Featured video: MIT teachings, free to the world

A new short film from MIT Open Learning explores the origin, influence, and global reach of MIT OpenCourseWare, reflecting on its role in establishing MIT, in 2001, as the first higher education institution to make educational resources freely available to learners across the world.

Part of MIT Open Learning, MIT OpenCourseWare helped spark a global movement that continues to shape how knowledge is shared across the world. The film, titled “The Courage to Be Open: MIT OpenCourseWare and the Democratization of Knowledge,” captures both the vision behind this work and the lasting impact it has had on expanding access to learning at scale.

Video by MIT Open Learning | 15 minutes, 22 seconds

de MIT News https://ift.tt/DX9dtnV

MIT students study plasma physics beneath Alaska’s aurora

For many graduate students, waking up at noon after a 4 a.m. bedtime is a sign of a night well spent. For a group of MIT students, it was simply the start of their workday — timed not to the sun, but to the aurora.

Their goal was simple: to study plasma phenomena using the aurora borealis as a natural laboratory. The process, less so; working largely in darkness in Fairbanks, Alaska, the students conducted experiments in temperatures that dipped as low as -25 degrees Fahrenheit, using red headlamps for visibility. The sun set before 3 p.m., and even at its warmest, temperatures barely reached 20 F.

The aurora provides a rare opportunity to observe plasma behavior directly, as charged particles that interact with Earth’s magnetic field produce visible, large-scale structures in the night sky. As Fairbanks is situated beneath a region of especially frequent auroral activity, it is one of the most reliable places in the world to observe these phenomena, though the conditions come with real constraints. 

For one thing, the extreme cold directly impacted the instrumentation. “Our laptops went from full battery to nearly empty in 10 minutes because of the cold,” says Leonardo Corsaro, a PhD student in physics at the Plasma Science and Fusion Center (PSFC) at MIT. “We were trying to transfer data as fast as possible before everything shut down; it was a race against time!”

The challenges extended beyond the cold itself. “The cold can be managed,” says Leon Nichols, a PhD student in physics at PSFC. “With good planning, you can stay comfy in -20 F. The real difficulty was movement when deploying cameras far away from the roads. Walking through thick snow can burn up to 900 calories in an hour. We used cross-country skis to access some of the more remote terrain that would have taken hours to reach otherwise.”

But the conditions were more than worth it: During their time in Alaska, the group witnessed the strongest solar storm in the past two decades, bringing the aurora to life in ways few will ever experience. “It felt like we were the only ones there,” Sydney Menne, a PhD student in nuclear science and engineering, recounts, “removed from the Earth and just entirely surrounded by the aurora, fully immersed in it.” 

The team was granted access to observation facilities at Poker Flat Research Range through the University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute. Over the course of the trip, students deployed multiple all-sky camera systems across distances of up to 100 miles, enabling simultaneous observations of auroral structures from different locations. These cameras, which capture 360-degree images of the night sky, were paired with magnetometers to correlate visual auroral features with changes in Earth’s magnetic field. 

By combining spatially distributed imaging with magnetic field measurements, the team aimed to capture how auroral structures change across space, with the long-term goal of supporting three-dimensional reconstructions of the aurora. This year’s campaign also expanded the measurements beyond imaging, using muon detectors to explore possible correlations between visual auroral activity, magnetic field changes, and particle detections, offering a potential window into how high-energy particles in the upper atmosphere relate to visible auroral activity.

Despite decades of study, many aspects of the aurora remain poorly understood, and each observation offers an opportunity to better characterize the behavior of plasma in near-Earth space. The team also observed a pulsating aurora, a relatively rare phenomenon in which strips of light stretching across the sky blink on and off multiple times per second. By combining instruments not traditionally applied to these problems and deploying low-cost systems at scale, the team is exploring new approaches to studying these phenomena. Insights from these observations can help improve our understanding of space weather, including how solar activity affects satellites, communications systems, and power infrastructure on Earth.

For some participants, the experience reshaped how they think about plasma physics itself. Corsaro explains, “In my research, it is easy to associate these phenomena with colorful plots and simulations, losing touch with the physical process. Seeing structures in the aurora, electric currents and flows forming and shifting overhead, brought a sense of reality to those concepts, and served as a reminder that real plasmas are far less neat and intuitive than theory suggests.”

The experience is part of a broader effort. This group of students represented the third iteration of the Geophysical Plasma Observation Expedition (GPOE), a project involving MIT students from the Plasma Science and Fusion Center, along with collaborating departments, that sends a cohort to Fairbanks, Alaska, each year. Faculty members now provide support for the expedition, while continuity is maintained through its student-driven structure, with each cohort including a mix of returning and new participants. The expedition is organized and led entirely by students and operates on an intensive, compressed timeline. Students are responsible not only for data collection, but also for instrument design, site selection, logistics, and post-processing, completing a full research cycle within a matter of months.

This year’s cohort included graduate students Leonardo Corsaro and Leon Nichols of PSFC; Sydney Menne of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering; and Noah Wolfe and Oleksandra “Sasha” Lukina of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) Laboratory and the MIT Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research. The group was accompanied by Professor Matthew Evans, professor of physics at MIT, who is affiliated with the LIGO Laboratory and the Kavli Institute. 

“This is an opportunity to go from concept to data analysis in just a few months,” says John Ball, a PhD student in nuclear science and engineering at PSFC. “That kind of compressed scientific cycle is rare, especially in our field.”

The program itself has relatively recent and somewhat unusual origins. It began in 2023, when graduate student Shon Mackie, frustrated by the lack of hands-on plasma diagnostic opportunities, noticed the solar cycle was approaching its peak and saw an opportunity to study plasma phenomena more directly. He drafted a short proposal to PSFC leadership, and the response from then-Director Dennis Whyte was two lines: “Sounds cool, literally! PSFC will fund this.” 

Since its launch in 2023, GPOE has evolved from a single-camera effort into a multi-instrument, multi-site campaign with growing participation, with each cohort building on the work of previous years by refining instrumentation, expanding observational coverage, and improving data collection strategies. 

This hands-on, student-driven approach has also created opportunities to extend the experience beyond MIT. In 2024, the program expanded to include a new outreach collaboration with the MIT Museum and the MIT Nord Anglia Collaboration, bringing approximately 65 high school students from around 20 schools worldwide to MIT to help design and build components of the all-sky camera systems used in the field. Working within a set of technical constraints, students developed and tested designs, ultimately producing 13 cameras that were deployed during the Alaska expedition.

The program has also begun to produce results beyond the expedition itself. Students have presented their work at major conferences, including the American Geophysical Union, and published findings in peer-reviewed journals such as Earth and Space Science. The group’s low-cost all-sky camera and magnetometer design is now being adopted by other research teams and community science initiatives, extending its impact beyond MIT.

Beyond its scientific goals, participants emphasized the broader impact of the experience. 

“Standing outside at midnight in Alaska, staring up at sheets of glowing plasma stretching thousands of kilometers across the sky, really brings home just how small and delicate our own place in the universe is,” says Ball. 

As the program continues to grow, students hope to expand both its technical capabilities and its reach, including more permanent instrumentation and expanding outreach partnerships. For many involved, the expedition represents not just a research opportunity, but a reminder of the scale and immediacy of the phenomena they study.

“Science is an adventure,” Corsaro says. “This kind of work reminds you why you became a scientist in the first place.”

de MIT News https://ift.tt/z24AkYR

MIT science writing students collaborate with The Associated Press

This spring, six reporters from The Associated Press’ climate desk traveled from cities across the United States to work with students from the MIT Graduate Program in Science Writing. Students developed and pitched local climate stories, then, over a four-day intensive weekend, worked with visual journalists from the AP to report and produce their pieces. Articles cover a broad spectrum of environmental topics, ranging from area kelp harvests that are used to produce biofuels to efforts to restore cranberry bogs in environmentally friendly ways, and include visual elements, like photography and videography.

The four collaborative pieces include:

• “How a retired cranberry bog helped change the game for wetland restoration,” by Jamie Jiang and Julia Vaz
• “Planes and ships could run on kelp someday, but there are serious hurdles,” by Zoe Beketova and Ana Georgescu
• “Massachusetts is dumping sewage into waterways. Grassroots organizations are fighting back,” by Ashley D’Souza and Lucie McCormick
• “One of America’s oldest weather observatories shows people the science behind our climate,” by Laura Martin Agudelo and Alex Megerle

“This workshop was an intense few days that offered a unique opportunity for MIT journalists to get feedback while in the field, reporting. The students brought enthusiasm and passion to the reporting, heading out before the sun came up and working long into the nights over the weekend for stories in the Boston area and beyond,” says AP’s Climate Photo Editor Alyssa Goodman, the workshop’s lead organizer. “For the AP team members who participated, it was also a rewarding opportunity, allowing us to share our passion for climate storytelling while getting to know these students, watching them build strong stories and gain experiences that will help them as they continue in journalism.”

The collaboration is unique, even among journalism programs. The Associated Press is one of the most prestigious, longest-running news wire services in existence. Nearly 4 billion people worldwide come in contact with AP journalism every day. The publication has won 59 Pulitzer Prizes, including 36 in photojournalism.

MIT student reporters say that the opportunity to directly work with journalists from the AP’s climate team and have their own stories published has been a highlight of their time in the Graduate Program in Science Writing.

“It was great to be in the field with a reporter and photographer from the AP News team, learning directly from her as the reporting unfolded,” says Zoe Beketova, whose story focused on kelp biofuels. “That kind of expertise is difficult to get in a static classroom setting, and I think my team learned a lot.”

Ana Georgescu says that the experience of working with the AP team was “like stepping into a real newsroom.” Georgescu adds that coordinating with AP editors and reporting teams in real time and under tight deadlines provided valuable on-the-ground experience.

“What made the biggest difference for me was being in the field alongside an experienced photojournalist and seeing how they read a scene in practice,” she says. “We were able to get immediate feedback on how we directed subjects, which scenes we chose, and how we integrated photography into the reporting process. That kind of hands-on, in-the-moment experience was incredibly helpful, and it’s made me really excited to keep exploring climate stories, as well as the visual side of journalism.”

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

MIT affiliates elected to National Academy of Sciences for 2026

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has elected 120 members and 25 international members for 2026, including six MIT faculty members and 10 additional alumni. 

Among MIT professors, Bengt Holmström, Michale Fee, Gareth McKinley ’91, Keith Nelson, Fan Wang, and Catherine Wolfram ’96 were elected in recognition of their “distinguished and continuing achievements in original research.” 

Additional alumni who were elected include Christopher J. Chang PhD ’02 (Chemistry); Cynthia J. Ebinger SM ’86, PhD ’88 (Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences); Andrew Gelman ’85, ’86 (Mathematics and Physics); Richard L. Greene ’60 (Physics); Chuan He PhD ’00 (Chemistry); Pardis C. Sabeti ’97 (Biology/Life Sciences); Robert J. Shiller SM ’68, PhD ’72 (Economics); Daniel M. Sigman PhD ’97 (EAPS); Eero Simoncelli SM ’88, PhD ’93 (Electrical Engineering and Computer Science); and Salil P. Vadhan PhD ’99 (Mathematics).

Membership in the National Academy of Sciences is one of the highest honors a scientist can receive in their career. The NAS is a private, nonprofit institution that was established under a congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863. It recognizes achievement in science by election to membership, and — with the National Academy of Engineering and the National Academy of Medicine — provides science, engineering, and health policy advice to the federal government and other organizations.

Bengt Holmström is the Paul A. Samuelson Professor of Economics, emeritus. He received his doctoral degree from the Stanford Graduate School of Business in 1978 and held faculty positions at Northwestern University and Yale University before joining the MIT faculty in 1994 with a joint appointment in economics and management.

Holmström is best known for his foundational research on the theory of contracting and incentives, for which he received the 2016 Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (together with Oliver Hart of Harvard University). His extensive contributions to contract theory as applied to the theory of the firm, corporate governance, and liquidity problems in financial crises have had wide-ranging impacts, while bringing contract theory into mainstream economic thought.

In addition to the Nobel, Holmström’s research has been recognized with the Stephen A. Ross Prize in Financial Economics and the Grand Cross of the Order of the Lion of Finland. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Econometric Society, and the American Finance Association. Holmström is also an elected foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences and a member of the Finnish Academy of Sciences and Letters.

Michale S. Fee is the Glen V. and Phyllis F. Dorflinger Professor of Neuroscience, head of the MIT Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences (BCS), and investigator at the McGovern Institute for Brain Research. His research explores how the brain learns and generates complex sequential behaviors. Using the zebra finch as a model system, Fee investigates the neural mechanisms underlying birdsong — a behavior that young birds learn from their fathers through trial and error, much as human infants learn to speak through babbling. His research extends far beyond birdsong — the neural circuits controlling birdsong learning are closely related to human brain circuits disrupted in Parkinson’s and Huntington’s diseases. Insights from Fee’s research could reveal new clues to the causes and potential treatments of these complex brain disorders.

After receiving his BE with honors in engineering physics at the University of Michigan in 1985, Fee studied applied physics at Stanford University, where he carried out his PhD thesis work in the laboratory of Steven Chu. In 1992, he began working as a postdoc in David Kleinfeld’s lab in the Biological Computation Research Department at Bell Laboratories. Four years later, he became a permanent member of the technical staff at Bell Labs and began working on the mechanisms of vocal sequence generation in the songbird. In 2003, he became an investigator at the McGovern Institute and a faculty member in BCS. In 2021, he was appointed BCS department head, continuing the department’s tradition of being led by scientists whose exemplary work makes MIT a world leader in brain science. Fee is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a recipient of multiple undergraduate and graduate teaching awards at MIT.  

Gareth H. McKinley ’91 is the School of Engineering Professor of Teaching Innovation in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at MIT, former associate head and interim head of the department, and co-founder of Cambridge Polymer Group. McKinley’s research interests include non-Newtonian fluid dynamics, microfluidics, extensional rheology, field-responsive materials, super-hydrophobicity, drag reduction, and the wetting of nanostructured surfaces. His work focuses on understanding the rheology of complex fluids such as surfactants, biomaterials, gels, and polymers, which are ubiquitous in foods and consumer products. 

McKinley has made outstanding contributions to viscoelastic fluid mechanics, understanding flow instabilities and stretching flows. His research group has developed novel instrumentation and customized rheological analysis techniques that have driven the field of rheology for complex and soft fluids. His instrumentation and testing algorithms, along with freely-distributed code for analyzing large amplitude oscillatory shear flow, and broad-band “chirp” rheometry, are used worldwide in industry and academia . 

McKinley is the author of over 390 technical publications. He has won the Publication Award of the Society of Rheology twice (2007 and 2022), as well as the 2021 Walters Award from J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics. He was awarded the Bingham Medal of The Society of Rheology in 2013, the Gold Medal from the British Society of Rheology in 2014, and the G.I. Taylor Medal from the Society for Engineering Science in 2022. In 2019, he was elected to the National Academy of Engineering and was also inducted as a fellow of the Royal Society of London. In 2023, he was awarded an honorary doctorate from the Katholieke University of Leuven, and in 2024 became a corresponding member of the Australian Academy of Sciences. In 2025, he was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and also became a foreign fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering.  

Keith A. Nelson, the Haslam and Dewey Professor of Chemistry, earned his BS in chemistry from Stanford University. After completing his doctoral studies in physical chemistry, also at Stanford, he conducted postdoctoral research with John P. McTague at the University of California at Los Angeles. In 1982, Nelson joined the MIT Department of Chemistry as an assistant professor.

His distinguished career has been recognized with numerous honors, including the William F. Meggers Award, the Bomem-Michelson Award, and the Frank Isakson Prize for Optical Effects in Solids. Research in the Nelson Group focuses on the time-resolved optical study and control of  collective transformations in condensed matter, using pulses of light in the THz, optical, and X-ray spectral ranges and laser-generated strain waves to drive the modes of motion through which these changes occur.

Fan Wang is a professor of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, investigator at the McGovern Institute, and co-director of the K. Lisa Yang and Hock E. Tan Center for Molecular Therapeutics at MIT. She investigates the neural circuits that govern the dynamic interactions between brain and body, exploring how the brain generates sensory perceptions and controls movement. Wang uses cutting-edge techniques including optogenetics, in vivo electrophysiology, and in vivo imaging to make discoveries with profound clinical implications.

By developing innovative tools to study how brain circuits work, Wang discovered distinct populations of neurons activated by anesthesia that can suppress pain without blocking sensation, and can calm anxiety by regulating automatic body functions like heart rate. She also identified the brain circuits controlling rhythmic movements essential for exploration and communication. Together, these findings reveal how emotion, physiology, movement, and consciousness are deeply interconnected.

Before coming to MIT, Wang obtained her PhD from Columbia University working with Richard Axel, and received her postdoctoral training at the University of California at San Francisco and Stanford University with Marc Tessier-Lavigne. She became a faculty member at Duke University in 2003, where she was later appointed Morris N. Broad Professor of Neurobiology. Wang became an investigator at the McGovern Institute and a faculty member in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT in 2021. She is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a recipient of multiple undergraduate teaching and graduate mentorship awards at MIT.  

Catherine D. Wolfram ’96 is the William Barton Rogers Professor in Energy and professor of applied economics in the MIT Sloan School of Management. Before coming to MIT Sloan, Wolfram previously served as the Cora Jane Flood Professor of Business Administration at the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley. From March 2021 to October 2022, she served as the deputy assistant secretary for climate and energy economics at the U.S. Treasury, while on leave from UC Berkeley. Before leaving for government service, she was the program director of the National Bureau of Economic Research’s Environment and Energy Economics Program and a research affiliate at the Energy Institute at Haas. Before joining the faculty at UC Berkeley, she was an assistant professor of economics at Harvard University. She received a PhD in economics from MIT in 1996 and an BA from Harvard in 1989.

Wolfram has published extensively on the economics of energy markets. Her work has analyzed rural electrification programs in the developing world, energy efficiency programs in the United States, the effects of environmental regulation on energy markets, and the impact of privatization and market restructuring in the United States and United Kingdom. She is currently working on projects at the intersection of climate, energy, and trade, including work on carbon border adjustment mechanisms and oil market sanctions. Since March 2025, Wolfram has served on the COP30 President’s Council on Economics, Finance, and Climate, and has chaired a working group on climate coalitions.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/P7Ou8zn

Some democracies are struggling to ensure safe drinking water

About 2 billion people — just under a quarter of the world’s population — lack regular access to clean drinking water. And roughly 800,000 people annually die from illnesses associated with unsanitary water.

Drinking water access is a fundamental problem for human and economic development. The U.N., for instance, highlighted the issue in its Sustainable Development Goals of 2015, an ambitious 17-point agenda that specified safe drinking water as a basic global aim.

Past research shows that democracies, in comparison to other forms of government, tend to be more successful at delivering this kind of public good, which benefits a large portion of the population. This is likely due to accountability measures that include elections, greater transparency, and more freedom in civil society.

But now a study led by an MIT professor shows that across nearly 100 countries with developing economies, that dynamic has become more complex in the 21st century. While democracies are slightly ahead of non-democracies when it comes to providing at least some water, they have been falling behind when it comes to ensuring that there is safe water on tap. 

“Among low- and middle-income countries, which have not done as well economically, we found there wasn’t really a big difference between democracies and non-democracies in the provision of what is called basic drinking water,” says MIT political scientist Evan Lieberman, co-author of a new paper detailing the results. “But for safe drinking water, we found, surprisingly, that democratic countries were becoming less good at extending access.” 

While the study does not pinpoint the precise reasons for this, it suggests a lens for viewing the problem. Democracies tend to be better at delivering visible public goods, the kinds of things citizens can literally see — like infrastructure that delivers water. But the difference between safe and unsafe water is not necessarily visible and obvious, so public officials may not be as responsive.

“This is likely a big part of the equation, that the invisibility of safe water makes it a less compelling public good for politicians,” says Lieberman, the Total Professor of Political Science and Contemporary Africa, and director of MIT’s Center for International Studies.

The paper, “Beyond the tap: The limited value of democracy for delivering universal safe water access in low- and middle-income countries,” is published in the journal World Development. The authors are Lieberman, and Naomi Tilles, a doctoral student in political science at Stanford University.

Seeing is believing

To conduct the study, the scholars analyzed drinking water data recorded by the World Health Organization/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme. That provides information for basic availability to water, defined as access to an improved water source with no more than 30 minutes of collection time; and access to safe drinking water, defined as an improved water source that is available on premises, available when needed, and free from potentially disease-producing contaminants, which range from fecal matter to harmful chemicals.

Examining 96 low- and middle-income countries, the researchers looked at a variety of measures pertaining to its democratic or non-democratic features, and ran 39,000 regressions to see how the form of government related to its provision of water. Overall, Lieberman and Tilles found that democratic governance is modestly associated with an increase in the basic availability of water, compared to non-democracies. However, the effect is not particularly robust.

The good news is that between 2000 and 2024, 81 of the 90 countries with data available in both years made gains in safe drinking water access. However, democratic countries have been less successful than their non-democratic counterparts in advancing the goal of achieving universal access. 

“Moreover, the gap between democracies and non-democracies seems to be getting a little bit larger over time,” Lieberman observes. 

Because the study is focused on establishing the overall empirical situation, the scholars do not claim to have determined why this trend has been emerging. Many newer democracies have struggled to establish high-functioning governance in some regions, which may influence their overall results. 

More broadly, Lieberman suggests, visibility matters. Past scholarship has shown that democracies perform relatively well in delivering visible public goods, especially in countries with little information in the public sphere. Delivering water generates attention for politicians in a way that keeping water safe does not. 

“Politicians may figure out they should do things citizens like, to stay in office, such as bringing water to an area,” Lieberman says. “You can have a ribbon-cutting ceremony, and people feel it really happened. But water quality is often invisible.

It’s a more difficult challenge to ensure safe water: You have to do testing, prevent people from polluting, and you may need to treat the water.”

In any case, Lieberman notes, “Given what we find, what is clear is that the incentives are not aligned under the current systems for advancing safe-water access within all democracies. That provides opportunities for human agency to create incentives for citizens, nongovernment agencies, and governments to do what is needed.” 

Development for all

Lieberman comes to the topic of water access as an expert on African politics. His most recent book, “Until We Have Won Our Liberty” (Princeton University Press, 2022), examines the vicissitudes of South African democracy. In the book and in general, he suggests that democracy is the most viable path toward development with “dignity,” meaning economic growth accompanied by liberties and equal treatment under the law. 

“I think democracy provides dignified development, by granting people recognition and participation, and that’s an extremely valuable thing,” Lieberman says.

Still, when it comes to the performance of many countries with regard to safe water, he says, “I think we just need to be clear-eyed about real problems.”

In some countries, he suggests, the time horizon of elected officials may also be relatively short-term, and they may be more oriented toward simpler problems than water safety. At the same time, other members of society need to find ways to make water safety a bigger issue in the eyes of the public. 

“There are important lessons for democracies to learn, and citizens in civil society who are aware of this challenge need to figure out ways to get people to care about it, to recognize the connection between illness and unsafe water, and to use political campaigns to advance their longer-term interests,” Lieberman says.

Overall, he adds, “There is something intrinsically important about democratic government. Then the question becomes how to make it work better to deliver really important outcomes like safe water.”

de MIT News https://ift.tt/hRYNSs4

Technology usually creates jobs for young, skilled workers. Will AI do the same?

At any given time, technology does two things to employment: It replaces traditional jobs, and it creates new lines of work. Machines replace farmers, but enable, say, aeronautical engineers to exist. So, if tech creates new jobs, who gets them? How well do they pay? How long do new jobs remain new, before they become just another common task any worker can do?

A new study of U.S. employment led by MIT labor economist David Autor sheds light on all these matters. In the postwar U.S., as Autor and his colleagues show in granular detail, new forms of work have tended to benefit college graduates under 30 more than anyone else. 

“We had never before seen exactly who is doing new work,” Autor says. “It’s done more by young and educated people, in urban settings.” 

The study also contains a powerful large-scale insight: A lot of innovation-based new work is driven by demand. Government-backed expansion of research and manufacturing in the 1940s, in response to World War II, accounted for a huge amount of new work, and new forms of expertise. 

“This says that wherever we make new investments, we end up getting new specializations,” Autor says. “If you create a large-scale activity, there’s always going to be an opportunity for new specialized knowledge that’s relevant for it. We thought that was exciting to see.” 

The paper, “What Makes New Work Different from More Work?” is forthcoming in the Annual Review of Economics. The authors are Autor; Caroline Chin, a doctoral student in MIT’s Department of Economics; Anna M. Salomons, a professor at Tilburg University’s Department of Economics and Utrecht University’s School of Economics; and Bryan Seegmiller PhD ’22, an assistant professor at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management.

And yes, learning about new work, and the kinds of workers who obtain it, might be relevant to the spread of artificial intelligence — although, in Autor’s estimation, it is too soon to tell just how AI will affect the workplace.

“People are really worried that AI-based automation is going to erode specific tasks more rapidly,” Autor observes. “Eroding tasks is not the same thing as eroding jobs, since many jobs involve a lot of tasks. But we’re all saying: Where is the new work going to come from? It’s so important, and we know little about it. We don’t know what it will be, what it will look like, and who will be able to do it.”

“If everyone is an expert, then no one is an expert”

The four co-authors also collaborated on a previous major study of new work, published in 2024, which found that about six out of 10 jobs in the U.S. from 1940 to 2018 were in new specialties that had only developed broadly since 1940. The new study extends that line of research by looking more precisely at who fills the new lines of work. 

To do that, the researchers used U.S. Census Bureau data from 1940 through 1950, as well as the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) data from 2011 to 2023. In the first case, because Census Bureau records become wholly public after about 70 years, the scholars could examine individual-level data about occupations, salaries, and more, and could track the same workers as they changed jobs between the 1940 and 1950 Census enumerations. 

Through a collaborative research arrangement with the U.S. Census Bureau, the authors also gained secure access to person-level ACS records. These data allowed them to analyze the earnings, education, and other demographic characteristics of workers in new occupational specialties — and to compare them with workers in longstanding ones.

New work, Autor observes, is always tied to new forms of expertise. At first, this expertise is scarce; over time, it may become more common. In any case, expertise is often linked to new forms of technology.

“It requires mastering some capability,” Autor says. “What makes labor valuable is not simply the ability to do stuff, but specialized knowledge. And that often differentiates high-paid work from low-paid work.” Moreover, he adds, “It has to be scarce. If everyone is an expert, then no one is an expert.”

By examining the census data, the scholars found that back in 1950, about 7 percent of employees had jobs in types of work that had emerged since 1930. More recently, about 18 percent of workers in the 2011-2023 period were in lines of work introduced since 1970. (That happens to be roughly the same portion of new jobs per decade, although Autor does not think this is a hard-and-fast trend.) 

In these time periods, new work has emerged more often in urban areas, with people under 30 benefitting more than any other age category. Getting a job in a line of new work seems to have a lasting effect: People employed in new work in 1940 were 2.5 times as likely to be in new work in 1950, compared to the general population. College graduates were 2.9 percentage points more likely than high school graduates to be engaged in new work. 

New work also has a wage premium, that is, better salaries on aggregate than in already-existing forms of work. Yet as the study shows, that wage premium also fades over time, as the particular expertise in many forms of new work becomes much more widely grasped. 

“The scarcity value erodes,” Autor says. “It becomes common knowledge. It itself gets automated. New work gets old.”

After all, Autor points out, driving a car was once a scarce form of expertise. For that matter, so was being able to use word-processing programs such as WordPerfect or Microsoft Word, well into the 1990s. After a while, though, being able to handle word-processing tools became the most elementary part of using a computer.

Back to AI for a minute

Studying who gets new jobs led the scholars to striking conclusions about how new work is created. Examining county-level data from the World War II era, when the federal government was backing new manufacturing in public-private partnerships throughout the U.S., the study shows that counties with new factories had more new work, and that 85 to 90 percent of new work from 1940 to 1950 was technology-driven. 

In this sense there was a great deal of demand-driven innovation at the time. Today, public discourse about innovation often focuses on the supply side, namely, the innovators and entrepreneurs trying to create new products. But the study shows that the demand side can significantly influence innovative activity. 

“Technology is not like, ‘Eureka!’ where it just happens,” Autor says. “Innovation is a purposive activity. And innovation is cumulative. If you get far enough, it will have its own momentum. But if you don’t, it’ll never get there.”

Which brings us back to AI, the topic so many people are focused on in 2026. Will AI create good new jobs, or will it take work away? Well, it likely depends how we implement it, Autor thinks. Consider the massive health care sector, where there could be a lot of types of tech-driven new work, if people are interested in creating jobs.

“There are different ways we could use AI in health care,” Autor says. “One is just to automate people’s jobs away. The other is to allow people with different levels of expertise to do different tasks. I would say the latter is more socially beneficial. But it’s not clear that is where the market will go.” 

On the other hand, maybe with government-driven demand in various forms, AI could get applied in ways that end up boosting health care-sector productivity, creating new jobs as a result. 

“More than half the dollars in health care in the U.S. are public dollars,” Autor observes. “We have a lot of leverage there, we can push things in that direction. There are different ways to use this.” 

This research was supported, in part, by the Hewlett Foundation, the Google Technology and Society Visiting Fellows Program, the NOMIS Foundation, the Schmidt Sciences AI2050 Fellowship, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the James M. and Cathleen D. Stone Foundation, and Instituut Gak.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/IgCoJ1O

Q&A: The path to a PhD in computational science and engineering at MIT

In 2023, the Center for Computational Science and Engineering (CCSE), an academic unit in the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing, introduced a new standalone PhD degree program. This interdisciplinary PhD program blends both coursework and a thesis, enabling students to pursue research in cross-cutting methodological aspects of computational science and engineering.

PhD candidate Emily Williams is poised to be the first graduate of the program. With a technical background in aerospace engineering and applied mathematics, her research interests include stochastic and generative modeling for multiscale chaotic systems. She earned a BS in aerospace engineering from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and an MS in aeronautics and astronautics from MIT. She was awarded the Department of Energy Computational Science Graduate Fellowship, which funded her doctoral research. Here, she discusses her experience with the program and its impact on her career trajectory.

Q: What has been a highlight of the CCSE degree program?

A: I found the program curriculum to be extremely thoughtful and intentional. In particular, the program of study was constructed to cover many important areas of computational science and engineering research and education, from engineering and mathematical modeling to scientific and parallel computing. I found a lot of overlap with the DoE CSGF program of study, so I was given a lot of freedom to pursue very interesting technical electives that fit within CSE that I might not have been able to explore if I had been in a discipline-centric program.

Q: Why is this program so impactful, especially in the context of having a stand-alone PhD program?

A: I think a stand-alone PhD program helps to further establish the MIT CCSE as a leader in CSE research and education. The joint programs give graduate researchers more opportunity to learn and apply leading CSE methodologies to their disciplinary areas and primarily stay within their home department. For me, I’ve found that I’ve had more opportunities for collaboration, in potentially applying my methods to a wide range of different exciting applications. I think this theme of collaboration will continue to foster through those advancing through the standalone program in particular.

Q: What advice would you give to students considering this program?

A: I think my advice would be to keep an open mind. My interest in CSE was shaped by common threads in my education and research interests over the years that I didn’t think were connected at all. Through my fellowship and the standalone program, I felt like I was able to create my own path to my degree and take courses that excited me and fit within the CSE themes of our program of study.

de MIT News https://ift.tt/5aZNRzP