Johnny Ni
12.1K posts

Johnny Ni
@JohnnyNi13
Vanguard Defense @Harvard - Prev. @northropgrumman @MITLL


there is no hugging face for robotics data. no standardized pipeline for collecting, labeling, versioning, training on real-world robot data at scale. no tooling that handles contact dynamics and material deformation well enough for industrial manipulation. no teleoperation infrastructure where human supervisor intervention automatically becomes training data. no vertical-specific manipulation datasets for any specific industrial task. the actual bottleneck in physical AI is the data and the infrastructure to generate it. and this is a structural problem. for language AI, training data was the internet. abundant, cheap, already labeled by human intent. for robotics, the gap between where foundation models are and where they need to be cannot be closed by deploying more robots. three bets are being made right now: simulation-first works brilliantly for locomotion. domain randomization has essentially solved quadruped walking in unstructured terrain. but it breaks down completely for manipulation. simulated cameras have no noise, blur, or friction error. real cameras and grippers have all of it. cable insertion, fabric folding, dexterous assembly are exactly where simulation fails. teleoperation as data collection is the second move. deploy semi-autonomous robots, capture human-guided trajectories, iterate. theoretically sound. but the capital math is brutal and the execution evidence isn't there yet. human video as proxy is the third. if robots could learn from watching humans, you tap unlimited data. the problem: human hand geometry and force feedback don't map onto robot actuators. you're learning the shape of motion without the physics that make it work. what's actually working today is locomotion. narrow manipulation in structured environments. inspection and sensing. quadrupeds doing thermal inspection. no general-purpose manipulation required. the hardware race is loud, capital-intensive, winner-take-few. but the data infrastructure race is quiet, undercapitalized, wide open.

The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated AI Research, Now Published in Nature Nature: nature.com/articles/s4158… Blog: sakana.ai/ai-scientist-n… When we first introduced The AI Scientist, we shared an ambitious vision of an agent powered by foundation models capable of executing the entire machine learning research lifecycle. From inventing ideas and writing code to executing experiments and drafting the manuscript, the system demonstrated that end-to-end automation of the scientific process is possible. Soon after, we shared a historic update: the improved AI Scientist-v2 produced the first fully AI-generated paper to pass a rigorous human peer-review process. Today, we are happy to announce that “The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated AI Research,” our paper describing all of this work, along with fresh new insights, has been published in @Nature! This Nature publication consolidates these milestones and details the underlying foundation model orchestration. It also introduces our Automated Reviewer, which matches human review judgments and actually exceeds standard inter-human agreement. Crucially, by using this reviewer to grade papers generated by different foundation models, we discovered a clear scaling law of science. As the underlying foundation models improve, the quality of the generated scientific papers increases correspondingly. This implies that as compute costs decrease and model capabilities continue to exponentially increase, future versions of The AI Scientist will be substantially more capable. Building upon our previous open-source releases (github.com/SakanaAI/AI-Sc…), this open-access Nature publication comprehensively details our system's architecture, outlines several new scaling results, and discusses the promise and challenges of AI-generated science. This substantial milestone is the result of a close and fruitful collaboration between researchers at Sakana AI, the University of British Columbia (UBC) and the Vector Institute, and the University of Oxford. Congrats to the team! @_chris_lu_ @cong_ml @RobertTLange @_yutaroyamada @shengranhu @j_foerst @hardmaru @jeffclune

NASA plans to invest $20 billion over the next seven years to develop a base on the surface of the moon, part of its goal to not only send humans back to the lunar surface, but allow them to live there. bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

















