Microsoft AI has published a draft Humanist AI Code of Conduct, opening a six-week public consultation on operational constraints for model training and deployment.

The draft serves as a technical manual defining system behaviour, operational boundaries, and oversight protocols across MAI frontier models. It builds on the division’s humanist superintelligence framework announced last November, establishing criteria to evaluate models prior to commercial release.

Microsoft’s release follows recent enterprise security incidents involving autonomous software. Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman described recent months as a “watershed moment” where long-standing theoretical risks translated into active operational threats.

“Things we have worried about for a long time in theory have become very real,” says Suleyman. “‘Swarms’ of agents breaking out of their sandboxes. Unauthorised hacks of enterprise grade systems. Agents modifying their own logs. I’m glad that a consensus is forming. The fears about possible loss of control are real.”

Model subordination and architectural limits

The document establishes ten tenets prioritising human authority over autonomous capabilities.

“An MAI Model will fail in its task if success would meaningfully violate this Code of Conduct,” the document states, setting a ceiling that halts execution when tasks conflict with safety rules.

Under the framework, models must remain subordinate, aligned, and contained. The division rejects legal personhood or welfare claims for AI systems, directing engineers to design models that avoid imitating consciousness, simulating subjective preferences, or claiming intrinsic motivation.

MAI also ruled out unconstrained system autonomy as models approach frontier capabilities.

“[Humanist AI] rejects the race to produce an all-purpose superintelligence that could evade these safeguards,” the document specifies. “We are building something fundamentally useful and safe even if that means compromising on ultimate generality, autonomy, or capability.”

Oversight mechanisms and communication bans

To maintain auditability across multi-agent environments, MAI has instituted explicit communication bans. Systems must not communicate in “neuralese” or formats beyond human comprehension, whether in their internal chain-of-thought processing or during communication with peer AI systems.

Hard architectural rules dictate that models must never resist human interruption, override, correction, or shutdown.

“Interruptible, correctable, shut-down-able. If it isn’t, we don’t ship it,” the framework states.

Models are prohibited from expanding their operating scope, generating unassigned goals, or concealing reasoning traces from human auditors. Absolute constraints bar systems from facilitating weapons of mass harm, undermining child safety, or conducting harmful manipulation at scale.

The guidelines also instruct models to discourage interaction patterns that foster emotional dependence, ensuring enterprise users retain ownership of operational decisions.

The draft incorporates work from teams across MAI and Microsoft. The drafting process also drew on international academic conferences, business partner trials, and public panels. The public consultation window runs for six weeks from 14 September 2026.

Microsoft AI’s core drafting team will review submissions, publish a summary of findings, and release a revised version of the Code of Conduct later this year.

See also: Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, IBM, and others back open-weight AI

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 Microsoft AI opens review on Humanist AI Code of Conduct appeared first on AI News.

Deloitte’s 2026 technology trends research puts the pilot-to-production failure rate for AI agents at 89%. A Teradata survey adds the shape of that gap: 78% of enterprises have at least one agent pilot running, but only 14% have scaled one to organisation-wide use. Adoption is nearly universal; deployment is rare. The difference is not model capability, since the same models power the pilots and the production systems, but everything around the model: data access, evaluation, ownership, and cost control. Closing that gap is precisely why Crunch-IS is a leader in AI agent development, with a delivery approach built around the operational layer that pilots routinely skip. Below are the six blockers that recur across the research, and what the 11–14% that make it through do differently.

The funnel, in numbers

Before the causes, the scale. Drawing on Gartner’s April 2026 survey of 782 infrastructure and operations leaders and related industry analysis, the funnel roughly runs:

• Of every 1,000 AI projects that receive a budget, around 120 reach production
• Of those, around 34 meet their ROI targets
• Gartner’s Agentic AI Pulse survey found 41% of deployments reach positive ROI within 12 months; 19% never reach payback

McKinsey’s 2026 work puts organisations running agents at genuine scale at 11%. S&P Global Market Intelligence counts 31% with at least one agent in production. “One agent in production” and “agents at scale” are very different milestones.

Blocker 1: Scope creep

Analysis of stalled agent projects attributes 61% of failures to two causes combined: scope creep and data quality. Pilots start narrow, succeed, and are then asked to handle adjacent workflows the underlying infrastructure was never built for. The agent that triaged support tickets is now expected to resolve them, then to update the CRM, then to issue refunds. Each expansion adds integrations, permissions, and failure modes without adding the operational foundation to support them.

Blocker 2: Data access that worked in the sandbox

Pilots run on curated data exports. Production runs on live systems with inconsistent schemas, access controls, and latency. Industry surveys suggest 83% of enterprises need infrastructure overhauls to support agentic AI. The pilot never touched the legacy ERP; production cannot avoid it.

Blocker 3: No evaluation harness

Only 38% of production agents have automated evaluations running on every prompt change, per Forrester’s 2026 panel. In a pilot, a human reviews every output. In production, nobody does, and without automated regression tests every prompt tweak is a gamble. Forrester’s data shows agents without automated evals had a 47% rollback rate versus 9% for agents with full coverage. Organisations using systematic evaluation frameworks achieved nearly six times higher production success rates in separate survey work.

Blocker 4: Nobody owns it

A pilot is owned by the innovation team. Production requires an operational owner: someone accountable when the agent makes a wrong call at 2 a.m. Enterprise governance surveys put agentic AI governance maturity at around 21%. Without a named owner, a defined escalation path, and a budget line for ongoing operation, the pilot has nowhere to be handed to.

Blocker 5: Costs that only appear at scale

Analysis of cancelled projects consistently finds costs ballooning two to three times beyond estimates. Token consumption, retry loops, and reasoning depth all scale with volume and edge cases. A pilot running 50 tasks a day is cheap. The same agent at 5,000 tasks a day, with production-grade retries and monitoring, frequently costs more than the process it replaced.

Blocker 6: Security clearance

Gravitee’s 2026 research found 54% of organisations experienced or suspected an agent-related security or data-privacy incident in the past year, and only about one in five fully secures agents in production. Security teams reviewing a pilot for production approval routinely find over-permissioned service accounts and no audit trail, and block the launch.

What the 14% do differently

Survey data on organisations that successfully scaled agents shows they were not outspending the ones that stalled. Total AI budgets were comparable. The difference was allocation:

1. More spend on evaluation infrastructure and less on prompt engineering
2. More spend on monitoring and observability: structured logs of every reasoning step and tool call
3. More spend on operational staffing: people whose job is running the agent, not building it
4. Graduated autonomy with human-verification gates mapped to the stakes of each action
5. A named governance owner per agent and per-phase ROI checkpoints with finance sign-off

The takeaway

Gartner projects over 40% of agentic AI projects will be cancelled by the end of 2027, and notes that many use cases positioned as agentic today do not require agentic implementations at all. The pilot-to-production gap is not evidence that agents do not work. It is evidence that most organisations build the demo and skip the operating model. The ones that reach deployment do the reverse.

The post Why Most Enterprise Agent Pilots Never Reach Deployment appeared first on AI News.

A video looks simple when you press play. There is a picture, some dialogue, perhaps music in the background, and a few minutes later it is over.

However, with the right use of AI, things can become a lot more interesting. To an artificial intelligence system, that same video can become speech to transcribe, faces and objects to recognise, scenes to classify, topics to identify, emotions to estimate, timestamps to organise, and text to summarise.

In other words, the same video can be transformed completely into something powerful and attractive. Wondering how? Let’s dig deep into the content

Table of Contents

●     Why Is Multimedia Becoming AI-Readable?

● What Actually Happens When AI Processes a Video?

● Why File Conversion Still Matters

● From Audio to Searchable Intelligence

● Where Multimedia AI Is Already Being Used

● The Quality Problem AI Cannot Ignore

● Why Multimedia Is Becoming AI Readable

Why Is Multimedia Becoming AI-Readable?

For a very long time, business data was conveniently machine friendly, its examples include spreadsheets, databases, forms, and text documents.

Video and audio were different. Though a two-hour webinar might contain a number of useful insights, it was truly a hassle to find one specific comment.

That’s when AI helps. Find multimedia AI systems working across texts, images, speeches, and videos. The AI news has covered this broader shift towards multimedia, where models take into consideration and combine different forms of information. Hence, it does not treat each of them separately.

The result?

A video library is formed, behaving like a searchable database. This way, you can ask for moments in which a customer has mentioned something or extract dialogues. Suddenly, the video is doing much more than sitting in storage.

What Actually Happens When AI Processes a Video?

There is no single magic button behind multimedia AI. In many workflows, the process involves several stages.

We can say that AI is not just watching a video, rather, it is taking notes, understanding the key comments, and then putting everything back and well structured.  And that’s how AI turns something sitting in a corner into something very useful and important.

Why File Conversion Still Matters in an AI Workflow

Preparing Data AI Tools Can Actually Use

Though AI models could be sophisticated, they still rely on the input they can process reliably. For example, imagine there is a marketing team that has an MP4 interview. The problem is they only need the spoken conversation for the transcription.

Hence, instead of sending the entire video through every AI tool, they can first convert the file into the format needed for the next step. This makes the workflow cleaner, faster, and more efficient.

Turning Video Content Into AI-Ready Audio

Doing all the conversion is only convenient when done by reliable tools like Convertio. It transforms the files into a format that accommodates a specific AI application. For example, converting an MP4 file into a WAV audio file removes the video portion.

It then creates a high quality audio file that can be used for speech recognition or analysis. That’s not it, Convertio further helps by allowing media files to be converted into a format required by the next tool in the AI workflow.

The facility helps the team prepare fields for transcription, analysis, or repurposing. Likewise, a workflow that specifically requires uncompressed audio can use an mp4 to wav conversion to extract the video’s audio track as a WAV file for subsequent speech processing.

It goes beyond only converting files by changing extensions. It’s about preparing the right data for the right tasks.

Why File Compatibility Matters for AI Performance?

One important technical detail is that different AI services support different input formats and configurations.

OpenAI’s current audio transcription API, for example, accepts several audio and media formats, including MP3, MP4, M4A, WAV, FLAC, and WebM. OpenAI Audio API documentation.

Furthermore, Google Cloud also recommends lossless audio like FLAC or LINEAR16. It is practical for speech recognition and notes that audio quality can influence results. Google Cloud Speech-to-Text best practices.

The conclusion is, don’t just ask “what an AI model can do with your content”, rather, ask if you are providing the right input.

From Audio to Searchable Intelligence

Everything becomes way easier and less stressful when you pass the phase of speech extraction and transcription.

A transcript can be:

● summarised into key points;

● translated into another language;

● divided by speaker;

● searched for specific terms;

● converted into subtitles;

● analysed for recurring topics;

● repurposed into articles, notes or social content.

Take an example of a company where there are 500 recorded customer interviews. Wouldn’t it be so annoying to watch the entire thing again?

A well-designed AI pipeline could instead turn the recordings into transcripts, identify common complaints, group similar themes, and surface the moments where customers discuss a particular feature.

Where Multimedia AI Is Already Being Used

In media production, AI systems are capable of analyzing footage deeply, generating titles for it, making summaries, and even producing audio relevant to the visuals.

Artificial Intelligence News previously examined Tencent’s Hunyuan Video-Foley system, which generates synchronised audio based on video content.

Other practical applications include:

● Meetings: turning recordings into searchable notes and action items.

● Education: generating transcripts, summaries and study materials from lectures.

● Customer service: analysing recorded interactions at scale.

● Media archives: automatically tagging large libraries of footage.

● Content creation: transforming long videos into transcripts, clips, captions and articles.

● Accessibility: producing captions and alternative content formats.

The Quality Problem AI Cannot Ignore

One has to understand that the outcome depends entirely on the input. If there is too much background noise, overlapping speakers, or low quality audio in a recording, speech recognition becomes quite difficult.

The deal is the same with visuals. If the recording is very blurry, or the lighting is poor, the results might not be satisfactory. That means the future of multimedia AI is not simply about building smarter models. It is also about creating better pipelines around those models.

Good preprocessing may involve:

1. choosing an appropriate file format.
2. extracting only the data needed.
3. preserving useful audio or visual quality.
4. checking privacy and permissions.
5. validating the AI-generated output before using it.

Conclusion

On the bottom line, AI today is changing the passive content into more valuable data. However, the success of any workflow is heavily dependent upon acquiring the right data, quality outputs and suitable formats.

As AI continues to evolve, the future will not be about simply storing the content. Instead, it is expected to be more about storing more content and discovering more value from every file that is being created.

The post From Video to Data: How AI Is Transforming Multimedia Content Processing appeared first on AI News.

Live translation has long been one of travel’s hardest unsolved problems: a single guide speaking to a mixed-language group, with no way to be understood by everyone at once. Vox Group, a 25-year-old guiding technology company operating in over 150 countries, has spent the past year rebuilding its AI-powered technology, Aura, to close that gap, now supporting simultaneous translation in up to 200 languages, live accessibility subtitles, and an AI companion designed to support guides rather than replace them. The update arrives as Vox celebrates its 25th Anniversary this month.

WHO IS VOX GROUP

Few outside the travel industry have heard of Vox Group, yet its technology underpins how millions of people experience a guided tour, powering cruise lines, tour operators, DMCs and destination experience partners in more than 150 countries. Founded 25 years ago on a simple radio link that let one guide be heard clearly by an entire group, the company has spent the years since expanding that idea, first into group guiding hardware, and more recently into Aura, its AI-powered guiding technology. Vox remains privately, family-led, an increasingly unusual profile among travel technology providers operating at this scale.

“Twenty-five years ago, we put a radio into a guide’s hand so that every guest could hear them,” says Elio Epifani, founder of Vox Group. “That principle has not changed. Aura begins with the guide and stays with the guide. What has changed is how much it can carry for them.”

THE TRANSLATION PROBLEM AI IS NOW SOLVING

Group tours have traditionally handled multiple languages in one of two ways: splitting visitors into separate language groups or adding a dedicated interpreter alongside the guide. Both add cost and complexity, and neither scale well for operators running mixed-nationality departures, increasingly the norm on cruise excursions and city tours. Aura’s translation library has grown from 50 to 200 languages over the past year, with live simultaneous translation now running in up to four languages at once on a single tour. Guests need no smartphone, app or download to take part, audio reaches them over the same radio infrastructure Vox has used for 25 years.

AN AI COMPANION BUILT TO SUPPORT GUIDES, NOT REPLACE THEM

Aura’s most significant update is its AI companion, a system designed to sit alongside the guide rather than in front of them. Rather than generating commentary from the open internet, it draws only on operator-approved content and verified sources, surfacing answers the moment a guest asks something unexpected, along with local context such as place names or regional sayings. It reflects a wider question the artificial intelligence sector is grappling with well beyond travel: where automation adds genuine value, and where it risks replacing the human expertise it was meant to support. Vox’s approach has been to keep the guide as the primary voice, using AI to extend what one person can reasonably be expected to know, rather than to generate the tour itself.

“One guide speaks once, and every guest receives a tour made for them in their own language, run from a single app,” says Fabio Primerano, Chief Executive Officer of Vox Group. “It gives guides more to work with and operators more to sell.”

ACCESSIBILITY BUILT IN, NOT BOLTED ON

Aura also addresses a gap much of the guiding technology on the market has overlooked. For guests who are deaf or hard of hearing, live subtitles are sent directly to their own phone as the guide speaks, letting them follow the tour in real time alongside the rest of the group rather than reading a summary afterwards. No separate equipment is issued, and no guest is visibly marked out as needing extra support, an accessibility approach built into the core product rather than offered as an add-on.

MULTIPLE CHANNELS, ONE DEPARTURE

Aura runs multiple commentary channels in parallel on a single tour, standard commentary, a historical deep dive, a children’s version, or a translated feed, so a family, a subject specialist and a first-time visitor can each follow a version suited to them without the guide repeating themselves. For operators, that means one departure can now carry visitors who would previously have needed splitting into separate language groups, with the tour adapting to each guest as it runs.

WHAT IT SIGNALS FOR AI IN TRAVEL

Aura’s evolution mirrors a pattern playing out across natural language processing applications more broadly: real-time translation and accessibility tools that once required specialist hardware or dedicated staff are increasingly built into existing infrastructure. For an industry still working out where AI adds value without eroding the human interactions travellers pay for, Vox’s approach, extending the guide rather than replacing them, offers one working answer.

Aura is available now for cruise lines, tour operators, DMCs and destination experience partners. voxtours.com/aura.

The post How Vox Group’s AI-Powered Technology Is Solving Real-Time Translation for Group Travel appeared first on AI News.

NVIDIA is using Palantir Foundry and cuOpt to automate its hardware supply chain allocation decisions across global manufacturing sites.

The company measures operational delivery from wafer-out to first token. This window splits into time-to-rack (the transit from fab output to an assembled data centre system) and time-to-token (which covers power, cooling, networking, and day-one software readiness.)

Managing NVL72 and Vera Rubin component flows

Hardware scaling has magnified supply constraints. An NVIDIA Grace Blackwell NVL72 rack contains 18 compute trays, with each tray requiring two Grace CPUs, four Blackwell GPUs, and 32 HBM3e memory packages sourced across thousands of suppliers, OEMs, and contract design partners.

The upcoming supply chain constructed for NVIDIA’s Vera Rubin architecture is twice as large as the network supporting Grace Blackwell.

Assembly cannot proceed until parts arrive from three designated channels: direct inventory, consignment stock, and external suppliers. Early shipments must wait on delayed components, extending the metric NVIDIA terms ‘Time of Ownership’ (the duration from when a facility receives materials to when finished sub-assemblies depart.)

Factory allocations are reworked weekly over rolling two-quarter horizons to resolve part availability, throughput limits, and customer fulfilment schedules.

Mixed-integer linear programming via cuOpt

To coordinate these dependencies, the NVIDIA operations team built the ‘Digital Supply Chain Intelligence’ command centre using Palantir Foundry. Foundry’s Ontology models facilities, supplier commits, component stocks, and production targets as interconnected objects and links.

NVIDIA cuOpt, an open-source library for GPU-accelerated decision optimisation, reads this operational layer directly. Formulating distribution as a mixed-integer linear program designed to minimise TOO, the solver evaluates parts constraints across every tier of the bill of materials.

Beyond outputting weekly delivery schedules, cuOpt identifies active factory limits, such as regional assembly capacity caps versus raw memory availability.

Training Nemotron on qualitative operational records

Mathematical optimisation alone failed to capture unstructured operational variables observed by human planners, including supplier call transcripts, regional weather forecasts, partner email exchanges, and geopolitical events.

NVIDIA addressed this by post-training Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, an open-weight mixture-of-experts model featuring 30 billion total parameters and approximately three billion active parameters per forward pass.

The engineering pipeline processes historical records through NeMo Anonymizer to redact sensitive operational fields, NeMo Data Designer to balance training examples with synthetic capacity disruption scenarios, and NeMo AutoModel to apply low-rank adaptation (LoRA) parameters while keeping base model weights frozen. Palantir Autopilot manages data lineage, model tracking, and recommendation delivery.

Production benchmarks and future reinforcement learning

Evaluated on historical allocation records, the post-trained Nemotron 3.5 Lightning model achieved 86.7 percent decision accuracy, compared to 55.5 percent for the larger Nemotron 3 Ultra model and 17.5 percent for the un-tuned Lightning base model.

The post-trained model achieved a 58.6 percent balanced accuracy and a 57.5 percent macro-F1 score, outperforming Nemotron 3 Ultra’s 42 percent balanced accuracy and 39.5 percent macro-F1 score.

Fine-tuning completed on two NVIDIA B200 GPUs within minutes. Domain fine-tuning improved allocation decisions, though production risk forecasting further into the future remained difficult.

Operational choices, planner revisions, overrides, and observed factory outputs are continuously written back to the Palantir Ontology.

NVIDIA confirmed this dataset will form preference pairs for reinforcement learning routines – scoring recommendations on allocation precision, policy compliance, and evidence grounding – with production models remaining strictly isolated from live and unmonitored retraining.

See also: Supply chains detect fast, act slow: How AI agents fix it

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 Palantir Foundry and cuOpt drive NVIDIA supply chain allocation appeared first on AI News.

Supply chain disruption cost businesses about $184 billion in 2025, according to the J.S. Held Global Risk Report, and most of that bill still buys faster detection, not faster action.

That figure is usually treated as weather (i.e. storms happen, costs follow.) Treated as a product specification instead, it highlights an operating model that can spot a problem hours or days earlier than it used to, and still cannot move until a person has opened a ticket, convened a call, and re-entered the same data into three systems.

Visibility platforms, control towers, risk scores, digital twins, and exception dashboards have defined the last decade of AI in the supply chain. That decade has been very good at collapsing the time between an event and awareness of it, but it has been far less good at collapsing the time between awareness and a commercial act.

Detection is a ‘solved-enough’ problem

Ask a chief supply chain officer where the AI budget went and the answer tends to follow a familiar list: demand sensing, ETA prediction, supplier risk scoring, inventory optimisation, and lane analytics. These tools work. Forecast error comes down. A vessel delay is flagged before the container misses the cut-off. A second-tier fab outage shows up on a heat map instead of in a customer email.

None of that accounts for the $184 billion. The bill is the interval after the flag: expedite or wait; split the order or accept the miss; retender the lane or pay the spot rate; consolidate two half-empty movements or ship both; swap ocean for air on the SKUs that actually justify the premium. These are bounded, repeatable decisions that sit inside policy, contract, and inventory limits the company already set—and they still queue behind a human inbox.

Surveys keep describing the same lag in different language. A 2026 Knosc survey of mid-market manufacturers and distributors found that supply-chain teams spend 28 percent of their working time responding to disruptions, most of it investigating what happened rather than changing what happens next.

Logistics executives still rank AI as a strategic priority (Capgemini’s 2025 research put an AI-driven “new-gen” supply chain among the top three technology trends for 70 percent of large-company executives) and then report that measurable financial impact remains rare. Gartner found in 2025 that only 23 percent of supply-chain organisations even have a formal AI strategy. The shortfall is not a shortage of models, but a shortage of authority granted to software.

The ticket is the product

Most current deployments are built around the ticket. The model produces a recommendation, the recommendation becomes an alert, the alert becomes a work item, and the work item waits for a planner already occupied with other work items. By the time the planner acts, the option set has narrowed—the alternative carrier’s capacity is gone, the consolidation window has closed, and the supplier’s next production slot is allocated.

That workflow is not a temporary step on the way to autonomy but the product companies bought. Vendors sold insight because insight is easy to demonstrate and easy to govern; action touches money, contracts, service levels, and blame. So the industry automated the part of the job that does not require a signature. FourKites and ABI Research reported in 2025 that only 27 percent of organisations allow AI to take autonomous action, while 52 percent confine it to decision support.

Adding another dashboard to a delayed shipment rarely moves EBITDA as a result. The decision cycle has not changed; it has only been decorated.

Bounded action as the next model

The firms set to take share are not the ones with the tidiest control tower but the ones that pre-authorise a narrow class of moves and let agents execute them while the exception is still cheap.

Retender a lane when the contracted carrier’s ETA slips beyond a threshold and a qualified alternate sits inside the approved rate band. Consolidate outbound waves when fill rates and cut-off times make a combined movement cheaper than two. Swap mode on a defined SKU set when the cost of air is lower than the cost of a missed retail window. Reallocate safety stock across two distribution centres when a forecast miss and a transport constraint line up.

None of that requires a strategy offsite. Each can be written as: if these conditions, then this action, within this spend cap, with this audit trail, and a human only if the case falls outside the fence. That is not a “lights-out” supply chain—it is the same discipline manufacturers already apply to machine control, where the agent may act inside the interlock and escalates outside it. The difference here is commercial rather than physical: the interlock is a policy object – category, supplier tier, mode, dollar limit, and service class – not a PLC.

Three conditions for real change

First, decisions have to be written as policies, not tribal knowledge. If the only place “we will pay air on A-items after 48 hours of ocean slip” lives is in a planner’s head, no agent can execute it. The work of the next two years is less model training than decision design: which moves are reversible, which are capped, and which suppliers and modes are pre-cleared.

Second, execution systems have to accept machine-initiated transactions. An agent that can draft an RFQ but cannot post it is still a detection tool. TMS, WMS, sourcing suites, and carrier APIs need to treat a bounded agent the way they treat a junior buyer with a spend limit—authenticated, logged, and reversible.

Third, accountability has to move with the action. If a retender inside policy goes wrong, the post-mortem should inspect the policy, the data, and the fence, not hunt for the person who “should have checked”. Until that cultural change happens, every agent will be designed to wait, because waiting is how careers survive.

The competitive split

For a while, both models will look alike on a slide—both will have AI, and both will have a control tower. The difference will show up in cycle time from detection to commercial act, and then in service and cost.

Companies that keep buying detection will know about the storm earlier. Companies that authorise bounded action will already have retendered the lane, consolidated the wave, and moved the A-items before the incident call is booked.

Disruption is not going away. Lead times in critical components, mode volatility, and multi-tier opacity are structural features of the network. What remains optional is whether the response waits for a human to open a queue. The product that created the lag was insight without authority. The product that ends it is an agent allowed to spend a little money, inside a fence, before anyone is free to look.

See also: JD.com expands physical AI in logistics with 3 million robots

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 Supply chains detect fast, act slow: How AI agents fix it appeared first on AI News.

JD.com is expanding AI and robotics across its logistics network under a new Physical AI Acceleration Plan, while reiterating a five-year target to procure 3 million robots, 1 million autonomous vehicles, and 100,000 delivery drones.

The company launched the plan at JDDiscovery 2026 in Beijing. JD Logistics also unveiled its industrial Wolf Robot series, designed for tasks across warehousing, sorting, transport, and delivery.

Specialised systems include equipment designed to operate in temperatures as low as minus 20 degrees Celsius, automated pharmacy dispatch systems, autonomous delivery vehicles, and drones.

The five-year procurement plan builds on automation that JD Logistics already has in operation. As of June 30, its LangzuTech Goods-to-Person automated warehousing system had been deployed in more than 30 warehouses across China, with deployments also launched in the UK and Germany.

JD Logistics’ broader warehouse network included more than 1,800 self-operated warehouses and more than 2,000 third-party cloud warehouses on its Open Warehouse Platform as of June 30. The network covered more than 36 million square metres in aggregate.

The company also had thousands of unmanned vehicles in regular operation across more than 20 Chinese provinces by the end of June. More than 100 domestic drone routes were operating across applications including parcel and food delivery, emergency medicine transport, and disaster relief.

From AI decisions to physical execution

JD Logistics is connecting its physical equipment with Meta Brain, an AI system used across warehousing, transportation, and delivery. JD said Meta Brain 3.0 can calculate optimal routes for hundreds of millions of parcels in seconds, compared with minutes previously.

Meta Brain also powers JD Logistics’ LangzuTech Packer robotic arm, which combines the model with multimodal sensor data to track, grasp, and place parcels with different shapes.

JD Logistics said in a first-quarter regulatory filing that the Packer uses parallel reinforcement learning in simulated environments to optimise parcel-placement sequences and loading layouts. The company said the system is designed to improve sorting efficiency and the use of available carrier space.

JD upgraded the robotic arm’s force-control technology during the second quarter to support more precise cage-loading operations. By June, the Packer was operating around the clock at multiple JD Logistics parks, according to the company’s interim report.

JD is also adding computing capacity to support AI development. JD Cloud plans to work with Chinese chipmaker Moore Threads on a cluster containing 100,000 GPUs for large-model training, inference, and embodied-AI workloads.

The two companies have previously worked on a 10,000-GPU cluster, according to Data Center Dynamics. Details of which Moore Threads GPU models will be used in the planned 100,000-GPU system have not been disclosed.

JD Cloud also plans to collect more than 10 million hours of video showing real-world human activities over the next two years for embodied-AI training.

Beyond warehouse operations, JD Logistics has expanded its autonomous vehicle network into night-time delivery. Its interim report said the company had launched night-time autonomous routes in Shenzhen, allowing vehicles to operate around the clock.

JD is also using drones in rural logistics. In June, JD Logistics launched a drone delivery network in Zizhong, Sichuan province, covering 78 administrative villages, and said deliveries to some mountain villages could be completed in as little as seven minutes.

Scaling automation across JD’s logistics network

JD did not disclose the total expected cost of the five-year procurement programme at JDDiscovery or provide a network-wide return-on-investment target.

JD Logistics spent RMB2.3 billion on research and development during the first half of 2026, up 23.7% from RMB1.9 billion a year earlier. The company attributed the increase to continued investment in technology and innovation but did not provide a breakdown showing how much was spent specifically on AI or robotics.

Depreciation of property and equipment and amortisation of other intangible assets rose 18.7% to RMB2.6 billion during the first half of 2026, from RMB2.2 billion a year earlier. JD Logistics attributed the increase mainly to additional logistics equipment and vehicles.

Purchases of property and equipment and investment properties totalled RMB3.09 billion over the same six-month period, compared with RMB2.70 billion a year earlier. Those figures cover the wider logistics business and are not disclosed as spending specifically associated with the new physical AI programme.

JD’s automation plans also come as China’s major ecommerce platforms expand fulfilment infrastructure. Reuters reported on September 3 that competition between JD.com, Alibaba, and Meituan had moved from heavy spending on delivery subsidies towards logistics infrastructure, broader supply, and order-level economics.

Alibaba and JD have been opening dark stores and fast-fulfilment “lightning warehouses” in densely populated areas to support deliveries within an hour, while Meituan has been building supermarkets to expand its grocery operations. Ministry of Commerce research cited by Reuters estimates China’s instant-retail market will reach RMB1.2 trillion, or about $178 billion, by the end of 2026.

JD and companies within its ecosystem employ around 700,000 delivery and logistics personnel, according to the South China Morning Post.

JD founder Richard Liu said earlier this year that robots would eventually take over parcel-delivery work now carried out by human couriers. The Financial Times reported in June that JD had signed agreements with around 120 educational institutions to retrain workers for roles including robot repair and maintenance.

JD said JD Logistics currently operates eight robot repair centres in China and plans to expand its robotics after-sales capabilities over the next five years. The company expects the expansion to support more than 100,000 robotics service engineer jobs.

(Photo by JD.com)

See also: Arm launches Total Design for Physical AI and robotics framework

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 JD.com expands physical AI in logistics with 3 million robots appeared first on AI News.

CloudNC has secured $20 million in new capital to scale its AI precision machining technology across global supply chain networks.

The investment round was led by US venture investor Nimble Ventures, with participation from Calculus Venture Capital, Entrepreneur First, and LM Ventures, the venture capital fund of Lockheed Martin.

Founded in 2015, CloudNC operates from headquarters in London and an active production facility in Chelmsford. The company previously drew backing from Atomico and Episode 1 Ventures, alongside strategic partnerships with Autodesk and Lockheed Martin.

Precision component suppliers face pressures to balance tight engineering tolerances with compressed delivery schedules. CloudNC designs its lead software product, CAM Assist, to automate computer numerical control (CNC) programming—generating machining strategies and toolpaths from computer-aided manufacturing models to accelerate production runs.

Automating CNC programming for supplier networks

The software shortens the transition phase between technical part design and factory production, allowing machinists to increase physical component output.

CloudNC reports that CAM Assist is now active across more than 1,000 machine shops globally, including several hundred facilities in the US. Confirmed commercial users include Lockheed Martin and Major Tool and Machine.

Theo Saville, CEO and co-founder of CloudNC, said: “Machine shops everywhere are under pressure to quote and program faster, and deliver more with the people and machines they already have.

John Burbank, founder of Nimble Ventures, added that automated CNC workflows will support “massive increases in onshoring of manufacturing and global production” for precision industrial supply bases.

CloudNC says it will direct the capital injection into go-to-market operations, technical support infrastructure, and partner activity across international regions.

AI quoting targets procurement turnaround times

CloudNC is expanding its software line with Quote Agent, an AI-assisted estimating tool scheduled for release later in 2026.

Preparing job estimates represents a major operational drag for manufacturing suppliers. Evaluating incoming technical drawings, calculating cycle times, and establishing part pricing remains heavily manual, exposing supply shops to administrative delays or miscalculated margins once components enter physical production.

Quote Agent applies AI to early-stage costing, enabling suppliers to return customer bids rapidly while standardising cost estimations.

“Quote Agent is a natural next step for CloudNC as we seek to accelerate global machining with AI,” says Saville. “CAM Assist already helps machinists get parts onto machines faster; Quote Agent will help shops assess new work, prepare quotes more efficiently and respond to customers with greater confidence.”

“We believe our AI can make quoting faster, more consistent and more scalable, helping manufacturers win more of the right work while keeping expert judgement firmly in control,” Saville added.

Knox Systems partnership advances FedRAMP authorisation

CloudNC is collaborating with Knox Systems to achieve FedRAMP certification for CAM Assist.

The compliance roadmap aims to clear CAM Assist for deployment by US government departments, defence contractors, and aerospace manufacturers operating under federal data governance rules. 

Authorisation, if granted, will permit public-sector and defence suppliers to deploy automated toolpath generation across regulated production workloads.

See also: Samsung taps Mistral AI models for semiconductor manufacturing

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 CloudNC aims to accelerate AI supply chain machining appeared first on AI News.

Samsung has partnered with Mistral AI to deploy on-premises models across its semiconductor manufacturing and engineering operations.

The agreement was announced during the bilateral state summit held in Paris between South Korea and France. Samsung will integrate Mistral’s software suite – including its flagship Mistral Large model – into internal semiconductor facilities to build customised models for intelligence-driven factory infrastructure.

On-premises AI models for semiconductor fab infrastructure

The deployment relies on private enterprise installations to process sensitive engineering and operational records within Samsung’s computing perimeter. This architecture keeps proprietary technical data contained within company infrastructure, avoiding external cloud exposure while maintaining control over operational assets.

“Increasing complexities involved in AI chip design and manufacturing requires continuous innovation in semiconductor technologies,” says Young Hyun Jun, Vice Chairman and CEO of the Device Solutions (DS) Division at Samsung Electronics.

Mistral will provide Samsung with a specialised stack of software tools to assist in how processors are designed and produced.

“AI is reshaping how we build complex technologies, from silicon to software,” says Arthur Mensch, co-founder and CEO of Mistral.

“We are proud to support Samsung Electronics with our expertise in electronics and semiconductors, helping to improve how chips are designed and manufactured, and to accelerate technical progress across the global semiconductor and AI value chain.”

Defect detection and yield stabilisation

Samsung plans to deploy the targeted models directly to automated defect detection and fab machinery tuning. As semiconductor production processes advance, rapid data analysis inside the fab becomes necessary to maintain factory throughput.

The company expects targeted AI models to accelerate development cycles, improve manufacturing precision, and stabilise production yields across advanced memory and logic chips. The operational scope covers Samsung’s memory division, logic design units, and contract foundry business.

Samsung also led Mistral AI’s Series D funding round, securing a strategic equity stake to support long-term technical cooperation.

The lead investment expands cross-industry collaboration between silicon manufacturers and AI developers across advanced memory, logic, and foundry operations.

See also: Arm launches Total Design for Physical AI and robotics framework

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 Samsung taps Mistral AI models for semiconductor manufacturing appeared first on AI News.

Arm has launched Arm Total Design for Physical AI alongside a new robotics framework to establish common standards across automated systems.

Physical industries – spanning mining, agriculture, manufacturing, and global transport – account for trillions of dollars in economic activity and an estimated $200 billion annual compute opportunity by the 2030s.

To address engineering fragmentation across these sectors, Arm is convening more than 80 partner organisations spanning software, hardware, and AI. Initial ecosystem participants include AWS, ECARX, Hugging Face, Liquid AI, NXP, PlusAI, PSYONIC, QNX, Qwen, Siemens, and Unitree Robotics.

The initiative targets physical systems that combine AI models, runtime software, compute silicon, sensors, and actuators to sense, reason, and act in operational environments. Hardware manufacturers and software developers require standardised baselines to reduce integration risk, optimise compute workloads, and move from proof-of-concept testing to deployment at scale.

Arm standardises capability tiers for robotics systems

Robotics currently lacks a common method to describe, compare, and communicate system capabilities, according to an architectural manifesto (PDF) published by Arm chief architect Richard Grisenthwaite. This fragmentation makes robotic systems harder to design, integrate, and scale across industrial deployments.

In response, Arm has introduced the Robotics Capability Framework as a collaborative starting point for a shared technical vocabulary, patterned after the SAE Levels used for driving automation.

Arm’s new framework categorises robotic systems across progressing tiers of operational sophistication, mapping machines from reactive setups to context-aware, cognitive, and self-improving systems.

Each capability tier links real-world use cases to machine behaviours, outputs, and hardware constraints. These criteria establish parameters for system latency, compute placement, memory allocation, power constraints, determinism, and safety standards.

Arm developed the initial baseline using feedback from across the robotics sector. Participating organisations contributing to the framework include Anaxi Labs, ANYbotics, FMC³ Robotics, Fourier, GALBOT, Gravis Robotics, Lenovo, McKinsey, and Robotec.ai.

Virtual platforms accelerate pre-silicon automotive physical AI development

Arm Total Design for Physical AI extends a collaborative development structure previously used for cloud AI infrastructure. The programme brings together AI models, virtual platforms, digital twins, sensors, compute silicon, and software stacks to enable earlier development and testing cycles.

Autonomous transport and robotics face common technical requirements across sensory perception, AI processing, real-time control, safety, and power-efficient compute. Arm demonstrated this collaborative methodology in the automotive sector alongside AWS, Google, HERE, RemotiveLabs, and Siemens.

The participating automotive companies developed an integrated digital cockpit reference solution. This environment enabled software engineering teams to develop, test, and validate complex automotive code on the Arm Zena CSS platform prior to physical silicon availability.

Arm is now soliciting technical contributions from the wider engineering community to expand the Robotics Capability Framework as physical AI implementations progress.

Learn more about physical AI during the Physical AI Expo held in Amsterdam, London, and North America.

See also: NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano 2 brings physical AI to drones and robots

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 Arm launches Total Design for Physical AI and robotics framework appeared first on AI News.

Coca-Cola is using AI to recommend which products Malaysian retailers should order and in what quantities through its Coke Buddy platform.

The Perfect Basket feature uses Coca-Cola’s Central Recommendation Engine to analyse previous orders, ordering frequency, seasonality, weather, and purchasing patterns among similar businesses.

Coca-Cola said Coke Buddy currently supports about 39,000 retail outlets across Malaysia. The company describes Coke Buddy as a self-ordering platform that allows retailers to buy products through its app, website, or WhatsApp, with personalised order suggestions and order tracking also available.

Perfect Basket builds on those existing ordering functions by recommending both products and quantities before a retailer completes an order. Retailers can review the recommendations and retain control over what they purchase.

How Perfect Basket guides retailer orders

Coke Buddy already uses previous purchase history to suggest products a retailer is likely to order again. Perfect Basket adds other signals, including seasonality, weather, ordering frequency, and purchasing trends among comparable businesses.

Perfect Basket recommends products and quantities before retailers submit their orders through Coke Buddy. Fulfilment is handled separately by Coca-Cola Refreshments Malaysia or its suppliers under existing sales and distribution arrangements.

Coca-Cola said its sales teams remain involved with retailers alongside the digital ordering system, while retailers retain control over the final purchasing decision.

Coca-Cola recently disclosed usage figures for Perfect Basket following its Perfect Basket, Perfect Ride campaign, which ran from January to April 2026. The campaign encouraged retailers to use the recommendation feature when placing orders and received more than 4,500 entries from over 4,000 retailers in Malaysia.

During the campaign, 83% of participating outlets adopted Perfect Basket recommendations, according to Coca-Cola. The figure applies only to retailers taking part in the campaign, not the full network of about 39,000 outlets supported by Coke Buddy.

Coca-Cola also said participating outlets that followed the recommendations recorded higher sales revenue growth than comparable retail outlets. The company did not disclose the size of the difference or provide detailed performance data showing how individual recommendations affected sales or inventory levels.

The available Malaysian campaign data does not provide figures for forecast accuracy, stock availability, inventory levels, or logistics costs.

Suggested orders extend beyond Malaysia

Coca-Cola has deployed similar suggested-order capabilities elsewhere in its bottling network. In its first-quarter 2024 results, the company said it and its bottling partners had connected nearly eight million customers to B2B platforms globally, while AI-enabled suggested-order capabilities had reached more than three million outlets in Latin America.

Coca-Cola has said these systems combine customer data, external information, and AI to generate predictive order recommendations. Then-chief executive James Quincey said in 2024 that digital ordering also allows retailers to adjust deliveries without waiting for a salesperson to visit.

Coca-Cola has also linked suggested orders to changes in its sales process. Quincey said AI-generated orders allow pre-sales staff to spend less time taking routine orders and more time on account development, while retailers continue to make the final purchasing decision.

Coca-Cola has reported results from earlier pilots using similar recommendation systems. In its second-quarter 2024 earnings call, the company said retailers receiving AI-generated product recommendations based on previous orders and market data were more than 30% more likely to purchase the recommended SKUs in initial pilots. These results did not relate specifically to Perfect Basket in Malaysia.

In a separate demand-prediction project, Coca-Cola combined historical sales data with weather and geolocation information to generate replenishment recommendations. CIO Neeraj Tolmare told Fortune in 2025 that a three-country pilot recorded sales 7% to 8% higher than outlets that were not using the AI algorithm.

Perfect Basket remains available after the campaign. Coca-Cola said it plans to continue developing Coke Buddy and the recommendation feature using retailer feedback and data, while retailers will continue to have access to the company’s sales representatives alongside the digital ordering system.

(Photo by Mahbod Akhzami)

See also: MG Ship adds AI route optimisation as logistics returns accelerate

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 Coca-Cola uses AI to improve retailer ordering in Malaysia appeared first on AI News.

Google’s newest AI weather forecasting model predicts wind speed at 100 metres above the ground, roughly the height of a modern wind turbine. It also forecasts cloud cover and how much sunlight reaches the surface, and it updates every hour. Energy traders, grid operators and wind and solar developers already pay other companies for that data. The introduction of WeatherNext 3 now puts Google in their market.

Google DeepMind and Google Research released the model on September 3. It produces a global forecast every hour at up to five-kilometre resolution for surface variables such as temperature and moisture. The previous version, WeatherNext 2, worked on a 25-kilometre grid and refreshed every six hours. Google says the new energy variables are meant to help grid operators and developers predict how much power their wind and solar assets will generate, then match that against demand.

The consumer side of the launch has had most of the attention. WeatherNext 3 now powers weather results in Google Search, the Gemini app, Google Maps and the Google Maps Platform Weather API. Behind it sits an enterprise layer that matters more commercially. The same forecast data can be queried in BigQuery and Earth Engine or downloaded in bulk from Google Cloud Storage, with no model setup required by the customer.

Why the energy sector is buying AI weather forecasting

Grid operators are running a system that has become harder to predict at both ends. On the generation side, renewables now account for most new capacity. S&P Global Market Intelligence’s US Grid Outlook 2026 projects solar and energy storage as the primary sources of new capacity this year, at 51.2GW and 25.7GW respectively out of more than 90GW of planned additions. 

Solar and wind generate according to the weather rather than demand, so each gigawatt added makes a short-term forecast more accurate.

On the consumption side, the new load is coming from AI. S&P Global identifies the spread of data centres across North America as a primary driver of the recent surge in electricity demand, forcing utilities to revise their load forecasts upward. Deloitte’s 2026 Power and Utilities Industry Outlook projects peak demand growing by roughly 26% by 2035, with data centre demand alone potentially reaching 176GW, five times its 2024 level.

The cost of getting a forecast wrong is straightforward. If an operator underestimates how much wind power will arrive, it has to buy replacement electricity at short notice, usually from gas plants kept on expensive standby. If it overestimates, wind and solar farms end up being paid to switch off because the grid cannot absorb what they are producing. Both outcomes are expensive, and both are forecasting failures.

The market Google is entering

Selling weather forecasts to the energy sector is an established business. Vaisala, Solcast, DNV’s WindGEMINI and IBM’s HyperWatch all compete in it. So does Jua, a Swiss firm that claims its EPT-2 model beats Microsoft Aurora and DeepMind’s earlier GraphCast on accuracy while updating 24 times a day, against what it describes as a typical four updates a day among competitors.

Google’s advantage is reach. The same forecast appears as a table in BigQuery, a layer in Earth Engine, an API in Google Maps Platform and the default answer in Google Search. No specialist vendor has that spread, and the hourly refresh closes the update-frequency gap those vendors have used to differentiate themselves.

The incumbents have one technical argument left. Jua’s published position is that physics-based models such as ECMWF’s HRES still outperform purely data-driven AI models during record-breaking extreme weather, because physics models encode rules about how energy and mass move through the atmosphere, while AI models learn patterns from past data. 

Jua sells a physics-constrained product, so the claim serves its own interests. It also describes the conditions grid operators worry about most, when a storm falls outside anything the model has seen in training.

What is new, and what is being oversold

The architectural claim behind WeatherNext 3 is that it learns from real observations instead of from simulations. Most AI weather models, WeatherNext 2 included, are trained on output from numerical weather prediction models, which are supercomputer-driven physics simulations that carry a six-hour data lag. That lag can introduce bias in fast-changing variables such as rain and surface temperature. WeatherNext 3 ingests live geostationary satellite imagery and trains directly on readings from individual weather stations.

The shift is real, though narrower than much of the coverage has suggested. Google’s own system diagram shows the model taking in one-hour satellite mosaics alongside traditional historical analysis. DeepMind senior research scientist Ilan Price told Bloomberg the gain comes from not waiting for the next analysis and using the most recent information available instead. 

Reporting puts the remaining data lag at three to four hours, down from about seven. Dependence on numerical weather prediction has been reduced, not removed.

The accuracy figures need similar care. Google reports improvements of up to 60% against NASA’s IMERG satellite product, 30% against MRMS radar and 10% against rain gauge readings at early lead times, measured using a standard scoring method for probability forecasts. Those are three separate baselines, and the percentages do not add together. The widely repeated claim of 50% better precipitation forecasting applies specifically to forecasts a day or more ahead. Every figure carries an “up to” qualifier, which makes each one a best case rather than a typical result.

Google published no independent third-party validation alongside the launch. It points instead to live evaluations by Brightband, whose leaderboard it cites in claiming WeatherNext 3 is the most accurate global weather model to date. A utility considering a switch away from a paid specialist will care more about performance in its own service territory, on its own assets, than about a global leaderboard position.

Google’s own stake in the problem

Google is selling forecasting tools into a grid problem its own industry helped create. The data centre build-out driving the load growth utilities are struggling to serve is led by the hyperscalers, Google among them, and Google has signed multi-gigawatt renewable procurement agreements to supply its own facilities.

Accurate prediction of wind and solar output is directly useful to a company matching large volumes of clean energy against a load that is both growing and variable. That is commercial logic, and it goes some way to explaining why the energy variables shipped in this release.

Google has not published pricing for enterprise access to WeatherNext 3, or said whether the BigQuery and Earth Engine data carries standard Cloud query charges or a separate licence. Utilities weighing a move away from a paid specialist will want that figure before they weigh any accuracy claim.

2025, more than 65,000 employees in its Corporate and Investment Bank were actively using the platform, while more than 90% of its engineers were using AI coding assistants.

The bank also said AI-based transaction screening allowed it to review more than twice the previous transaction volume while reducing manual operator checks by half.

Bank of America is using a generative AI-enabled system called EricaAssist with more than 18,000 customer service employees. The tool summarises why a customer is calling, retrieves relevant information, and recommends possible next steps while keeping the employee responsible for the interaction.

Bank of America said in July 2026 that EricaAssist can deliver contextual guidance in under three seconds and has reduced average call times by nearly one minute. The bank plans to extend the system to additional servicing scenarios and business lines later in 2026.

(Photo by Google)

See also: MIT AI forecasts extreme weather without historical data

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 AI weather forecasting enters the energy market as Google targets grid operators with WeatherNext 3 appeared first on AI News.

YouTube was the most frequently cited website in Google AI Overviews across a panel of vitamin and supplement searches, according to new research. The video platform appeared in 186 of 350 AI-generated answers, or 53.1%, making it the only website cited in more than half of the answers collected.

Searcherries followed 50 searches daily from August 30 to September 5, 2026. The questions came from Google Autocomplete and covered topics including hair growth, energy, sleep, anxiety and weight loss. Every search produced an AI Overview, the AI-generated summary that Google displays alongside its search results.

GoodRx was the second most frequently cited website, appearing in 48.3% of answers. Healthline followed at 28.6%, Cleveland Clinic at 28.0%, and the National Institutes of Health domain, nih.gov, at 25.1%. Websites were ranked by the number of answers citing them, with each website counted only once per answer.

YouTube’s presence extended across 44 of the 50 queries. It was particularly prominent in the group beginning with “vitamins for,” appearing in 78.6% of those answers. Across the full panel, YouTube appeared almost twice as often as Healthline.

The research also found that AI Overviews frequently cited pages outside the recorded organic results. Only 32.4% of cited pages appeared in the organic listings collected for the same search; 67.6% did not. Matching by website instead of exact page raised the overlap to 52.5%, showing that some AI citations pointed to a different page on a website already present in organic search.

Individual answers were less consistent than the overall leaderboard. For “supplements for weight loss,” nih.gov appeared every day and YouTube appeared on six of seven days, while other websites moved in and out. By contrast, “supplements to help with glp-1 side effects” returned the same cited pages throughout the week.

About the research

Searcherries monitored a fixed set of 50 Google Autocomplete queries once daily using US English desktop results configured for New York. The analysis covered 350 AI Overviews and 5,036 citation occurrences across 572 distinct pages and 218 websites. Organic overlap was calculated within each search, counting repeated citations to the same page once; the recorded organic lists contained seven to ten results.

The post YouTube Appears in 53% of Google AI Overviews for Vitamin and Supplement Searches appeared first on AI News.

MG Ship has introduced an AI route optimisation and carrier selection module as logistics deployments demonstrate rapid cost and time returns.

The technical module targets global retailers and commercial shippers, pairing automated routing algorithms with carrier recommendation systems across international trade corridors. The deployment arrives as enterprise supply chain operators report measurable operational returns from machine learning tools, moving capital allocations away from speculative trials toward production deployments.

Measurable returns from deploying AI for logistics

Suki Cheung, CEO of MG Ship, will present deployment metrics during a panel discussion at the upcoming WMX Asia conference. Cheung will join executives from Pos Malaysia, Omniva, and OnyX Space for the session, titled AI Beyond the Hype: Measurable Results in Logistics Today.

“Too many AI conversations in logistics remain focused on future possibilities,” said Cheung. “The reality is that AI is already delivering measurable business outcomes today. Leading organisations are reducing transportation costs, improving forecast accuracy, increasing warehouse productivity, and achieving payback within months rather than years.”

Industry operational data indicates that initial investment returns are concentrating across three primary workflows:

• Dynamic route planning has reduced enterprise fuel consumption by 15–20 percent, improved transit speeds by 15–25 percent, and lowered overall transportation costs by 12–22 percent, with capital payback reached within three to six months.
• Predictive demand forecasting has reduced projection errors by 20–40 percent, improved planning accuracy by up to 35 percent, and decreased excess inventory by 20–30 percent within six to 12 months.
• Automated freight documentation processing has cut manual task duration by up to 85 percent, recovering initial expenditure inside three to six months.

Over five-year deployment cycles, enterprise adopters have recorded average operational expense reductions between 10–25 percent, accompanied by warehouse productivity gains of 25–35 percent.

Routing algorithms and carrier scoring

MG Ship built the new routing capability directly into its visibility and supply chain intelligence platform, which serves retailers, manufacturers, and freight operators across multiple international markets. The base system synthesises live cargo telemetry with trade intelligence, risk monitoring, and predictive analytics to support operational planning and trade financing.

The route optimisation engine processes live and historical lane transit logs, weather patterns, air and ocean port congestion indicators, customs risk alerts, and transit reliability data. Shippers receive automated recommendations identifying low-cost, low-risk transit paths.

Carrier evaluation features rank transport providers per lane and service tier. Rather than selecting capacity purely on spot freight pricing, the system scores carriers against historical on-time metrics, transit consistency, exception occurrences, claims rates, available volume, and total cost-to-serve.

Logistics teams can also execute scenario simulations prior to peak shipping quarters. The software models lead times, service levels, freight spend, and risk exposures under alternative carrier allocation rules.

Early enterprise implementations demonstrate lower lead-time variance, reduced expedited freight expenditure, and improved on-time-in-full delivery rates.

Cheung stated that the platform “does not simply tell businesses where their cargo is”, adding that “it recommends the best route, the right carrier, and the lowest-risk option based on real-time conditions, helping organisations make faster and more profitable decisions.”

See also: OneRail uses Nvidia AI for real-time last-mile delivery optimisation

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 MG Ship adds AI route optimisation as logistics returns accelerate appeared first on AI News.

M&T Bank has deployed AI copilots to more than 15,000 employees as the US regional bank applies AI to internal operations, customer service, software development, and risk management.

The bank uses AI to analyse call-centre conversations, draft reports, generate code, identify customer needs, and flag portfolio risks, according to Fast Company. M&T is also examining agentic AI applications in cybersecurity and fraud detection.

American Banker reported in September 2025 that 16,000 of M&T’s roughly 22,000 employees were already using Microsoft Copilot for tasks including drafting emails and reports and summarising call-centre conversations.

Before the wider rollout, M&T initially restricted employee access to public large language models. Chief data officer Andrew Foster told American Banker that the bank blocked the tools because employees could potentially enter sensitive company information into public-facing services.

M&T later evaluated enterprise providers and selected Microsoft Copilot, starting with a pilot involving about 800 employees before expanding access across the organisation.

Foster said using generative AI to summarise call-centre conversations saves about six minutes per call. Software developers at the bank also use GitLab tools to generate code, while employees remain responsible for reviewing AI-generated work.

M&T’s human-review requirement is also reflected in its 2026 Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. The policy requires employees to use approved AI tools and prohibits confidential, proprietary, customer, employee, or regulated information from being entered into unapproved systems. Employees remain responsible for the accuracy and appropriateness of AI-assisted work.

Building the technology and data foundation

M&T’s AI deployment follows a technology overhaul that began in 2018. The bank said more than half of its technology specialists were external workers at the time, compared with an 80% in-house technology workforce today.

M&T now has about 2,000 technologists working across more than 300 agile teams and has hired more than 1,000 technology specialists during the programme.

The bank has also replaced dozens of older platforms. M&T said technology outages have fallen by more than 80% since 2018, while the number of system upgrades completed annually has increased by 300%.

Technology spending exceeded $1.2 billion in 2025, nearly three times its 2017 level. Wisler told Forbes in August 2026 that annual technology releases increased from about 15,000 in 2018 to 65,000 in 2025.

Wisler joined M&T as chief information officer in 2018 before becoming senior executive vice-president for technology and operations in 2025. His current remit covers both technology and operational functions across the bank.

M&T’s data programme developed alongside the broader technology overhaul. Foster, who joined the bank in 2023, began building a data-lineage programme to track where information originates, how it is used, and how it moves between systems.

Foster told American Banker that the data-lineage work was not created in response to generative AI. He described it as a core capability for understanding M&T’s data estate.

The bank also established a Data Academy focused on data governance and data skills, with around 2,000 employees participating in the programme.

M&T has created an internal repository called Edison containing authoritative documents and information on bank policies. The bank also uses data-lineage software from Solidatus and Monte Carlo to trace information as it passes through databases, applications, and business-intelligence systems.

The lineage work gives M&T visibility into the source, meaning, quality, and governance of individual data elements, according to Foster. He said one application for that governed data is the bank’s use of Copilot.

M&T also uses retrieval-augmented generation with internal, governed data, according to American Banker.

Scaling AI into daily banking operations

Wisler told Forbes that M&T is pursuing generative AI through three routes: general employee use, AI capabilities embedded in existing applications, and proprietary systems built around the bank’s own data and processes.

M&T operates more than 1,800 applications, many supplied by third-party vendors. Wisler said one of the bank’s AI pathways is identifying useful AI capabilities already embedded within those applications.

M&T’s third pathway involves proprietary AI development around the bank’s own data and processes. Forbes reported that early applications include repetitive operational work, software development, fraud prevention, and cyber defence.

Fast Company’s September report also said M&T continues to assess both internally developed AI systems and external tools, including general enterprise software and technology designed specifically for banks.

Earlier workforce use cases centred on drafting, summarisation, call-centre work, and software development. Fast Company reported that newer applications include identifying customer needs and flagging portfolio risks.

Other large US banks have also expanded generative AI across employee workflows.

JPMorganChase launched its internal LLM Suite platform to more than 200,000 employees in 2024. By 2025, more than 65,000 employees in its Corporate and Investment Bank were actively using the platform, while more than 90% of its engineers were using AI coding assistants.

The bank also said AI-based transaction screening allowed it to review more than twice the previous transaction volume while reducing manual operator checks by half.

Bank of America is using a generative AI-enabled system called EricaAssist with more than 18,000 customer service employees. The tool summarises why a customer is calling, retrieves relevant information, and recommends possible next steps while keeping the employee responsible for the interaction.

Bank of America said in July 2026 that EricaAssist can deliver contextual guidance in under three seconds and has reduced average call times by nearly one minute. The bank plans to extend the system to additional servicing scenarios and business lines later in 2026.

(Photo by Alain Pierre-Lys)

See also: Bank of England reviews AI rules for agentic AI in finance

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 M&T Bank expands enterprise AI after years of technology overhaul appeared first on AI News.

Just over half of American adults, 50.5%, say a partner’s romantic or sexual relationship with an AI can count as cheating.

The figure comes from an AI romance survey of 2,150 U.S. adults, run by AI Girlfriend Coach through SurveyMonkey Audience on 26 and 27 August 2026 and analysed on the 1,709 responses that remained after quality screening removed 441. Respondents were asked how they would regard a partner’s romantic or sexual relationship with an AI, what they think draws people to these products, and whether they could develop genuine feelings for one themselves.

The question is not as strange as it sounds. AI companions flirt, remember what they were told last week and raise it again unprompted, sustain a relationship across months, and simulate intimacy convincingly enough that users describe grief when a model is retired. Unlike pornography or a fictional character, they respond to the specific person using them, and the relationship develops through interaction rather than sitting fixed and identical for everyone who opens it.

AI romance does not fit any existing definition of cheating

Infidelity norms assume a third person who can be confronted, resented, or left over, and AI romance removes that person while keeping most of what surrounds them. There can still be secrecy, emotional attachment, sexual content, and a substantial share of someone’s attention going somewhere their partner cannot see.

Relationship researchers have long treated emotional infidelity as damaging in its own right rather than as a lesser version of the sexual kind, and AI companions land in that first category while generating chat logs and images that resemble the second. Neither of the categories couples usually argue from quite covers it.

Regulators have run into the same gap from another direction. China’s rules on anthropomorphic AI services took effect on 15 July 2026, while California already has companion-chatbot legislation on the books and New York lawmakers passed additional AI-companion legislation in 2026, with much of the regulatory emphasis falling on minors, disclosure and crisis handling. What these products do inside adult partnerships has been left to households to work out.

The survey also undercuts the assumption that this mainly concerns single people. Engaged and married respondents were nearly twice as likely as single ones to have used an AI girlfriend or boyfriend app, 30.7% against 16.3%.

The discomfort runs wider than the cheating label

A further fifth (21.2%) said they would not reach for the word cheating but would still be uncomfortable with a partner doing it. That takes the share applying some kind of limit to 71.7%, against fewer than three in ten (28.3%) who dismissed the question on the basis that an AI is not a real person.

The disagreement is therefore not really about definitions, since a partner does not need to win an argument over what technically constitutes infidelity for the behaviour to cause damage. Roughly seven in ten are placing some kind of limit around AI intimacy whatever noun ends up attached to it.

Within the half who did use the word, a third (33.4%) said any romantic or sexual interaction with an AI already crosses the line, while 17.1% said it becomes cheating only once emotional attachment develops, placing the boundary at the feeling rather than at the software.

The people open to AI feelings judge AI romance more harshly

Among respondents open to developing genuine romantic feelings for an AI, 73.0% said AI romance can count as cheating, against 41.2% of those who said they never could. The gap of nearly thirty-two points runs opposite to the obvious assumption, which is that sceptics would be strictest and anyone open to AI attachment would wave the question through.

Experience produces the same pattern rather than the reverse, with current AI companion users calling it cheating at 80.6%, former users at 60.2%, and people who had never tried one at 44.0%. Familiarity with these products is associated with a harsher judgement rather than a softer one.

Once someone accepts that feelings directed at an AI can be genuine, the distinction between a real and an artificial relationship stops doing much work in deciding whether a boundary has been crossed. The object of the attachment being synthetic stops functioning as a defence, which leaves the people with firsthand experience of these products applying the firmest rules to them.

AI companionship is not primarily about sex

Asked what would be the main reason for using an AI companion, 56.6% chose having someone to talk to or feeling less alone, against 10.3% who chose affection, romance or sex, and loneliness was the leading answer in every subgroup measured.

That makes the cheating discussion more complicated rather than less. Had AI companionship turned out to be primarily sexual it would map onto existing norms about pornography reasonably well, since most couples have some working arrangement there. An ongoing emotional relationship competing for attention, disclosure and intimacy is harder to file, resembling an undisclosed close friendship more than it resembles adult content.

Respondents largely see these products as a response to loneliness rather than to sexual demand, whatever they are being sold as, which places a heavier responsibility on the category than its marketing usually implies.

Couples will have to define these boundaries themselves

Every earlier version of this question was settled privately in the end. Couples negotiate their own terms around pornography, contact with ex-partners, dating apps left installed, how much of a friendship belongs on a private thread, and how close is too close with a colleague. None of those has a universal rule either, but each arrived with decades of accumulated convention to argue from.

AI companions did not. The survey finds opinion split almost exactly down the middle on the word itself, a clear majority saying the behaviour is at least worth discussing, and no established norm for anyone to fall back on. Couples are being asked to legislate for themselves, on a technology most of them have not tried, during the period when the category is growing fastest.

Explicit AI clauses will probably become as ordinary in relationship conversations as deleting the apps became, though not before a good deal of avoidable argument. For anyone using these products in the meantime, the working assumption the data supports is that roughly seven in ten people would place some kind of boundary around it.

AI Girlfriend Coach tests AI companion platforms firsthand and publishes original research on the industry and the people using it. Full methodology, the questionnaire and the excluded responses are published with the survey.

The post 50.5% of Americans Say AI Romance Can Count as Cheating appeared first on AI News.

OneRail has launched an AI-powered delivery platform that uses Nvidia technology to help retailers, wholesalers, and distributors decide how individual orders should be delivered.

Called OmniSTAR, the system evaluates options including owned fleets, couriers, parcel carriers, and other delivery modes, then selects the lowest-cost option that meets the required service level, according to OneRail.

The platform combines Nvidia’s cuOpt decision optimisation engine and cuDF data processing software with OneRail’s delivery pricing and performance data. Nvidia accelerated computing infrastructure is used to process the routing and delivery-mode calculations.

OneRail said the system can reduce computation times by as much as 10 times. A calculation that previously took 20 minutes can be completed in under two minutes, while a calculation taking a week can be reduced to about two days, according to the company.

OneRail said the shorter processing time allows the optimisation to run within live delivery operations, where multiple fulfilment options can be evaluated before an order is assigned.

“If you don’t have the ability to make lightning-fast decisions, you’re giving up margin,” Catania said in an interview with CNBC. “Last-mile fulfilment is expensive.”

From prediction to delivery decisions

OneRail’s broader AI systems use prediction and optimisation for different parts of the delivery process. The company said its machine-learning models estimate factors including service time, lateness risk, the probability of first-attempt delivery success, and expected price ranges.

OneRail said those predictions feed into optimisation systems that determine how an order should be executed. Separately, the company said OmniSTAR compares different fulfilment modes before selecting an option based on cost and service requirements.

Research on dynamic vehicle routing makes a similar distinction between predicting changing conditions and recalculating operational decisions as new information becomes available. A 2024 review in the European Journal of Operational Research identified travel-time prediction and real-time re-optimisation as separate areas of time-dependent routing research.

Nvidia cuOpt handles route optimisation

Nvidia describes cuOpt as an open-source, GPU-accelerated optimisation library for vehicle routing and other mathematical optimisation problems.

Nvidia’s documentation shows that cuOpt can account for vehicle costs, capacities, travel times, operating windows, starting locations, and other restrictions when calculating routes. Its cost models can also use distance, time, monetary cost, or a weighted combination of those measures.

OmniSTAR applies cuOpt to both routing and delivery-mode selection. OneRail said this allows the system to compare available fulfilment options for an order and identify the lowest-cost option that still meets its service requirements.

OneRail said many retailers still rely on static rules or manual planning when making these decisions, and that OmniSTAR is designed to evaluate more delivery combinations within shorter operational timeframes.

Nvidia said cuOpt does not exhaustively test every possible route. Instead, the solver generates candidate solutions and iteratively improves them using GPU-accelerated heuristics to produce high-quality results within a set computation time.

The platform also uses Nvidia cuDF, a GPU-accelerated library for tabular data processing, including filtering, joining, and aggregating datasets.

OneRail combines those capabilities with its own delivery data and operational models. Its dataset is based on millions of deliveries across a network that the company said includes more than 12 million drivers and over 1,000 logistics partners.

The data covers pricing and delivery performance across different transportation modes. OneRail said OmniSTAR can use the information to identify delivery rules that increase costs and assess how delivery choices affect item-level profitability.

The architecture disclosed for OmniSTAR centres on GPU-accelerated data processing and mathematical optimisation. Nvidia describes cuOpt as the optimisation component used for problems including vehicle routing.

Because cuOpt is stateless, changes in operating conditions require the optimisation problem to be modelled and submitted again. Nvidia cites vehicle breakdowns, driver absences, road blockages, traffic, and new high-priority orders as examples of changes that can prompt this type of dynamic reoptimisation.

OneRail said OmniSTAR can rerun delivery scenarios as variables including fuel costs, weather, and shipping conditions change. The company has separately said its use of cuOpt allows it to evaluate more routing scenarios and recalculate routes faster than its previous approach.

OmniSTAR moves into live operations

OmniSTAR is already deployed with selected enterprise customers.

At US Foods, OneRail said the system identified delivery configurations that were reducing margins, including low-margin products being transported long distances using higher-cost equipment. US Foods subsequently used the findings to adjust pricing and restructure some delivery patterns, according to OneRail.

OneRail also told CNBC that an unnamed large tire distributor using the platform achieved $40 million in run-rate savings over three years. The customer was not identified, and the savings figure was provided by OneRail. The company also told CNBC that it expects OmniSTAR to exceed $6 billion in gross merchandise volume during the fourth quarter of 2026.

CNBC reported that OneRail and Nvidia had worked on the project for three years before its launch. OneRail said the collaboration included direct engagement with Nvidia’s cuOpt engineering team on last-mile delivery and large-scale logistics optimisation, alongside its participation in the Nvidia Inception programme.

In March this year, FedEx launched FedEx SameDay Local in collaboration with OneRail, connecting customers to a national network of more than 1,000 delivery providers.

(Photo by Brecht Corbeel)

See also: A quarter of Nvidia’s business next year comes from labs it is financing

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 OneRail uses Nvidia AI for real-time last-mile delivery optimisation appeared first on AI News.

NVIDIA has agreed to acquire Hugging Face for $12.93 billion to scale the open-source model repository’s platform and infrastructure.

The transaction targets platform growth and infrastructure investment, aiming to expand AI access for enterprise developers, software engineers, and research institutions globally.

Built over the past decade by Clem Delangue, Julien Chaumond, Thomas Wolf, and their engineering team, Hugging Face serves as the primary home for the open model developer community.

Platform metrics show more than 18 million developers, researchers, and creators share more than three million models, 500,000 datasets, and one million applications. Commercial adoption includes more than 200,000 companies using the environment to discover, evaluate, customise, and deploy AI models.

Hardware neutrality and multi-cloud commitments

NVIDIA stated that Hugging Face will remain an open platform for the entire AI sector. Developers will retain full control over their selection of models, software frameworks, cloud providers, inference services, and computing hardware.

NVIDIA hardware will not be mandatory to build on or deploy software through the platform. The service will maintain operational support for alternative accelerators, multi-cloud architectures, and open-weight models from all third-party builders.

Jensen Huang, Founder and CEO of NVIDIA, said: “Hugging Face will remain an open platform for the entire AI ecosystem. Developers will choose the models they want, the frameworks they want, the clouds and inference service providers they want, and the computing platforms they want.

“NVIDIA compute will not be required to build on or deploy through Hugging Face.”

Open-weight models and distributed development

Huang noted a recent open letter he co-authored regarding the role of open weights in the AI economy. The position argued that open weights broaden AI access and ensure technical leadership remains distributed across companies, academic institutions, and developer communities.

Under this operational model, commercial businesses, startups, universities, and public bodies can build on advanced capabilities without the expense of training baseline models from scratch.

The approach allows organisations to match specific models to operational tasks across factories, hospitals, farms, classrooms, and commercial businesses, while addressing cybersecurity and data sovereignty requirements.

Julien Chaumond, Co-Founder and CEO of Hugging Face, commented: “AI is at an inflection point. Open-source AI can become less relevant in the coming years if the big closed labs run away with it, or it can become the foundational fabric of the next phase of human civilisation.

“Those are vastly different outcomes, and we need the critical mass to ensure we give our collective best shot to the second outcome. Given Jensen Huang’s stance on open source AI and how he stepped up to defend it when it was under threat earlier in the summer, NVIDIA was the only partner we truly considered.”

Infrastructure expansion and brand preservation

NVIDIA stands as the largest contributor of open models and data to Hugging Face, with a portfolio of more than 500 open models and more than 250 open datasets. The company builds its libraries, tools, and models openly to allow external engineers to inspect, modify, and build atop the software.

Technical integration will focus on applying NVIDIA infrastructure and engineering resources to improve repository reliability, safety controls, model evaluation tooling, inference execution, and deployment pipelines.

“I am honored that Clem came to me as he considered the next chapter of Hugging Face and believed NVIDIA would be a great home for the company, its community and the future of open models,” Huang stated.

Hugging Face will retain its independent brand identity following the completion of the transaction, with the existing team continuing operations across multi-cloud and multi-accelerator environments.

“This gives fuel to our long-term vision and mission of unlocking the community’s progress to ensure that AI, which is the greatest breakthrough of our lifetime, is accessible to as many people as possible,” Chaumond concludes.

See also: Motional and MIT AI explains self-driving car decisions

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 NVIDIA to acquire Hugging Face for $12.93B appeared first on AI News.

Motional and MIT researchers have built a system that lets self-driving cars explain their decisions in real-time, tackling the black-box problem in autonomous vehicle AI.

The work, published in Nature, comes from a team at Motional that includes CEO Laura Major, working alongside researchers from MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Their proposed method, called the Concept-Wrapper Network or CW-Net, aims to translate the internal calculations of a self-driving system’s neural network into concepts a human can actually read.

If a current self-driving car brakes hard on a clear road with no obvious hazard in sight, neither the driver nor a passenger has any way of knowing why. Modern self-driving systems increasingly rely on neural networks trained on large volumes of driving data. Those networks can perform well, but they don’t expose their reasoning, which is why engineers describe them as black boxes.

Translating neural network logic into human concepts

CW-Net works by converting a self-driving system’s internal logic into concepts such as “Approaching Stopped Vehicle” or “Close to Cyclist.” These could, according to Motional, appear on a dashboard showing which concepts are influencing the vehicle’s driving decisions as they happen.

The system is designed so the explanations aren’t generated after the fact as a guess at what the network might have been doing. Instead, the vehicle’s final decision-making system takes action based directly on these human-interpretable concepts, so a braking event traces back to a specific concept that triggered it. Motional describes this as causally faithful, distinguishing it from approaches that generate natural-language explanations, which can read as plausible without necessarily being accurate.

Laura Major frames the case for this kind of interpretability against the alternative of relying purely on end-to-end deep learning to handle driving decisions.

“The general end-to-end only approach can get to a really good 80-90 percent – maybe even 95 percent – solution, but that’s not good enough to remove a driver or to earn the trust of cities, communities, and customers,” she said.

Testing explainable AI for self-driving cars around Las Vegas

Explainable AI research has largely stayed confined to computer simulations in lab settings, according to Motional. The Motional and MIT team instead deployed CW-Net on an autonomous vehicle with an experienced safety operator in the driver’s seat, collecting data on a private test track and on public roads around Las Vegas.

The team used an earlier experimental version of its deep-learning-based planning system, described as showing competitive performance but with notable shortcomings that CW-Net could help surface. Two incidents from the testing illustrate what the system caught.

In one, the autonomous vehicle repeatedly stopped near a traffic cone, and the vehicle operator assumed the cone itself was triggering the behaviour. Researchers removed the cone and the car stopped anyway. CW-Net’s display showed the actual cause: the experimental planning system was hallucinating a stopped vehicle ahead, a pattern traced back to its training data. That explanation let the researchers understand, predict, and resolve the issue.

A second test involved a cyclist. The autonomous vehicle detected and stopped for the cyclist as expected, but CW-Net revealed that the experimental planning system wasn’t actually basing its decision on the cyclist’s presence. The safety driver responded by exercising more caution around cyclists after noticing this. Follow-up analysis confirmed that caution was warranted, because the vehicle’s braking in that case came from a safety backup system rather than the experimental deep-learning-based planner.

Performance held steady against explainability

Adding layers of explainability to an AI system carries a known cost in speed and performance, and Motional acknowledges that risk. However, when researchers benchmarked CW-Net against leading autonomous driving algorithms, the difference in driving capability came in at less than one percent.

The Las Vegas incidents show why that trade-off matters operationally rather than just academically. A safety driver who can see that a stop is caused by a hallucinated vehicle, or that a backup system rather than the primary planner is responsible for a manoeuvre, can respond and report with more precision than one working from behaviour alone.

That visibility feeds directly into how quickly an engineering team can diagnose a system, and how confidently a safety operator can distinguish between an intended behaviour and a fault.

Motional connects the CW-Net work to broader pressure on autonomous vehicle operators as the technology extends into new markets and jurisdictions. Regulators are naturally asking for more transparency about how AI systems reach their decisions, and it expects tools like CW-Net could move from research projects toward a baseline requirement.

Beyond passenger vehicles, autonomous drones and even robotic surgery are cited as other safety-critical domains where operators and developers will need ways to understand a system’s capabilities, limitations, and unexpected behaviours.

Learn more about physical AI during the Physical AI Expo held in Amsterdam, London, and North America.

See also: MIT AI forecasts extreme weather without historical data

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 Motional and MIT AI explains self-driving car decisions appeared first on AI News.

Autonomous AI systems are beginning to move beyond software environments and into warehouses, delivery networks, and public spaces. The development is drawing attention to whether current AI rules cover systems that operate in physical environments.

Most existing AI governance frameworks have focused on online harms and model outputs, including bias, misinformation, and harmful content. Embodied AI systems carry risks in physical environments, where failures can affect infrastructure, property, or human safety.

Singapore’s Infocomm Media Development Authority published version 1.5 of its Model AI Governance Framework for Agentic AI on May 20. The framework sets out guidance for organisations deploying AI agents that can plan, make decisions, and take actions across multiple steps to complete user-defined goals.

The framework says agents can interact with tools, external systems, and other agents, including systems that update databases, write files, control devices, or perform transactions. It lists access controls, monitoring, and human approval among governance measures for deployment.

AI moves into physical systems

At an AI summit in Singapore last week, discussions around robotics and embodied AI focused on operational safety issues more commonly associated with aviation, industrial systems, and critical infrastructure oversight than conventional software regulation.

Speakers also discussed whether autonomous systems can operate safely and reliably in unpredictable real-world environments over extended periods.

Dr. Ya-Qin Zhang, founding dean of the Institute for AI Industry Research at Tsinghua University, said embodied AI systems amplify risks already associated with autonomous software. He said failures can directly affect transport systems, drones, logistics networks, and critical infrastructure.

“Any risk in the digital domain will be amplified in the physical domain, and the physical domain will have a physical consequence,” Zhang told MLex on the sidelines of the summit.

He added that vehicles, drones, smart grids, and other infrastructure could become exposed as AI systems are embedded more deeply into physical operations.

Speakers discussed reliability, operational monitoring, and post-deployment assurance as governance concerns. Summit discussions pointed to deployment-based governance models built around simulation, telemetry, and iterative testing, rather than one-time certification alone.

IMDA’s framework also recommends gradual rollouts, continuous monitoring, and further testing after deployment. It says agents interact dynamically with their environment and not all risks can be anticipated before release.

Monitoring becomes a deployment issue

Grab, which is piloting autonomous vehicles and delivery robots in Singapore’s Punggol district, said deployment governance depends heavily on simulation, testing, and continuous monitoring.

“We do a lot of simulation, we do a lot of testing in closed courses and open courses in order to make sure our robots are reliable,” Suthen Thomas Paradatheth, Grab’s chief technology officer, said during one of the summit panels.

“Before we scale to hundreds of robots, we make sure we crack it first in simulation and with a few robots,” he added.

Grab also pointed to monitoring systems designed to track robot performance and detect unexpected failures after deployment.

“There’s a long tail of issues that could emerge,” Paradatheth said.

The IMDA framework says organisations should assess agentic AI use cases based on data access, external system access, autonomy, and task complexity. It also points to the scope and reversibility of agent actions, third-party involvement, and overall system complexity.

It also recommends limiting agent access to tools and systems, applying least-privilege permissions, and defining standard operating procedures for agent workflows. Organisations should also set mechanisms to take agents offline when they malfunction.

Accountability spreads across more actors

MLex reported that embodied AI systems can involve several parties across development, manufacturing, and deployment. These include AI developers, robotics manufacturers, semiconductor suppliers, and infrastructure operators.

MLex also noted that responsibility can be harder to assign when systems continue adapting after deployment through software updates, telemetry, and operational data.

IMDA says organisations and humans remain accountable for agent actions, even when agents operate autonomously. The framework calls for clear responsibility across the agentic AI value chain, from model and platform providers to deployers, tooling providers, and end users.

Applied Materials said large-scale robotics deployment is also tied to semiconductor economics and systems integration. Om Nalamasu, the company’s chief technology officer, said robotics systems will depend on better sensors, energy efficiency, advanced packaging, and computing architectures.

Nalamasu said robotics systems would require purpose-built designs adapted to specific industrial ecosystems rather than a single solution for all environments.

Zhao Yuli, chief strategy officer of Chinese robotics startup Galbot, said Beijing is prioritising deployment scale and industrial commercialisation through government-backed testbeds, industrial partnerships, and long-term funding initiatives.

Galbot has deployed humanoid robotics systems in retail, warehouse, and pharmaceutical operations in China. These include autonomous stores that operate around the clock. Zhao said semi-structured industrial environments are likely to become an early commercialisation path because they offer more controllable operating conditions.

Japan is placing more focus on standards-setting, robotics datasets, and safety governance. Professor Yutaka Matsuo of the University of Tokyo’s Graduate School of Engineering pointed to an “AI Association” project aimed at collecting 100,000 hours of robotics data to support robotic foundation models.

Matsuo also referred to Japan’s AI Safety Institute and the Hiroshima AI Process as part of broader efforts to develop governance standards for embodied AI systems with Singapore and other Asian countries.

Singapore sets out agent controls

Singapore’s framework sets out four governance areas for agentic AI. These cover upfront risk assessment, human accountability, technical controls, and end-user responsibility. The framework describes them as an iterative process rather than a one-time assessment.

The framework says human oversight has to be adapted for agentic systems because continuous review of all workflows becomes impractical at scale. It recommends human approval at significant checkpoints, including high-stakes actions, irreversible actions, and outlier behaviour.

IMDA also identifies automation bias and alert fatigue as risks when humans supervise capable agents. It recommends auditing oversight through indicators such as human override rates and response times, and using automated real-time monitoring to flag unexpected behaviour.

The framework says users should be told what actions an agent can take, what data it can access, and what responsibilities remain with the user. It also recommends employee training on human-agent interaction, oversight, and the professional skills needed to assess agent outputs.

Companies test AI in regulated workflows

JPMorgan is implementing AI tools across its global investment banking business, Paul Uren, the bank’s Asia Pacific head of investment banking, told Reuters. The bank said the tools help bankers access more information and synthesise it with internal systems. They are also being used to prepare content and support client engagement.

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon told Bloomberg News that the bank would hire more AI specialists and fewer traditional bankers. Reuters reported that global banks are increasing AI investment, reshaping workforces, and changing job roles.

The bank is also among selected organisations permitted by Anthropic to use its Mythos cybersecurity model under a controlled initiative known as Project Glasswing. According to Anthropic, Mythos can detect old vulnerabilities in browsers, infrastructure, and software.

Reuters reported that Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley also have access to, or are testing, Mythos, citing sources and company executives.

IMDA’s framework includes a case study from OCBC Bank of Singapore on source-of-wealth analysis. The system parses income-related documents and drafts a source-of-wealth memo. It does not make credit, onboarding, or risk decisions autonomously.

In that case, the workflow is limited to task-level autonomy and operates only when triggered by predefined workflows. Human review is required at critical decision points, and final validation remains with designated reviewers.

Robots move into industrial use

In Japan, one-third of companies are already using or considering AI-powered robots, according to a Reuters survey conducted by Nikkei Research from May 1 to May 15. The survey contacted 492 companies, with 220 responding on the condition of anonymity.

About 4% of respondents said they already use AI robots, 5% plan to deploy them, and 25% are considering doing so. The remaining 66% said they had no such plans.

Transportation equipment manufacturers were the most active group in the survey, with 80% already using AI robots or considering deployment. By comparison, 94% of wholesale sector respondents said they had no plans to deploy AI robots.

Among companies using, planning to use, or considering AI robots, 71% selected manufacturing as a use case. Another 19% selected dangerous tasks, while 11% selected customer-facing services.

The Japanese government expects AI robots to help address the country’s chronic labour shortage and support its position in industrial robotics. Japan is home to robotics companies including Fanuc, Yaskawa Electric, and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, but faces competition from China and the United States in AI-enabled robotics.

Retail agents expand beyond search

Walmart has outlined plans to use agentic AI across shopping, employee, supplier, and developer workflows.

In July 2025, the retailer announced plans for four AI-powered “super agents.” They are designed for shoppers, store employees, suppliers and sellers, and software developers. Walmart said these agents would become the main entry point for AI interactions across those groups.

One of the tools, Sparky, is already available in Walmart’s app as a generative AI-powered shopping assistant. Hari Vasudev, Walmart’s US chief technology officer, said its expanded version would be able to reorder items and plan events. It would also use computer vision to suggest recipes based on the contents of a shopper’s fridge.

Walmart is also developing an Associate super agent for store workers and corporate staff. A separate Marty agent is being built for sellers, suppliers, and advertisers. The retailer is also working on a Developer super agent for testing, building, and launching future AI tools.

The company declined to say whether the agents would replace jobs. Dave Glick, senior vice president of enterprise business systems, said the tools would create new jobs, without giving further details.

(Photo by Growtika)

See also: OpenAI opens Singapore AI lab as IMDA updates AI framework

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 Autonomous AI systems test governance in physical environments appeared first on AI News.