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 co
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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 communi
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.
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.
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 syst
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 thePhysical AI Expoheld in Amsterdam, London, and North America.
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.
To protect enterprise margins, business leaders must invest in robust AI governance to securely manage AI infrastructure.
When evaluating enterprise software adoption, a recurring pattern dictates how technology matures across industries. As Rob Thomas, SVP and CCO at IBM, recently outlined, software typically graduates from a standalone product to a platform, and then from a platform to foundational infrastructure, altering the governing rules entirely.
At the initial product stage, exert
To protect enterprise margins, business leaders must invest in robust AI governance to securely manage AI infrastructure.
When evaluating enterprise software adoption, a recurring pattern dictates how technology matures across industries. As Rob Thomas, SVP and CCO at IBM, recently outlined, software typically graduates from a standalone product to a platform, and then from a platform to foundational infrastructure, altering the governing rules entirely.
At the initial product stage, exerting tight corporate control often feels highly advantageous. Closed development environments iterate quickly and tightly manage the end-user experience. They capture and concentrate financial value within a single corporate entity, an approach that functions adequately during early product development cycles.
However, IBM’s analysis highlights that expectations change entirely when a technology solidifies into a foundational layer. Once other institutional frameworks, external markets, and broad operational systems rely on the software, the prevailing standards adapt to a new reality. At infrastructure scale, embracing openness ceases to be an ideological stance and becomes a highly practical necessity.
AI is currently crossing this threshold within the enterprise architecture stack. Models are increasingly embedded directly into the ways organisations secure their networks, author source code, execute automated decisions, and generate commercial value. AI functions less as an experimental utility and more as core operational infrastructure.
The recent limited preview of Anthropic’s Claude Mythos model brings this reality into sharper focus for enterprise executives managing risk. Anthropic reports that this specific model can discover and exploit software vulnerabilities at a level matching few human experts.
In response to this power, Anthropic launched Project Glasswing, a gated initiative designed to place these advanced capabilities directly into the hands of network defenders first. From IBM’s perspective, this development forces technology officers to confront immediate structural vulnerabilities. If autonomous models possess the capability to write exploits and shape the overall security environment, Thomas notes that concentrating the understanding of these systems within a small number of technology vendors invites severe operational exposure.
With models achieving infrastructure status, IBM argues the primary issue is no longer exclusively what these machine learning applications can execute. The priority becomes how these systems are constructed, governed, inspected, and actively improved over extended periods.
As underlying frameworks grow in complexity and corporate importance, maintaining closed development pipelines becomes exceedingly difficult to defend. No single vendor can successfully anticipate every operational requirement, adversarial attack vector, or system failure mode.
Implementing opaque AI structures introduces heavy friction across existing network architecture. Connecting closed proprietary models with established enterprise vector databases or highly sensitive internal data lakes frequently creates massive troubleshooting bottlenecks. When anomalous outputs occur or hallucination rates spike, teams lack the internal visibility required to diagnose whether the error originated in the retrieval-augmented generation pipeline or the base model weights.
Integrating legacy on-premises architecture with highly gated cloud models also introduces severe latency into daily operations. When enterprise data governance protocols strictly prohibit sending sensitive customer information to external servers, technology teams are left attempting to strip and anonymise datasets before processing. This constant data sanitisation creates enormous operational drag.
Furthermore, the spiralling compute costs associated with continuous API calls to locked models erode the exact profit margins these autonomous systems are supposed to enhance. The opacity prevents network engineers from accurately sizing hardware deployments, forcing companies into expensive over-provisioning agreements to maintain baseline functionality.
Why open-source AI is essential for operational resilience
Restricting access to powerful applications is an understandable human instinct that closely resembles caution. Yet, as Thomas points out, at massive infrastructure scale, security typically improves through rigorous external scrutiny rather than through strict concealment.
This represents the enduring lesson of open-source software development. Open-source code does not eliminate enterprise risk. Instead, IBM maintains it actively changes how organisations manage that risk. An open foundation allows a wider base of researchers, corporate developers, and security defenders to examine the architecture, surface underlying weaknesses, test foundational assumptions, and harden the software under real-world conditions.
Within cybersecurity operations, broad visibility is rarely the enemy of operational resilience. In fact, visibility frequently serves as a strict prerequisite for achieving that resilience. Technologies deemed highly important tend to remain safer when larger populations can challenge them, inspect their logic, and contribute to their continuous improvement.
Thomas addresses one of the oldest misconceptions regarding open-source technology: the belief that it inevitably commoditises corporate innovation. In practical application, open infrastructure typically pushes market competition higher up the technology stack. Open systems transfer financial value rather than destroying it.
As common digital foundations mature, the commercial value relocates toward complex implementation, system orchestration, continuous reliability, trust mechanics, and specific domain expertise. IBM’s position asserts that the long-term commercial winners are not those who own the base technological layer, but rather the organisations that understand how to apply it most effectively.
We have witnessed this identical pattern play out across previous generations of enterprise tooling, cloud infrastructure, and operating systems. Open foundations historically expanded developer participation, accelerated iterative improvement, and birthed entirely new, larger markets built on top of those base layers. Enterprise leaders increasingly view open-source as highly important for infrastructure modernisation and emerging AI capabilities. IBM predicts that AI is highly likely to follow this exact historical trajectory.
Looking across the broader vendor ecosystem, leading hyperscalers are adjusting their business postures to accommodate this reality. Rather than engaging in a pure arms race to build the largest proprietary black boxes, highly profitable integrators are focusing heavily on orchestration tooling that allows enterprises to swap out underlying open-source models based on specific workload demands. Highlighting its ongoing leadership in this space, IBM is a key sponsor of this year’s AI & Big Data Expo North America, where these evolving strategies for open enterprise infrastructure will be a primary focus.
This approach completely sidesteps restrictive vendor lock-in and allows companies to route less demanding internal queries to smaller and highly efficient open models, preserving expensive compute resources for complex customer-facing autonomous logic. By decoupling the application layer from the specific foundation model, technology officers can maintain operational agility and protect their bottom line.
The future of enterprise AI demands transparent governance
Another pragmatic reason for embracing open models revolves around product development influence. IBM emphasises that narrow access to underlying code naturally leads to narrow operational perspectives. In contrast, who gets to participate directly shapes what applications are eventually built.
Providing broad access enables governments, diverse institutions, startups, and varied researchers to actively influence how the technology evolves and where it is commercially applied. This inclusive approach drives functional innovation while simultaneously building structural adaptability and necessary public legitimacy.
As Thomas argues, once autonomous AI assumes the role of core enterprise infrastructure, relying on opacity can no longer serve as the organising principle for system safety. The most reliable blueprint for secure software has paired open foundations with broad external scrutiny, active code maintenance, and serious internal governance.
As AI permanently enters its infrastructure phase, IBM contends that identical logic increasingly applies directly to the foundation models themselves. The stronger the corporate reliance on a technology, the stronger the corresponding case for demanding openness.
If these autonomous workflows are truly becoming foundational to global commerce, then transparency ceases to be a subject of casual debate. According to IBM, it is an absolute, non-negotiable design requirement for any modern enterprise architecture.
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.
A survey carried out by OutSystems, The State of AI Development 2026 [email wall], argues that AI has moved into early production phase for many enterprises, primarily inside the IT function.
The survey was based on the responses of 1,879 IT leaders, and warns that adoption of AI is in danger of running ahead of governance and integration. The shortfall is a gap between what IT leaders want agents to do and what their organisations can safely control. The report’s authors urge companies to ad
A survey carried out by OutSystems, The State of AI Development 2026 [email wall], argues that AI has moved into early production phase for many enterprises, primarily inside the IT function.
The survey was based on the responses of 1,879 IT leaders, and warns that adoption of AI is in danger of running ahead of governance and integration. The shortfall is a gap between what IT leaders want agents to do and what their organisations can safely control. The report’s authors urge companies to address the controls or guardrails on AI systems, and also stress the importance of integrating new, AI technology into an organisation’s existing platforms.
OutSystems says 97% of its respondents are exploring some form of agentic strategy, with 49% of them describing their current abilities as “advanced” or “expert.” Nearly half of those surveyed say that over half of agentic AI projects have moved from pilot into production, with Indian companies most successful in implementing the technology: 50% of Indian companies say their AI projects are 51% to 75% successful.
Companies are considering where agents should be deployed first, and under what controls, but although “cost reduction or efficiency gains” is the most cited expectation for AI’s effects, only 22% found their deployments most effective in that regard. Instead, the most effective area gains in a business stemmed from equipping software developers with AI tools described as “generative AI-assisted.”
The report’s geography and sector data show that transitions to AI agentic workflows are unevenly distributed. India stands out as the market with the highest share of users considering themselves “expert”, while many organisations in Australia, Brazil, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, and the US still identify as intermediate stage users. France and Germany are the most dubious of AI adoption, with Germany recording the highest share of leaders not using agentic AI in any form.
The sectors and functions invested in AI
Financial services and technology show the most movement from pilot to production, with many implementations in core business functions. The sector can be considered as having the most clear line of sight from automation to measurable returns in terms of income. The practical inference from the report’s findings would be for slower-moving sectors to copy the implementation workflows employed by the fintech industry: Start with narrow, high-volume workflows where performance can be measured and failures can be contained, and focus on the IT function.
According to the survey, generative AI-assisted development is now common in nine of the ten countries surveyed, alongside traditional coding, outsourced development, and SaaS customisation. It undercuts the notion that enterprises are moving into an AI-native or all-AI stack. In fact, most organisations add agents and AI-generated code on top of the processes already proven effective in their development environments.
Fragmented data no roadblock to AI progress
OutSystems finds that 48% of respondents see integration with legacy systems as the most important ability needed to expand agentic AI, and 38% say legacy systems are the main reason projects stall between pilot and production. Of the potential barriers to AI development that were offered as choices to the survey’s participants, more than 40% cited integration difficulties and legacy fragmentation the most problematic.
Organisations considering large data clean-up programmes (which many AI vendors advocate as a reason why deployments fail to reach production) may want to rethink, the report implies. The authors state agents can be built that can work well in complex data environments, as long as governance and integration are strengthened at the same time as AI implementation. Across the board, most sectors express “moderate trust” levels of agentic AI at around 50%, although responses from different business functions were not broken out in the survey results’ figures.
IT operations and software development
The financial returns are manifest mostly in IT functions themselves. The report says the most explored use cases are IT operations, at 55%, and data analysis, at 52%. Workflow automation follows at 36%, then customer experience at 33%. On realised return on investment, IT development and productivity lead by a margin, at 40%, ahead of operational efficiency at 22%. That distribution suggests that the first durable value from agentic AI is internal at developers’ desks rather than in customer-facing environments. Customer-facing deployments may still make sense, but the report indicates they require more trust in system performance, stronger controls, better orchestration, and an ability to create watertight oversight mechanisms.
Trust in and control of agents and governance
Trust in agentic AI, however, is improving. OutSystems reports that 73% of respondents express either high or moderate trust in letting agents to act autonomously, a rise of around 10% compared to a similar survey the company undertook last year. Trust in code or workflows generated by third-party AI tools is slightly lower, at 67%, a substantial increase from the prior year’s figure, when only 40% ‘mostly trusted’ generative AI to write code without human help.
Only 36% of respondents say they have a centralised approach to AI governance, while 64% say they lack such a facility, and 41% rely on rules implemented on a per-project basis. Two-thirds say building human-in-the-loop checkpoints is technically difficult because it requires orchestration that can pause agents – in effect inserting manual braking on operations that might be fully autonomous.
Many organisations appear to be deploying looser oversight models, although it is not clear if that is a result of greater trust in models or whether business functions are under pressure to deploy AI regardless of security or reliability concerns. If the trend to loosen oversight continues, the report’s authors note that agentic AI adoption may advance faster than the methods of accountability that many consider important.
Firms that want to scale agents in regulated or mission-critical settings should treat orchestration and auditability as part of the product, the survey’s findings state. When compliance checks consider a business’s operations, breadcrumb trails in the form of logfiles and defined responsibilities are considered important elements of any agentic AI rollout.
The report says 94% of leaders are concerned about “AI sprawl”, which is not defined, but could be inferred to be a lack of a centralised management platform that oversees all AI deployments in the enterprise. 39% are very or extremely concerned about the issue, and only 12% currently use a centralised platform to keep that sprawl under control.
(Image source: “Relax” by Koijots is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)
Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is part of TechEx and co-located with other leading technology events. Click here for more information.
AI News is powered by TechForge Media. Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars here.
Login
