group hopes to learn more about the general principles enabling new chemical transformations.

Liu is mentored by professor of chemistry Alexander Radosevich. She plans to pursue a PhD in organic or inorganic chemistry and eventually lead research developing sustainable synthetic transformations informed by fundamental mechanistic and reactivity studies, and teach at the university level.

“Going through the Goldwater application process gave me a deeper understanding of my research project and helped me reflect on my intrinsic motivations to pursue research. I’m excited to use what I’ve learned to keep growing as a researcher,” Liu says. “I am so grateful for the countless mentors, teachers, labmates, classmates, friends, and family in my life who have believed in me, fostered my passion for chemistry, and taught me so much. Receiving this scholarship is truly a testament to their outstanding support!"

Charlotte Myers, a third-year physics and astronomy major, conducts research at the Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research, where she applies machine learning to model galactic structure, and at the Center for Theoretical Physics, where she studies theoretical models of dark matter. Her research interests center on the physics of dark matter, which she approaches from multiple perspectives — from its distribution on galactic scales to particle-level models.

Myers is mentored by Lina Necib, an assistant professor in the Department of Physics. She plans to pursue a PhD in theoretical physics and conduct research in cosmology and astroparticle physics, with a focus on the fundamental physics of dark matter, and teach at the university level.

“I am very grateful to my research advisors, Professor Necib, Dr. Starkman, and Professor Slatyer, for their guidance and support in helping me develop as a researcher,” Myers says. “I find it deeply rewarding to engage with open questions in physics, and I am excited to continue pursuing this work in graduate school and beyond. Receiving this scholarship has given me both the resources and the confidence to continue on that path, even when progress is not always linear.”

The scholarship program honoring Senator Barry Goldwater was designed to identify, encourage, and financially support outstanding undergraduates interested in pursuing research careers in the sciences, engineering, and mathematics. The Goldwater Scholarship is the preeminent undergraduate award of its type in these fields.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/pV1krf2

MIT takes top team honors in 86th Putnam Math Competition

In an outstanding performance at the 86th William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition, MIT’s team once again took the top spot for the sixth consecutive year. MIT secured four of the five Putnam Fellows, who are the five highest-ranking students, and the Elizabeth Lowell Putnam Prize, which is given to a woman whose “performance in the competition is particularly meritorious.”

The members of the winning team, consisting of junior Cheng Jiang, senior Luke Robitaille, and first-year Chunji Wang, were all awarded as Putnam Fellows alongside senior Zixiang Zhou, each receiving a $2,500 award for their performance. Notably, Robitaille is a four-time Putnam Fellow, having received the award for each year of his studies. For a second consecutive year, sophomore Jessica Wan was awarded the Elizabeth Lowell Putnam Prize and received $1,000.

Wan was also among the top 25 scorers, amongst 16 others from MIT: Warren Bei, Reagan Choi, Pico Gilman, Henry Jiang, Zhicheng Jiang, Papon Lapate, Gyudong Lee, Derek Liu, Maximus Lu, Krishna Pothapragada, Pitchayut Saengrungkongka, Qiao Sun, Allen Wang, Kevin Wang, and Yichen Xiao.

A legacy of success

“I was delighted to see how well the MIT students did on the Putnam exam this year, which reflects their hard work, talent, and enthusiasm,” says Professor Henry Cohn, who led class 18.A34 (Mathematical Problem Solving) this year, also informally known as the Putnam seminar.

MIT’s continued success in the Putnam competition stems from a variety of sources. Some of this is built on things like the seminar, where students get together to sharpen their skills by diving deep into tough problems and discussing solutions.

Cohn, a former participant in the Putnam, comments on the joy of teaching the seminar and seeing students’ progress. “When you spend a semester watching students present solutions to difficult problems, you start to understand how they think,” says Cohn. “It’s exciting to see them apply their abilities to new, difficult problems."

Professor Bjorn Poonen, who also led the seminar in previous years (and is a four-time Putnam Fellow), describes it as an opportunity to hone a spectrum of skills in competition preparation. “Knowing how to explain things well is really important for doing well on the Putnam and for everything else, and for this it really helps to have experience communicating with others, which is what the problem-solving seminar is all about.”

A shared passion for problem-solving

The students who take the Putnam thrive on all aspects of the competition, from the social to the exam itself.

“It’s not a school day, and we still get to do math,” Jiang describes his excitement for the competition. Indeed, getting to “do math” extends beyond formally sitting for the exam, to breaks and opportunities for discussion that are interspersed throughout the day. The students take each opportunity to come together as seriously as they do the competition, and it is this collective passion for problem-solving that builds a strong sense of community and brings students back year after year.

“The competition brings together hundreds of students from across campus representing many majors, years of graduation, and degrees of math contest experience, but what brings everyone together is a shared love of solving problems,” Cohn says. “You can see this in the clusters of students who stay to discuss the problems long after the exam has ended. Mathematics can sometimes feel like a solitary pursuit, but at this level, collaboration is key.”

Community complements the shared passion the math enthusiasts share for problems and puzzles. “You get a kind of satisfaction similar to when you get unstuck while doing a crossword puzzle and everything falls into place,” Poonen describes his own experience solving Putnam problems.

Consistency in certainty

The competition is also an opportunity to see familiar faces. Robitaille recalls his experiences in high school math olympiads, and highlights the friendly atmosphere at the Putnam. “Throughout college, I have stayed close with people I met at competitions,” Robitaille says. “There’s the whole background of times spent together, not just on contest day.”

An event for both community and challenge, the consistency and certainty of competition day is what brought Robitaille and Zhou back year after year. “Each time, you have a set amount of time to sit in the room and work on the problems,” Robitaille says. “If you were the type of person for whom that would be a fun thing, like me, it’s nice to have an opportunity to do it again occasionally.”

“It’s more fun than the real world, where everything is complicated,” Zhou adds with a smile.

The full list of 2025 winners can be found on the Putnam website.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/f81krbw

New chip can protect wireless biomedical devices from quantum attacks

As quantum computers advance, they are expected to be able to break tried-and-true security schemes that currently keep most sensitive data secure from attackers. Scientists and policymakers are working to design and implement post-quantum cryptography to defend against these future attacks.

MIT researchers have developed an ultra-efficient microchip that can bring post-quantum cryptography techniques to wireless biomedical devices, like pacemakers and insulin pumps. Such wearable, ingestible, or implantable devices are usually too power-constrained to implement these computationally demanding security protocols.

Their tiny chip, which is about the size of a very fine needle tip, also includes built-in protections against physical hacking attempts that can bypass encryption to steal user data, such as a patient’s social security number or device credentials. Compared to prior designs, the new technology is more than an order of magnitude more energy-efficient.

In the long run, the new chip could enable next-generation wireless medical devices to maintain strong security even as quantum computing becomes more prevalent. In addition, it could be applied to many types of resource-constrained edge devices, like industrial sensors and smart inventory tags.

“Tiny edge devices are everywhere, and biomedical devices are often the most vulnerable attack targets because power constraints prevent them from having the most advanced levels of security. We’ve demonstrated a very practical hardware solution to secure the privacy of patients,” says Seoyoon Jang, an MIT electrical engineering and computer science (EECS) graduate student and lead author of a paper on the chip.

Jang is joined on the paper by Saurav Maji PhD ’23; visiting scholar Rashmi Agrawal; EECS graduate students Hyemin Stella Lee and Eunseok Lee; Giovanni Traverso, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at MIT, a gastroenterologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and an associate member of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard; and senior author Anantha Chandrakasan, MIT provost and the Vannevar Bush Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. The research was recently presented at the IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conference.

Stronger security

A large percentage of wireless biomedical devices, like ingestible biosensors for health monitoring, currently lack strong protection due to the computational demands of existing security protocols, Jang says.

But the complexity of post-quantum cryptography (PQC) can increase power consumption by two or three orders of magnitude.

Implementing PQC is of paramount importance, since regulatory bodies like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will soon begin phasing out traditional cryptography protocols in favor of stronger PQC algorithms. In addition, some industry leaders believe rapid advances in quantum hardware make PQC implementation even more urgent.

To bring these power-hungry PQC protocols to wireless biomedical devices, the MIT researchers designed a customized microchip, known as an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), that greatly reduces energy overhead while guaranteeing the highest level of security.

“PQC is very secure algorithmically, but making a device resilient against physical attacks usually requires additional countermeasures that pump up the energy consumption at least two or three times. We want our chip to be robust to both security threats in a very lightweight manner,” Jang says.

A multi-pronged approach

To accomplish these goals, the researchers incorporated several design features into the chip.

First, they implemented two different PQC schemes to enhance robustness and “future-proof” their device in case one scheme is later proven to be insecure. To boost energy efficiency, they applied techniques that enable the PQC algorithms to share as much of the chip’s computational resources as possible.

Second, the researchers designed a highly efficient, on-chip true random number generator. This device continually generates random numbers to use for secret keys, which is essential to implement PQC.

Their on-chip design improves energy efficiency and security over standard approaches that usually receive random numbers from an external chip.

Third, they implemented countermeasures that prevent a type of physical hacking attempt, called a power side-channel attack, but only on the most vulnerable parts of the PQC protocols.

In power side-channel attacks, hackers steal secret information by analyzing the power consumption of a device while it processes data. The MIT researchers added just enough redundancy to the PQC operations to ensure the chip is protected from these types of attacks.

Fourth, they designed an early fault-detection mechanism so the chip will abort operations early if it detects a voltage glitch.

Wireless biomedical devices often have erratic power supplies, so they are susceptible to glitches that can cause an entire security procedure to fail. The MIT approach saves energy by stopping the chip from running a doomed procedure to completion.

“At the end of the day, because of the techniques we utilized, we can apply these post-quantum cryptography primitives while adding nothing to the overhead, with the added benefit of robustness to side-channel attacks,” Jang says.

Their device achieved between 20 to 60 times higher energy efficiency than all other PQC security techniques they compared it to, with a more compact area than many existing chips.

“As we transition into post-quantum approaches, providing strong security for even the most resource-limited devices is essential. This work shows that robust cryptographic protection for biomedical and edge devices can be achieved alongside energy efficiency and programmability,” says Chandrakasan.

In the future, the researchers want to apply these techniques to other vulnerable applications and energy-constrained devices.

This research was funded, in part, by the U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health.

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

How morality and ethics shaped India’s economic development

In a world leaning away from globalization, governments face a tough choice: Should they block dominant foreign companies to protect local businesses, or welcome them in hopes of fast-tracking economic growth and modernization? 

In his recently published book, “Traders, Speculators, and Captains of Industry: How Capitalist Legitimacy Shaped Foreign Investment Policy in India” (Harvard University Press, November 2025), Jason Jackson, associate professor in political economy and urban planning in the MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning, explains that these policy decisions aren’t just math, but long-standing and often heated moral debates over how businesses should conduct themselves, and who they serve.

Jackson argues that morality has a long history in economics and deserves more attention because, while ever-present in economic policy discourse, moral beliefs are often under-recognized or underappreciated.

“India is an exemplary case of ways in which moral beliefs shape economic policy decisions,” says Jackson. “But at the same time, I think it’s representative of a general feature of capitalism. It’s the perfect case.”

Jackson’s focus on India for this book stems from his interest in industrial policy and the politics of international development. Multinational firms have long been a source of controversy. They are seen as bringing two crucial resources to developing countries: finance and technology. However, while multinationals are potentially valuable contributors to economic development through the mechanism of foreign direct investment (FDI), they can also be monopolistic, dominating local industries and displacing domestic firms.

This long-standing tension in foreign investment policy became the backdrop for several emerging markets in developing countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) — in the early 2000s. India was growing at an extremely high level — 6-7 percent annually — and Indian companies were doing well, including those in industries that were seen as key to development, such as autos. Jackson wanted to understand why Indian companies were holding their own relative to foreign firms, which dominated more manufacturing in other places, and planned to focus on the period from the 1980s through the 2010s that coincides with the period of economic liberalization in India and, more broadly, with globalization. But while conducting field work, Jackson noticed that in describing how they made industrial policy decisions, Indian policymakers drew distinctions between firms that were fashioned in moral terms. There were some firms that policymakers believed would invest in technology and provide good jobs, and other firms — both foreign and domestic — seen as exploitative and not interested in engaging in activities that would advance economic growth and industrial transformation.

“I realized these distinctions had deep salience,” says Jackson. “My interlocutors would describe firms — especially foreign firms they saw as simply trading, or as exploitative — as ‘New East India’ companies, referencing the famous East India Company that was the governance authority in colonial India, but had been defunct for more than 150 years. That forced my research to become more historical, increasingly relying on archival work to make sense of these moralized distinctions between different types of business actors, whether foreign or domestic, and to understand how these beliefs became so powerful across Indian society.”

“Moral categories of capitalist legitimacy”

Jackson says there are several ways in which social scientists think that policymakers make decisions. One view considers the competing interest groups policymakers must negotiate with, in which case outcomes may depend on one group having more influence or power than others. Another approach assumes these individuals make decisions based on self-interest, particularly when their choices are perceived as corrupt.

“But what I found is that neither of these approaches gave enough credence to the ways in which policymakers in India grapple with quite technical and complex policy decisions regarding the type of development they want to promote in their country, and the types of companies they thought could help to achieve their development goals.” says Jackson. “Therefore, I was more interested in trying to understand what kind of ideas and beliefs animated their decision-making.”

What Jackson found was that Indian policymakers viewed both foreign firms and local Indian companies through what he terms “moral categories of capitalist legitimacy.” Would these firms invest in productive technologies? Would they provide good employment for the local population? Or would they be exploitative? These criteria were not only applied to multinational corporations. Even Indian family-controlled business groups were evaluated as to whether the gains accrued stayed within the confines of the extended family or whether they provided broader societal benefits. 

Coca-Cola goes to India

The story of Coca-Cola in India is an example of the tension experienced with regulating foreign investment where multinational companies were seen as exploitative. The company made its initial foray into India in the 1950s, and over the next two decades its reach became extensive. In the late 1970s, India’s Minister of Industry George Fernandes was visiting a village in Bihar — a state with one of the highest levels of poverty — when he asked for a glass of water. Instead, he was told the water was not suitable to drink, and was given Coca-Cola.

“This struck Fernandes as deeply problematic,” says Jackson. “He later recalled thinking that ‘after 30 years of freedom in India, our villages do not have clean drinking water, but they do have Coca-Cola — which, of course, is made with purified water, so safe to drink. How was this possible?’” Fernandes returned to his office in New Delhi determined to do something about it.

Just a few years earlier, India had passed a law, the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA), which required foreign companies to dilute their equity to no more than 40 percent. The law was explicitly designed to encourage technology transfer, but Coca-Cola had not complied. Fernandes told Coca-Cola that it had to take on an Indian partner or it would have to leave. Coca-Cola chose the latter. In the following year, IBM was also kicked out of India when it similarly balked at complying with FERA and sharing its technology.

“These companies were very much seen in the mold of the East India Co.,” says Jackson. “A firm comes from abroad and extracts resources from India while giving little benefit to the country. These are all very clearly morally coded beliefs that played a crucial role in these policy decisions.”

With Coca-Cola out of India, the beverage market became wide open, and several Indian companies emerged. Thums Up, an Indian cola brand — founded by Ramesh Chauhan ’62 — took off and became the dominant cola by the 1980s. Chauhan developed its own unique formula independently.

In 1991, India accelerated its economic liberalization, especially around FDI, and FERA’s standards were diluted. Coca-Cola returned to India, again without a partner. Other major brands, including Pepsi, had also entered the market. By then, Thums Up had a market share in India of well over 80 percent, but, concerned with its ability to compete in a war between the deep-pocketed American multinational giants, Thums Up sold out to Coca-Cola for $60 million in 1993, a figure that was later deemed to be small.

Trader, speculator, or captain of industry?

Jackson says that in India, there were two competing interpretations of this story. In one version, Fernandes kicking out a global multinational firm was seen as a developing country establishing its economic sovereignty by making a bold policy decision and “risking all kind of geopolitical blowback that might follow from the U.S.,” says Jackson. “In this view, the Indian government’s bold move allowed local entrepreneurs and local companies like Chauhan and Thums Up to emerge.”

Yet an important counter narrative emerged that challenged the view that companies like Thums Up and figures like Chauhan are enterprising entrepreneurs.

“Maybe they just took advantage of protectionism to form a company and make some money,” says Jackson. “So rather than being an intrepid captain of industry, observers wondered whether maybe Chauhan was ‘simply a trader’ who took advantage of policy protection, but sold out as soon as the market became competitive.”

Later developments added some credibility to this view. Ironically, Coca-Cola was unable to remove Thums Up and Limca, another soda brand from Chauhan’s company, from its product lineup, and both remained extremely popular and widely consumed. This suggested to many observers that Thums Up could have survived the cola wars had it not sold out to the American multinational. The public had acquired a taste for the distinctly Indian beverages that Chauhan had created.

“This narrative encapsulates this kind of tension policymakers face: If we provide policy support to our enterprising entrepreneurs and they thrive, will they also do well for the country? Or are they simply opportunists who will take advantage of policy support in ways that benefit themselves but have little broader benefits to the country,” says Jackson.

This episode was just one of dozens of instances of conflicts between Indian companies and multinational firms in the liberalizing 1990s and 2000s, which the government was often compelled to adjudicate. Throughout this period, the question persisted: How would policymakers identify the business figures who could be agents of industrial development and economic transformation, whether foreign or domestic? 

Ramesh Chauhan for one continued an enterprising path. He turned his attention to the bottled water industry in India and his brand — Bisleri — remains one of the country’s leading bottled water brands today.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/37rhlqV

Tackling the housing shortage with robotic microfactories

A national housing shortage is straining finances and communities across the United States. In Massachusetts, at least 222,000 homes will have to be built in the next 10 years to meet the population's needs. At the same time, there are numerous challenges in traditional construction. There's a shortage of skilled construction workers. Most projects involve multiple contractors and subcontractors, adding complexity and lag time. And the construction process, as well as the buildings themselves, can be a major source of emissions that contribute to climate change.

Reframe Systems, co-founded by Vikas Enti SM '20, uses robotics, software, and high-performance materials to address these problems. Founded in 2022, the company deploys microfactories that bring housing fabrication and production closer to the regions where the homes are needed. The first homes designed and manufactured in Reframe's first microfactory have been fully built in Arlington and Somerville, Massachusetts. 

Enti's experiences in MIT System Design and Management (SDM) shaped the company from its start. "Learning how to navigate the system and finding the optimal value for each stakeholder has been a key part of the business strategy," he says, "and that's rooted in what I learned at SDM."

Better tools for system-level problems

Enti applied to SDM's master of science in engineering and management while he was working at Kiva Systems, overseeing its acquisition by Amazon and transformation into Amazon Robotics. He found that the SDM program's fundamentals of systems engineering, system architecture, and project management provided him with the tools he needed to address system-level problems in his work.

While he was at MIT, Enti also served as an associate director for the MIT $100K Entrepreneurship Competition, which offers students and researchers mentorship, feedback, and potential funding for their startup ideas. He realized that "there isn't a single formula for how businesses start, or how long it takes to get them started," he says, which helped shape his plans to start his own business.

Enti took a leave of absence from MIT to oversee the expansion of Amazon Robotics in Europe. He returned and completed his degree in 2020, writing his thesis on developing technology that could mitigate falls for elderly people. This instinct to use his education for a good cause resurfaced when his daughters were born. He wanted his future business to address a real-world problem and have a social impact, while also reducing carbon emissions.

Growing housing, shrinking emissions

Enti concluded that housing, with immediate real-world impact and a significant share of global carbon emissions, was the right problem to work on. He reached out to his colleagues Aaron Small and Felipe Polido from Amazon Robotics to share his idea for advanced, low-cost factories that could be deployed quickly and close to where they were needed. The two joined him as co-founders.

Currently, the microfactory in Andover, Massachusetts, produces structural panels, with robotics completing wall and ceiling framing and people completing the rest of the work, including wiring and plumbing. Eventually, Reframe hopes to automate more of the building process through further use of robotics. The modular construction process allows for reduced waste and disruption on the eventual home site. And the finished homes are designed to be energy-efficient and ready for solar panel installation. The company is set to start work soon on a group of homes in Devens, Massachusetts.

In addition to the Andover location, Reframe is setting up in southern California to help rebuild homes that were destroyed in the area's January 2025 wildfires. The company's software-assisted design process and the adjustability of the microfactories allows them to meet local zoning and building codes and align with the local architectural aesthetic. This means that in Somerville, Reframe's completed buildings look like modernized versions of the neighboring three-story buildings, known locally as "triple-deckers." On the other side of the country, Reframe's design offerings include Spanish-style and craftsman homes.

"Housing is a complex systems problem," Enti says, explaining the impact SDM has had on his work at Reframe. The methods and tools taught in the integrated core class EM.412 (Foundations of System Design and Management) help him tackle systems-level problems and take the needs of multiple stakeholders into account. The Reframe team used technology roadmapping as they devised their overall business plan, inspired by the work of Olivier de Weck, associate head of the MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics. And lectures on project management from Bryan Moser, SDM's academic director, remain relevant. 

"Embracing the fact that this is a systems problem, and learning how to navigate the system and the stakeholders to make sure we're finding the optimal value, has been a key part of the business strategy," Enti says.

Reframe Systems is set to continue learning through iteration as they plan to expand their network of microfactories. The company remains committed to the core vision of sustainably meeting the country's need for more housing. "I'm grateful we get to do this," Enti says. "Once you strip away all the robotics, the advanced algorithms, and the factories, these are high-quality, healthy homes that families get to live in and grow." 

de MIT News https://ift.tt/S5OokeK

How to expand the US economy

It’s an essential insight about our world: Innovation drives economic growth. For the U.S. to thrive, it must keep innovating. But how, and in what areas?

A new book co-authored by MIT faculty members focuses on six key areas where technology advances can drive the economy and support national security.

Those sectors — semiconductors, biotechnology, critical minerals, drones, quantum computing, and advanced manufacturing — are all built on U.S. know-how but are also areas where the country has either yielded a lead in production or innovation, or could yet fall behind.

As the book explains, a roadmap for U.S. prosperity and security involves sustaining notable areas of innovation and the national research ecosystem behind them, while rebuilding domestic manufacturing.

“In each of these areas, there are breakthroughs to be had, where the U.S. can leapfrog competitors and gain an advantage,” says Elisabeth Reynolds, an MIT expert on industrial innovation and editor of the new volume. “That’s a very exciting part of this.” She adds: “These areas are front and center for U.S. national economic and security policy.”

The book, “Priority Technologies: Ensuring U.S. Security and Shared Prosperity,” is published this week by the MIT Press. It features chapters by MIT faculty with expertise on the industrial sectors in question. Reynolds, a professor of the practice in MIT’s Department of Urban Studies and Planning, is a leading expert on industrial innovation and has long advocated for innovation-based growth that helps the U.S. workforce.

“All of this can be good for everyone,” says MIT economist Simon Johnson, who wrote the foreword to the book. “Out of that flow of innovations and ideas, we can create more good jobs for all Americans. Pushing the technological frontier and turning that into jobs is definitely going to help.”

Making more chips

“Priority Technologies” grew out of an ongoing MIT seminar by the same name, which Reynolds and Johnson began holding in 2023, often with appearances by other MIT faculty.

Both Reynolds and Johnson bring vast experience to the subject of innovation and production. Among other things, Reynolds headed MIT’s Industrial Performance Center for over a decade and was executive director of the MIT Task Force on the Work of the Future. She served in the White House National Economic Council as special assistant to the president for manufacturing and development.

Johnson, the Ronald A. Kurtz (1954) Professor of Entrepreneurship at the MIT Sloan School of Management, shared the 2024 Nobel Prize in economics, with MIT’s Daron Acemoglu and the University of Chicago’s James Robinson, for work about the historical relationship between institutions and economic growth. He has co-authored numerous books, including, with Acemoglu, the 2023 book “Power and Progress,” about the trajectory and implications of artificial intelligence.

As it happens, “Priority Technologies” does not focus on AI, instead opting to examine other vital, and often related, areas of innovation.

“We do not think this is the entire list of priority technologies,” Johnson says. “This is a partial list, and there are lots of other ideas.”

In the chapter on semiconductors, Jesús A. del Alamo, the Donner Professor of Science in MIT’s Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, calls them “the oxygen of modern society.” This U.S.-born industry has seen a large manufacturing shift away from the country, however, leaving it vulnerable in terms of security and the economy; about one-third of inflation experienced in 2021 stemmed from a chip shortage. As he notes, the U.S. is now in the process of rebuilding its capacity to make leading-edge logic chips, for one thing.

“With semiconductors, people thought the U.S. could lose the manufacturing, stay on top of the innovation and design side, and would be fine,” Reynolds says. “But it’s turned out to make the country quite vulnerable. So we’ve had a massive shift to rebuild semiconductor manufacturing capabilities here in the U.S., and I would argue that’s been a successful strategy in recent years.”

Bringing biotech back home

In biotechnology, relocating manufacturing in the U.S. is also key, using new technologies in the process. As J. Christopher Love, the Laurent Professor of Chemical Engineering, puts it in his chapter, while the U.S. is the leader in biotech research, it “lacks the manufacturing infrastructure and expertise necessary to bring these ideas to the market at the same pace as it generates innovative new products.” Among other remedies, he suggests that smaller, more flexible production facilities can help the U.S. “leapfrog” other countries on the manufacturing side. Love is also co-director of MIT’s Initiative for New Manufacturing, which aims to drive advances in U.S. production across industries.

“We have tremendous biotech innovation, we’re the leaders, but we have a bottleneck when it comes manufacturing,” Reynolds observes. “If we can break through that with new technologies, new production processes, we’re in a position to make us less vulnerable, from a supply chain point of view, and capture more of what is going to be a $4 trillion market over the next 15 years.”

A similar story holds in other areas. Many drone innovations were developed in the U.S., while much manufacturing has shifted to China. Fiona Murray, the William Porter (1967) Professor of Entrepreneurship, writes that the U.S. has an “opportunity to rebuild its production at scale,” although that will also require significant strengthening of its supply chains, too.

Elsa Olivetti, the Jerry McAfee (1940) Professor of Engineering and a professor of materials science and engineering, recommends a multifaceted approach to help the U.S. regain traction in the production of critical minerals, including better forms of extraction, manufacturing, and recycling, to reduce potential scarcities.

And in the quantum computing chapter, two MIT co-authors — William D. Oliver, the Henry Ellis Warren (1894) Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and a professor of physics; and Jonathan Ruane, a senior lecturer at MIT Sloan — note that the sector could help accelerate drug discovery, materials science, and energy applications. Noting that the U.S. still leads in private-sector investment in the field but tails China in public-sector investment, they urge more research support and stronger supply chains for quantum computing components, among other recommendations.

“The country that achieves quantum leadership will gain decisive advantages in these strategically important industries,” they write.

The university engine

From industry to industry, the book makes clear that certain key issues are broadly important to U.S. competitiveness and growth. The partnership between the federal government and the world-leading research capacities of U.S. universities, for one thing, has given the country an initial lead in many economic sectors and promises to continue driving innovation.

At the same time, the U.S. would benefit from expanding and strengthening its domestic supply chains, in the process of building up more domestic manufacturing, and needs capital investment that will help hardware-side, physically substantial industrial growth.

“These common themes include supply chain resilience and manufacturing capability,” Reynolds says. “Can we help drive the country’s innovation ecosystem through expansion of our industrial system and manufacturing? That’s a big question.”

On the research front, she reflects, over the years, “It’s been amazing how much MIT-led research has aligned with national priorities — or maybe that’s not so surprising.”

The partnership between the U.S. federal government and universities as research engines was formalized in the 1940s, thanks in part to then-MIT president Vannevar Bush. According to some estimates, government investment in non-defense research and development alone has accounted for up to 25 percent of U.S. economic growth since World War II.

“Vannevar Bush realized it wasn’t about a stock of technology, it was about a flow of innovation,” Johnson says. “And that brilliant insight is still relevant today. I think that is the insight of the last century. And that’s what we’re trying to capture and reiterate and repeat.”

“This is not even the future. This is current.”

Scholars and industry leaders have praised “Priority Technologies.” Erica Fuchs, a professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University, has stated that when it comes to “ensuring American national security, economic competitiveness, and societal well-being,” the book underscores “the positive role technology can play in those outcomes.” Hemant Taneja, CEO of the venture capital firm General Catalyst, calls the volume “required reading for anyone interested in building the abundant, resilient future America deserves.”

For their part, Reynolds and Johnson hope the book will draw many kinds of readers interested in the economy, innovation, prosperity, and national security.

“We tried to make the volume accessible,” Reynolds says, noting that the book directly lays out “challenges for the country, and what we see as recommendations for next steps in how we position the country to succeed, and lead globally. Each of these chapters has something important to say.”

Johnson also notes the MIT scholars participating in the project want to enhance the ongoing policy conversation, in Washington and across the country, about supporting innovation and using it to drive U.S. economic and technological leadership.

“One reason to write a book is, you can’t pound the table with a podcast,” quips Johnson, who co-hosts a podcast, “Power and Consequences,” on major policy issues. In conversations with political leaders and their staffs, he adds, there is a core message to be transmitted about America and technology-driven growth: We have the knowledge and resources, but need to focus on supporting innovation while trying to increase domestic production.

“Here are the technologies we currently need,” Johnson says. “This is not imagination, this is not fanciful, this is not science fiction. This is not even the future. This is current. These are the technologies needed to defend the country and its interests. And we need to invest in these, and in everything we need to drive them forward.”

de MIT News https://ift.tt/Wy1wipM

Managing traffic in space

Chances are, you’ve already used a satellite today. Satellites make it possible for us to stream our favorite shows, call and text a friend, check weather and navigation apps, and make an online purchase. Satellites also monitor the Earth’s climate, the extent of agricultural crops, wildlife habitats, and impacts from natural disasters.

As we’ve found more uses for them, satellites have exploded in number. Today, there are more than 10,000 satellites operating in low-Earth orbit. Another 5,000 decommissioned satellites drift through this region, along with over 100 million pieces of debris comprising everything from spent rocket stages to flecks of spacecraft paint.

For MIT’s Richard Linares, the rapid ballooning of satellites raises pressing questions: How can we safely manage traffic and growing congestion in space? And at what point will we reach orbital capacity, where adding more satellites is not sustainable, and may in fact compromise spacecraft and the services that we rely on?

“It is a judgement that society has to make, of what value do we derive from launching more satellites,” says Linares, who recently received tenure as an associate professor in MIT’s Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AeroAstro). “One of the things we try to do is approach these questions of traffic management and orbital capacity as engineering problems.”

Linares leads the MIT Astrodynamics, Space Robotics, and Controls Lab (ARCLab), a research group that applies astrodynamics (the motion and trajectory of orbiting objects) to help track and manage the millions of objects in orbit around the Earth. The group also develops tools to predict how space traffic and debris will change as operators launch large satellite “mega-constellations” into space.

He is also exploring the effects of space weather on satellites, as well as how climate change on Earth may limit the number of satellites that can safely orbit in space. And, anticipating that satellites will have to be smarter and faster to navigate a more cluttered environment, Linares is looking into artificial intelligence to help satellites autonomously learn and reason to adapt to changing conditions and fix issues onboard.

“Our research is pretty diverse,” Linares says. “But overall, we want to enable all these economic opportunities that satellites give us. And we are figuring out engineering solutions to make that possible.”

Grounding practical problems

Linares was born and raised in Yonkers, New York. His parents both worked as school bus drivers to support their children, Linares being the youngest of six. He was an active kid and loved sports, playing football throughout high school.

“Sports was a way to stay focused and organized, and to develop a work ethic,” Linares says. “It taught me to work hard.”

When applying for colleges, rather than aim for Division I schools like some of his teammates, Linares looked for programs that were strong in science, specifically in aerospace. Growing up, he was fascinated with Carl Sagan’s “Cosmos” docuseries. And being close to Manhattan, he took regular trips to the Hayden Planetarium to take in the center’s immersive projections of space and the technologies used to explore it.

“My interest in science came from the universe and trying to understand our place within it,” Linares recalls.

Choosing to stay close to home, he applied to in-state schools with strong aeronautical engineering departments, and happily landed at the State University of New York at Buffalo (SUNY Buffalo), where he would ultimately earn his bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees, all in aerospace engineering.

As an undergraduate, Linares took on a research project in astrodynamics, looking to solve the problem of how to determine the relative orientation of satellites flying in formation.

“Formation flying was a big topic in the early 2000s,” Linares says. “I liked the flavor of the math involved, which allowed me to go a layer deeper toward a solution.”

He worked out the math to show that when three satellites fly together, they essentially form a triangle, the angles of which can be calculated to determine where each satellite is in relation to the other two at any moment in time. His work introduced a new controls approach to enable satellites to fly safely together. The research had direct applications for the U.S. Air Force, which helped to sponsor the work.

As he expanded the research into a master’s thesis, Linares also took opportunities to work directly with the Air Force on issues of satellite tracking and orientation. He served two internships with the U.S. Air Force Research Lab, one at Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and the other in Maui, Hawaii.

“Being able to collaborate with the Air Force back then kind of grounded the research in practical problems,” Linares says.

For his PhD, he turned to another practical problem of “uncorrelated tracks.” At the time, the Air Force operated a network of telescopes to observe more than 20,000 objects in space, which they were working to label and record in a catalog to help them track the objects over time. But while detecting objects was relatively straightforward, the challenge came in correlating a detected object with what was already in the catalog. In other words, is what they were seeing something they had already seen?

Linares developed image analysis techniques to identify key characteristics of objects such as their shape and orientation, which helped the Air Force “fingerprint” satellites and pieces of space debris, and track their activity — and potential for collisions — over time.

After completing his PhD, Linares worked as a postdoc at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the U.S. Naval Observatory. During that time he expanded his aerospace work to other areas including space weather, using satellite measurements to model how Earth’s ionosphere — the upper layer of the atmosphere that is ionized by the sun’s radiation — affects satellite drag.

He then accepted a position as assistant professor of aerospace engineering at the University of Minnesota at Minneapolis. For the next three years, he continued his research in modeling space weather, tracking space objects and coordinating satellites to fly in swarms.

Making space

In 2018, Linares made the move to MIT.

“I had a lot of respect for the people and for the history of the work that was done here,” says Linares, who was especially inspired by the legendary Charles Stark “Doc” Draper, who developed the first inertial guidance systems in the 1940s that would enable the self-navigation of airplanes, submarines, satellites, and spacecraft for decades to come. “This was essentially my field, and I knew MIT was the best place to continue my career.”

As a junior faculty member in AeroAstro, Linares spent his first years focused on an emerging challenge: space sustainability. Around that time, the first satellite constellations were launching into low-Earth orbit with SpaceX’s Starlink, which aimed to provide global internet coverage via a huge network of several thousand coordinating satellites. The launching of so many satellites, into orbits that already held other active and nonactive satellites, along with millions of pieces of space debris, raised questions about how to safely manage the satellite traffic and how much traffic an orbit can sustain.

“At what level do we reach a tipping point, where we have too many satellites in certain orbital regimes?” Linares says. “It was kind of a known problem at the time, but there weren’t many solutions.”

Linares’ group applied an understanding of astrodynamics, and the physics of how objects move in space, to figure out the best way to pack satellites in orbital “shells,” or lanes that would most likely prevent collisions. They also developed a state-of-the-art model of orbital traffic, that was able to simulate the trajectories of more than 10 million individual objects in space. Previous models were much more limited in the number of objects they could accurately simulate. Linares’ open-source model, called the MIT Orbital Capacity Assessment Tool, or MoCAT, could account for the millions of pieces of space debris, in addition to the many intact satellites in orbit.

The tools that his group has developed are used today by satellite operators to plan and predict safe spacecraft trajectories. His team is continuing to work on problems of space traffic management and orbital capacity. They are also branching out into space robotics. The team is testing ways to teleoperate a humanoid robot, which could potentially help to build future infrastructure and carry out long-duration tasks in space.

Linares is also exploring artificial intelligence, including ways that a satellite can autonomously “learn” from its experience and safely adapt to uncertain environments.

“Imagine if each satellite had a virtual Doc Draper onboard that could do the de-bugging that we did from the ground during the Apollo missions,” Linares says. “That way, satellites would become instantaneously more robust. And it’s not taking the human out of the equation. It’s allowing the human to be amplified. I think that’s within reach.”

de MIT News https://ift.tt/pxXU0QA