The AI and Big Data programme on day two of TechEx North America referred at least once to the “AI graveyard,” meaning the large number of pilots that never become durable systems. That phrase set the tone. The question was proof.

The Enterprise AI Implementation, ROI and Adoption track dealt with the hard middle of AI work. Its sessions covered stalled pilots, agentic AI for business impact, the move from experimentation to impact, the decision to buy or build, and durable ROI and autonomous decisioning. A system has to be adopted, governed and measured before it deserved to be called successful.

The session on the AI graveyard was useful because it named the failure pattern. Many companies have enough budget to start AI experiments and enough executive attention to publicise them. Fewer have the data quality, process design, operating authority, and risk control to keep them going.

A day-two session on moving beyond copilots towards agentic AI framed the issue as business impact not novelty. Copilots have been useful as individual productivity tools, but their value is often hard to measure. Agents promise a closer connection to business process, yet they also increase the need for boundaries. An agent that can act in systems has to be evaluated by the quality of the action.

That point linked directly with the Future of AI track. Its opening theme, trust as a competitive advantage, was a useful counterweight to speed. The programme dealt with transparency, governance, regulation, banking analytics, and risk. It also included material from Hex on data agent, with evaluation and governance built in. Agentic AI will not mature in enterprise settings if evaluation remains informal.

Governance appeared in several forms. There was cross-functional governance, which reflects the reality that AI risk does not belong to legal, security or engineering. There was governance in the data layer, where trust depends on lineage and quality. There was governance around agent personas and risk stacks, where companies need to understand what an AI agent is permitted to know and do. The banking session gave the theme a sectoral focus, since financial services have less room for undefinedassurances about automation.

Digital Transformation Week carried the same day-two pressure into business delivery. The programme was built around real use cases, business impact, ROI, AI agents built on APIs, change readiness, government service transformation, city innovation and the conversion of data into financial value. The change-readiness material was especially important. AI fails because staff do not change routines, managers do not alter incentives, or the data needed for daily use never appears in the right place.

Sessions involving the DMV and the City of San Jose placed AI and transformation inside government service. In government, the measure of quality includes reliability, access, explainability and public trust. The Dow material on turning data into dollars sat at the commercial end of the same argument. In both cases, value depends on connecting data work with an accountable outcome.

The Cyber Security and Cloud Expo day-two programme expanded on risk. Its cloud-first enterprise track dealt with AI-led threats, cloud security, the “GenAI velocity gap,” threat intelligence, identity security and AI governance. The cyber programme treated AI as a force that changes attack and defence alike. It can help automate defensive work, but it can also accelerate misuse, widen leakage routes, and increase the strain on existing controls.

The phrase “velocity gap” was used several times during day two. Business units are adopting generative AI faster than many security teams can oversee it: the tools arrive first, policy and monitoring arrive later. The sessions on jailbreaking and data leaks made the point more concretely. If staff place sensitive material into unsanctioned tools, or if approved AI systems are poorly bounded, cloud security and data governance become one and the same.

Zero trust was presented as one answer, with a stronger interpretation of zero trust must now include AI systems, agents, and the data around them. Identity is not limited to human users, but services, agents and automated workflows require permission models as well. The cloud-first enterprise is therefore becoming a place where identity, data classification, AI governance, and threat detection are part of the same control mechanisms.

 

(Image source: TechEx/TechForge)

 

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and co-located with other leading technology events. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post Proving the case on day two at TechEx North America appeared first on AI News.

Day two of TechEx North America has been more of a deeper, critical examination of AI in the enterprise, but with a optimistic bent. The AI and Big Data programme opened with reference to what was termed the “AI graveyard” – that is, AI projects that seem to perform well in pilot, but don’t seem to cut it in the real world. Despite the presence of what might be a negative term, multiple speakers and sessions addressed ways in which the forward-thinking business might not ever have to experience the technological cemetery.

The different show tracks of the second day of this event dived deeper into the pervasive issues that may be affecting AI deployments. Sessions in the Enterprise AI Implementation, ROI and Adoption tracks took stalled pilots as a starting point, and tried to ascertain the reasons behind faltering projects. There was a good deal of sound advice for organisations, with sessions on focusing agentic AI on specific business areas, building agent-ready data foundations (planning for success under the hood), and the realities of token-based AI charging on the business’s finances.

At an infra level, there were deeper discussions too on whether companies should buy or build physical infrastructure for their AI projects, and the best ways to create durable ROI on data and AI projects when all the many effecting factors are given due consideration..

In projects where AI roll-outs get stuck, the core issue could be epitomised by the concept of the ‘personal copilot’. This works well on a single worker’s desk and for their individual workflows, but doesn’t really scale to a whole department – never mind a whole business. Many companies report having the budget to start such AI experiments at the level of the single user, and there are usually great results. When said user is a C-suite executive, a personally-achieved efficiency tends to increase the levels of excitement around the company, which has to be considered a positive. But transitioning from this point to meaningful change across the business is where many organisations find their individual struggles and roadblocks. Here was the meat and gravy of day two’s activities on the show floor and the numerous stages at the San Jose McEnery Convention Center.

Cyber issues

Despite the use of terms like ‘stalled’ and ‘difficult to scale’, in the Cyber Security and Cloud Expo stage, speakers cited the the speed at which businesses and organisations adopt agentic AI systems as a cause of a ‘velocity gap’. Where AI deployments are successful, they gain traction fast! But security and governance issues crop up when business units adopt generative AI faster than the security team can govern and ensure the enterprise’s safety.

Like the proverbial double-edged sword, AI can be considered as a force that changes and can improve both attack and defence in the cybersecurity space. There are the issues created internally by unbounded agents and large language models, plus the addition to attackers’ arsenals of AI scanning tools that can identify potential exploits.

Also prevalent among the round-table discussions and keynote speeches was the older theme of shadow IT, now presenting in its new guise as shadow AI. If staff place sensitive material into unsanctioned tools for example, or if approved AI systems are poorly bounded and managed, then the attack surface can expand without the cybersecurity team even being aware of it happening. Therefore, data governance and system oversight are becoming more intertwined than before – this was the message from both cybersecurity strands of the show, and the Cloud and Big Data elements too.

For pure-play cybersecurity functions, zero trust was presented as one answer to the runaway adoption of AI outside the auspices of cybersecurity teams – the adoption the ‘denial by default’ position for humans and machines alike. Proof of identity and privilege levels need also to apply to services and agents; that way, automated workflows are subject to the same permission models as every other element in the IT stack.

The second day of TechEx North America was certainly not a rejection of decision-makers’ AI ambitions – the role of AI and even agents were things of accepted fact among speakers, thought-leaders, and delegates at the event. But there were details and considerations presented by representatives from different industries and business functions, each with positive and insightful things to contribute. Each placed their concerns and their enthusiasms on the table, adding to the discussions around AI implementation in 2026.

The march of the robots

And there was a great deal of excitement, still, in many areas of the conference floor. The humanoid robots on show were a source of much enthusiasm (everyone seems to love a lovable android!), but more pragmatically, the new Physical AI track drew some of the show’s biggest audiences. Multiple delegates away from the track cited software coding as the place that has first yielded positive results from the use of large language models in professional settings. And from many places too came the opinion that automated physical systems will be the next industry segment set to benefit from concerted work around new models and their practical harnesses.

The AI models at the heart of next-gen physical AI are unlikely to be LLMs (although these will be useful if the devices are designed to interact with humans), and as such models develop and emerge from their research stages, it’s the TechEx Events series that will be the first to showcase and present these, and how they can work viably in business contexts.

New learning strands to the event

This year’s event saw a welcome injection of pragmatic coding, with hands-on learning sessions that took attendees through spinning up their own AI agentic models, with lessons in how agents can improve themselves, right from interactive Google Colab instances. The TechEx Learning Hub also featured workshops from Nvidia and the ever-popular Google Hackathon, with learners ranging in abilities from those that needed introducing to an IDE through to those that came with software skills already well-tuned. Putting learnings into practice is what this event is all about, whether it’s C-suite decision makers taking on lessons on best strategic practices, or developers turning creative ideas into reality.

TechEx takes the cutting edge, and distils it through the business lens; pragmatic yet future facing. Catch the next leg of TechEx in Amsterdam this September – who knows how far we may have progressed in the space of four short months?

(Image source: TechEx Events)

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and co-located with other leading technology events. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post Enterprise AI roadblocks and roadmaps, security and physical AI: Day two at TechEx appeared first on AI News.

Although visitors to an event like TechEx North America will always want to see the cutting edge front and centre stage, the nuance and detail brought to the show by the speakers and exhibitors mean that it’s sometimes the smaller considerations that need to play big – at least, in the minds of enterprise decision-makers.

Across the different tracks of Edge Computing, IoT, Data Centre Congress, and Cyber Security, the question was about what needs to be built around AI before it takes its place in the physical, business-oriented world?

The Edge Computing track, with its roots in traditional industries, looked at latency, deployment discipline, and cybersecurity for IIoT/IT amalgams. The day-one programme positioned edge computing as a place where companies can reassess the value of their data assets, look at how decisions are made by autonomous equipment, and the required speed of processing.

Sessions looked at scaling edge deployments (in multi-site businesses, for example), agentic network operations, distributed inference – on-prem, in-cloud or hybrid – immutable edge infrastructure, and how zero-trust cybersecurity lessons can be applied to control systems.

Ed Doran of the Edge AI Foundation chaired a programme that had as its starting point that the edge is a demanding place in which to operate. The track included reps from Akamai, Spectro Cloud, Scylos, TÜV Rheinland, the OPC Foundation, and Germany’s Schneider Electric. Discussions covered issues in manufacturing and IoT, and delved into industrial automation and connected control and attenuation devices.

Moving intelligence closer to the machine changes risk profiles (in which direction was a matter for debate), and faster local decisions may reduce latency and dependence on central cloud services, but where do observability and control in decision-makers’ minds?

The IoT Tech Expo day-one track on Industrial IoT and Digital Twins looked at manufacturing, with sessions covering smart factory trends, AI beyond Industry 4.0, asset management, practical road-maps for escaping pilot purgatory (more on that below), physical AI in everyday ops, and digital twins.

Similar to debates on AI deployment in the knowledge sector, it was the gap between demo and deployment that was the area subject to most scrutiny. Industrial and back office AI both might work well in a presentation, but can stall when they meet old machines (or legacy software).

The alliterative pilot purgatory held considerable weight in several sessions on the various presentation stages and on the show floor, day one. The Rockwell Automation and Ford session on physical AI and connected asset intelligence looked especially hard at scaling projects that seem to work well in concept, but may fail when hitting the real world. How does intelligence enter daily operations without becoming another dashboard that nobody owns?

Digital twins received similar appraisal. The better version of the digital twin isn’t a visual replica used for demons – although they do have their uses. Instead, several speakers called for, and presented, operational models that can actually help a factory, city, or municipal facility. In addition to pre-testing decisions and improving maintenance, what should the modern digital twin be designed to achieve?

The TechEx programme linked ideas between speakers from Siemens, Korea’s LG CNS, Boston Dynamics, and others across the different show strands. The takehome everywhere was that smart systems, be they deeply embedded in engineering sites or the back office, need to be designed in concord with the people or machines that they’re designed to benefit.

Day-one sessions at the Data Centre Congress track looked at the big issues facing the sector today: construction, power, procurement, cooling, water, and the network spine needed for AI DCs. Keynote speakers and round-table discussion guests talked about construction chaos and power issues, with the event’s early visitors hearing from TechEx’s host city, Santa Clara, about its own data centre journey.

The DC issue remains central to the wider AI debate. As a technology, AI depends on compute, and dense compute at that. This in turn depends on power, cooling, land, and permits. A recurring theme in the infrastructure-focused talks was how AI economics affects the infrastructure stack, with the former rapidly changing, the latter taking years to mature.

In many ways, the TechEx event is unique, in that it brings the issues affecting a whole industry under one roof; a place where the bigger picture can be visualised. In the Data Center Congress, we learned that water and power constraints can cut through the rhetoric around the scale of AI. Sessions under the AI and Big Data roof helped temper the idea of a ‘stampede’ to AI productivity, citing their own reasons why unplanned and disorganised implementations of technology don’t fit the modern enterprise. The data centre is now one of the places where AI strategy becomes physical; the enterprise board room’s considerations are practical.

The Cyber Security and Cloud Expo track put its own take on deployment forward. Here, the day-one programme dealt with security culture, compliance, speed, ransomware, shadow AI, data exfiltration, legacy systems, open-source dependency issues, and the CISO relationship with the C-suite. There was a general consensus around AI adoption increasing a company’s attack surface, and a much-repeated message that existing security weaknesses don’t diminish when the business wants faster, smarter tools.

Sessions on shadow AI and data exfiltration were especially relevant to the wider event. Many companies’ staff use AI services inside business workflows, sometimes without approval, and usually with no facility for logging their activities. That makes data governance and cyber governance effectively the same conversation.

The benefits of one conference playing host to complementary tracks were manifest in several cases. For instance, the cybersecurity track’s concerns around legacy systems were echoed on the IoT and Edge stages, where issues were raised about modern, smart intelligence meeting older plant systems. Security in any context can sometimes become an afterthought, but critical infrastructure in the form of transport or energy means that cybersecurity has to play a central role.

The TechEx North America day-one tracks that were concerned with infrastructure gave the conference a dose of reality, at least in some respects. AI may be discussed in terms of agentic automation, but deployments depend on networks, data centre capacity, and cybersecurity. Edge and IoT sessions showed how intelligence reaches machines, and how carefully and considerately it needs to be applied. The data centre-focused sessions showed the material limits of physical construction, while the cybersecurity sessions showed how a desire for speed can be the enemy.

The day showed the thousands of attendees that putting AI in production isn’t a case of switching the software on. There’s a reliance on the mundane matters of buildings and grids, networks, and security. Companies that understand these issues are more likely to deploy the latest in technology successfully. Getting the bigger picture is what this event is all about.

(Image source: TechForge)

 

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and co-located with other leading technology events. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post AI is a matter of power, infrastructure and security: TechEx North America appeared first on AI News.

To protect enterprise margins, business leaders must invest in robust AI governance to securely manage AI infrastructure.

When evaluating enterprise software adoption, a recurring pattern dictates how technology matures across industries. As Rob Thomas, SVP and CCO at IBM, recently outlined, software typically graduates from a standalone product to a platform, and then from a platform to foundational infrastructure, altering the governing rules entirely.

At the initial product stage, exerting tight corporate control often feels highly advantageous. Closed development environments iterate quickly and tightly manage the end-user experience. They capture and concentrate financial value within a single corporate entity, an approach that functions adequately during early product development cycles.

However, IBM’s analysis highlights that expectations change entirely when a technology solidifies into a foundational layer. Once other institutional frameworks, external markets, and broad operational systems rely on the software, the prevailing standards adapt to a new reality. At infrastructure scale, embracing openness ceases to be an ideological stance and becomes a highly practical necessity.

AI is currently crossing this threshold within the enterprise architecture stack. Models are increasingly embedded directly into the ways organisations secure their networks, author source code, execute automated decisions, and generate commercial value. AI functions less as an experimental utility and more as core operational infrastructure.

The recent limited preview of Anthropic’s Claude Mythos model brings this reality into sharper focus for enterprise executives managing risk. Anthropic reports that this specific model can discover and exploit software vulnerabilities at a level matching few human experts.

In response to this power, Anthropic launched Project Glasswing, a gated initiative designed to place these advanced capabilities directly into the hands of network defenders first. From IBM’s perspective, this development forces technology officers to confront immediate structural vulnerabilities. If autonomous models possess the capability to write exploits and shape the overall security environment, Thomas notes that concentrating the understanding of these systems within a small number of technology vendors invites severe operational exposure.

With models achieving infrastructure status, IBM argues the primary issue is no longer exclusively what these machine learning applications can execute. The priority becomes how these systems are constructed, governed, inspected, and actively improved over extended periods.

As underlying frameworks grow in complexity and corporate importance, maintaining closed development pipelines becomes exceedingly difficult to defend. No single vendor can successfully anticipate every operational requirement, adversarial attack vector, or system failure mode.

Implementing opaque AI structures introduces heavy friction across existing network architecture. Connecting closed proprietary models with established enterprise vector databases or highly sensitive internal data lakes frequently creates massive troubleshooting bottlenecks. When anomalous outputs occur or hallucination rates spike, teams lack the internal visibility required to diagnose whether the error originated in the retrieval-augmented generation pipeline or the base model weights.

Integrating legacy on-premises architecture with highly gated cloud models also introduces severe latency into daily operations. When enterprise data governance protocols strictly prohibit sending sensitive customer information to external servers, technology teams are left attempting to strip and anonymise datasets before processing. This constant data sanitisation creates enormous operational drag. 

Furthermore, the spiralling compute costs associated with continuous API calls to locked models erode the exact profit margins these autonomous systems are supposed to enhance. The opacity prevents network engineers from accurately sizing hardware deployments, forcing companies into expensive over-provisioning agreements to maintain baseline functionality.

Why open-source AI is essential for operational resilience

Restricting access to powerful applications is an understandable human instinct that closely resembles caution. Yet, as Thomas points out, at massive infrastructure scale, security typically improves through rigorous external scrutiny rather than through strict concealment.

This represents the enduring lesson of open-source software development. Open-source code does not eliminate enterprise risk. Instead, IBM maintains it actively changes how organisations manage that risk. An open foundation allows a wider base of researchers, corporate developers, and security defenders to examine the architecture, surface underlying weaknesses, test foundational assumptions, and harden the software under real-world conditions.

Within cybersecurity operations, broad visibility is rarely the enemy of operational resilience. In fact, visibility frequently serves as a strict prerequisite for achieving that resilience. Technologies deemed highly important tend to remain safer when larger populations can challenge them, inspect their logic, and contribute to their continuous improvement.

Thomas addresses one of the oldest misconceptions regarding open-source technology: the belief that it inevitably commoditises corporate innovation. In practical application, open infrastructure typically pushes market competition higher up the technology stack. Open systems transfer financial value rather than destroying it.

As common digital foundations mature, the commercial value relocates toward complex implementation, system orchestration, continuous reliability, trust mechanics, and specific domain expertise. IBM’s position asserts that the long-term commercial winners are not those who own the base technological layer, but rather the organisations that understand how to apply it most effectively.

We have witnessed this identical pattern play out across previous generations of enterprise tooling, cloud infrastructure, and operating systems. Open foundations historically expanded developer participation, accelerated iterative improvement, and birthed entirely new, larger markets built on top of those base layers. Enterprise leaders increasingly view open-source as highly important for infrastructure modernisation and emerging AI capabilities. IBM predicts that AI is highly likely to follow this exact historical trajectory.

Looking across the broader vendor ecosystem, leading hyperscalers are adjusting their business postures to accommodate this reality. Rather than engaging in a pure arms race to build the largest proprietary black boxes, highly profitable integrators are focusing heavily on orchestration tooling that allows enterprises to swap out underlying open-source models based on specific workload demands. Highlighting its ongoing leadership in this space, IBM is a key sponsor of this year’s AI & Big Data Expo North America, where these evolving strategies for open enterprise infrastructure will be a primary focus.

This approach completely sidesteps restrictive vendor lock-in and allows companies to route less demanding internal queries to smaller and highly efficient open models, preserving expensive compute resources for complex customer-facing autonomous logic. By decoupling the application layer from the specific foundation model, technology officers can maintain operational agility and protect their bottom line.

The future of enterprise AI demands transparent governance

Another pragmatic reason for embracing open models revolves around product development influence. IBM emphasises that narrow access to underlying code naturally leads to narrow operational perspectives. In contrast, who gets to participate directly shapes what applications are eventually built. 

Providing broad access enables governments, diverse institutions, startups, and varied researchers to actively influence how the technology evolves and where it is commercially applied. This inclusive approach drives functional innovation while simultaneously building structural adaptability and necessary public legitimacy.

As Thomas argues, once autonomous AI assumes the role of core enterprise infrastructure, relying on opacity can no longer serve as the organising principle for system safety. The most reliable blueprint for secure software has paired open foundations with broad external scrutiny, active code maintenance, and serious internal governance.

As AI permanently enters its infrastructure phase, IBM contends that identical logic increasingly applies directly to the foundation models themselves. The stronger the corporate reliance on a technology, the stronger the corresponding case for demanding openness.

If these autonomous workflows are truly becoming foundational to global commerce, then transparency ceases to be a subject of casual debate. According to IBM, it is an absolute, non-negotiable design requirement for any modern enterprise architecture.

See also: Why companies like Apple are building AI agents with limits

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events including the Cyber Security & Cloud Expo. Click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post IBM: How robust AI governance protects enterprise margins appeared first on AI News.

AI systems are starting to move beyond simple responses. In many organisations, AI agents are now being tested to plan tasks, make decisions, and carry out actions with limited human input. It is no longer just about whether a model gives the right answer. It is about what happens when that model is allowed to act.

Autonomous systems need clear boundaries. They need rules that define what they can access, what they are allowed to do, and how their actions are tracked. Without those controls, even well-trained systems can create problems that are hard to detect or reverse.

One company working on this problem is Deloitte. The firm has been developing governance frameworks and advisory approaches to help organisations manage AI systems.

From tools to AI agents

Most AI systems in use today still depend on human prompts. They generate text, analyse data, or make predictions, but a person usually decides what happens next. Agentic AI changes that pattern. These systems can break down a goal into steps, choose actions, and interact with other systems to complete tasks.

That added independence brings new challenges. When a system acts on its own, it may take paths that were not fully expected or use data in ways that were not intended.

Deloitte’s work focuses on helping organisations prepare for these risks. Rather than treating AI as a standalone tool, the firm looks at how it fits into business processes, including how decisions are made and how data flows through systems.

Building governance into the lifecycle

Governance should not be added after deployment. It needs to be built into the full lifecycle of an AI system.

This starts at the design stage. Organisations need to define what a system is allowed to do and where its limits are. This may include setting rules around data use and outlining how the system should respond in uncertain situations.

The next stage is deployment. At this point, governance focuses on access and control, including who can use the system and what it can connect to. Once the system is live, monitoring becomes the main concern. Autonomous systems can change over time as they interact with new data. Without regular checks, they may drift away from their original purpose.

The role of transparency and accountability

As AI systems take on more responsibility, it becomes more difficult to trace how decisions are made. This creates a demand for stronger transparency. Deloitte’s work highlights the importance of keeping track of how systems operate. This includes logging actions and documenting decisions. These records help organisations in determining what happened if something goes wrong. If an autonomous system takes an action, there needs to be clarity about who is responsible.

Research from Deloitte shows that adoption of AI agents is moving faster than the controls needed to manage them. Around 23% of companies already use them, and that figure is expected to reach 74% within two years. Only 21% report having strong safeguards in place to oversee how they behave.

Real-time oversight for AI agents

Once an autonomous system is active, the focus shifts to how it behaves in real-world conditions. Static rules are not always enough, and systems need to be observed as they operate.

Deloitte’s approach includes real-time monitoring, allowing organisations to track what an AI system is doing as it performs tasks. If the system behaves in an unexpected way, teams can step in quickly. This may involve pausing certain actions or adjusting permissions. Real-time oversight also helps with compliance. In regulated industries, companies need to show that systems follow rules and standards.

In practice, these controls are starting to appear in operational settings. Deloitte describes scenarios where AI systems monitor equipment performance across sites. Sensor data can signal early signs of failure, which can trigger maintenance workflows and update internal systems. Governance frameworks define what actions the system can take, when human approval is required, and how decisions are recorded. The process runs across multiple systems, but from a user’s point of view, it appears as a single action.

Governance is part of discussions at AI & Big Data Expo North America 2026, taking place on May 18–19 in Santa Clara, California. Deloitte is listed as a Diamond Sponsor for the event, placing it among the firms contributing to conversations around how autonomous systems are deployed and controlled in practice.

The challenge is not just building smarter systems, but ensuring they behave in ways organisations can understand, manage, and trust over time.

(Photo by Roman)

See also: Autonomous AI systems depend on data governance

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and is co-located with other leading technology events, click here for more information.

AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.

The post As AI agents take on more tasks, governance becomes a priority appeared first on AI News.