AI Research
Reimagining clinical AI: from clickstreams to clinical insights with EHR use metadata
Harnessing EHR data for health research | Nature Medicine. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03074-8.
Acosta, J. N., Falcone, G. J., Rajpurkar, P. & Topol, E. J. Multimodal biomedical AI. Nat. Med. 28, 1773–1784 (2022).
Adler-Milstein, J. et al. Meeting the Moment: Addressing Barriers and Facilitating Clinical Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Diagnosis. NAM Perspect. https://doi.org/10.31478/202209c. (2022)
Aquino, Y. S. J. et al. Utopia versus dystopia: Professional perspectives on the impact of healthcare artificial intelligence on clinical roles and skills. Int. J. Med. Inf. 169, 104903 (2023).
Pavuluri, S., Sangal, R., Sather, J. & Taylor, R. A. Balancing act: the complex role of artificial intelligence in addressing burnout and healthcare workforce dynamics. BMJ Health Care Inf. 31, e101120 (2024).
Rule, A. et al. Guidance for reporting analyses of metadata on electronic health record use. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.31, 784–789 (2023).
Adler-Milstein, J., Adelman, J. S., Tai-Seale, M., Patel, V. L. & Dymek, C. EHR audit logs: A new goldmine for health services research?. J. Biomed. Inform. 101, 103343 (2020).
Kannampallil, T. & Adler-Milstein, J. Using electronic health record audit log data for research: insights from early efforts. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 167–171 (2023).
Rule, A., Melnick, E. R. & Apathy, N. C. Using event logs to observe interactions with electronic health records: an updated scoping review shows increasing use of vendor-derived measures. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 144–154 (2023).
Rule, A., Chiang, M. F. & Hribar, M. R. Using electronic health record audit logs to study clinical activity: a systematic review of aims, measures, and methods. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.27, 480–490 (2020).
Physician time spent using the electronic health record during outpatient encounters: a descriptive study. Ann Intern. Med 172, No 3. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M18-3684.
Rotenstein, L. S., Holmgren, A. J., Downing, N. L. & Bates, D. W. Differences in total and after-hours electronic health record time across ambulatory specialties. JAMA Intern. Med. 181, 863–865 (2021).
Tai-Seale, M. et al. Association of physician burnout with perceived EHR work stress and potentially actionable factors. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 1665–1672 (2023).
Chen, Y. et al. Modeling care team structures in the neonatal intensive care unit through network analysis of EHR Audit Logs. Methods Inf. Med. 58, 109–123 (2019).
Yakusheva, O. et al. An electronic health record metadata-mining approach to identifying patient-level interprofessional clinician teams in the intensive care unit. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 32, 426–434 (2025).
Chen, Y., Patel, M. B., McNaughton, C. D. & Malin, B. A. Interaction patterns of trauma providers are associated with length of stay. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.25, 790–799 (2018).
Lou, S. S. et al. Effect of clinician attention switching on workload and wrong-patient errors. Br. J. Anaesth. 129, e22–e24 (2022).
Rose, C. et al. Team is brain: leveraging EHR audit log data for new insights into acute care processes. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 8–15 (2023).
Melnick, E. R. et al. Analysis of electronic health record use and clinical productivity and their association with physician turnover. JAMA Netw. Open 4, e2128790 (2021).
Tran, B., Lenhart, A., Ross, R. & Dorr, D. A. Burnout and EHR use among academic primary care physicians with varied clinical workloads. AMIA Summits Transl. Sci. Proc. 2019, 136–144 (2019).
Rossetti, S. C. et al. Real-time surveillance system for patient deterioration: a pragmatic cluster-randomized controlled trial. Nat. Med. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-03609-7. (2025)
Rossetti, S. C. et al. Healthcare process modeling to phenotype clinician behaviors for exploiting the signal gain of clinical expertise (HPM-ExpertSignals): Development and evaluation of a conceptual framework. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.28, 1242–1251 (2021).
Zhang, X., Yan, C., Malin, B. A., Patel, M. B. & Chen, Y. Predicting next-day discharge via electronic health record access logs. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.28, 2670–2680 (2021).
Bhaskhar, N., Ip, W., Chen, J. H. & Rubin, D. L. Clinical outcome prediction using observational supervision with electronic health records and audit logs. J. Biomed. Inform. 147, 104522 (2023).
Zhang, X. et al. Optimizing large language models for discharge prediction: best practices in leveraging electronic health record audit logs. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2024, 1323–1331 (2025).
Kim, S., Warner, B. C., Lew, D., Lou, S. S. & Kannampallil, T. Measuring cognitive effort using tabular transformer-based language models of electronic health record-based audit log action sequences. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.31, 2228–2235 (2024).
Rossetti, S. C. et al. Leveraging clinical expertise as a feature – not an outcome – of predictive models: evaluation of an early warning system use case. Amia. Annu. Symp. Proc. 2019, 323–332 (2020).
Duggan, M. J. et al. Clinician experiences with ambient scribe technology to assist with documentation burden and efficiency. JAMA Netw. Open 8, e2460637 (2025).
Garcia, P. et al. Artificial intelligence–generated draft replies to patient inbox messages. JAMA Netw. Open 7, e243201 (2024).
Sinsky, C. A., Rotenstein, L., Holmgren, A. J. & Apathy, N. C. The number of patient scheduled hours resulting in a 40-hour work week by physician specialty and setting: a cross-sectional study using electronic health record event log data. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 32, 235–240 (2025).
Holmgren, A. J., Sinsky, C. A., Rotenstein, L. & Apathy, N. C. National comparison of ambulatory physician electronic health record use across specialties. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 39, 2868–2870 (2024).
Rotenstein, L. et al. Virtual scribes and physician time spent on electronic health records. JAMA Netw. Open 7, e2413140 (2024).
Rotenstein, L. S. et al. Association of primary care physicians’ Electronic Inbox activity patterns with patients’ likelihood to recommend the physician. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 39, 150–152 (2024).
Li, H. et al. Quantifying EHR and policy factors associated with the gender productivity gap in ambulatory, general internal medicine. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 39, 557–565 (2024).
Jay Holmgren, A., Steitz, B., Lou, S. & Apathy, N. Using Electronic Health Record Metadata to Understand Clinician Work and Behavior. In Reengineering Clinical Workflow in the Digital and AI Era: Toward Safer and More Efficient Care (eds. Zheng, K., Westbrook, J. & Patel, V. L.) 299–317 (Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-82971-0_15. 2025).
Rotenstein, L. & Jay Holmgren, A. COVID exacerbated the gender disparity in physician electronic health record inbox burden. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 1720–1724 (2023).
Gupta, K. et al. Differences in ambulatory EHR use patterns for male vs. female physicians. Catal. Carryover 5, (2019).
Rotenstein, L. S. et al. System-level factors and time spent on electronic health records by primary care physicians. JAMA Netw. Open 6, e2344713 (2023).
Holmgren, A. J., Thombley, R., Sinsky, C. A. & Adler-Milstein, J. Changes in physician electronic health record use with the expansion of telemedicine. JAMA Intern. Med. 183, 1357–1365 (2023).
Tawfik, D. et al. Emerging domains for measuring health care delivery with electronic health record metadata. J. Med. Internet Res. 27, e64721 (2025).
Yan, C. et al. Differences in health professionals’ engagement with electronic health records based on inpatient race and ethnicity. JAMA Netw. Open 6, e2336383 (2023).
Cox, M. L. et al. Documenting or operating: where is time spent in general surgery residency?. J. Surg. Educ. 75, e97–e106 (2018).
Read-Brown, S. et al. Time requirements for electronic health record use in an Academic Ophthalmology Center. JAMA Ophthalmol. 135, 1250–1257 (2017).
Dziorny, A. C. et al. Automatic detection of front-line clinician hospital shifts: a novel use of electronic health record timestamp data. Appl. Clin. Inform. 10, 28–37 (2019).
Hribar, M. R. et al. Secondary use of EHR timestamp data: validation and application for workflow optimization. Amia. Annu. Symp. Proc. 2015, 1909–1917 (2015).
Hribar, M. R. et al. Secondary use of electronic health record data for clinical workflow analysis. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA 25, 40–46 (2018).
Sinsky, C. A. et al. Metrics for assessing physician activity using electronic health record log data. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 27, 639–643 (2020).
Avdagovska, M. et al. Exploring the impact of in basket metrics on the adoption of a new electronic health record system among specialists in a tertiary hospital in alberta: descriptive study. J. Med. Internet Res. 26, e53122 (2024).
Akbar, F. et al. Physicians’ electronic inbox work patterns and factors associated with high inbox work duration. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 28, 923–930 (2021).
Arndt, B. G. et al. Tethered to the EHR: Primary care physician workload assessment using EHR event log data and time-motion observations. Ann. Fam. Med. 15, 419–426 (2017).
Amroze, A. et al. Use of electronic health record access and audit logs to identify physician actions following noninterruptive alert opening: descriptive study. JMIR Med. Inform. 7, e12650 (2019).
Cutrona, S. L. et al. Primary care providers’ opening of time-sensitive alerts sent to commercial electronic health record inBaskets. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 32, 1210–1219 (2017).
Rumlow, Z. et al. The impact of diagnosis-specific plan templates on admission note writing time: a quality improvement initiative. J. Grad. Med. Educ. 16, 581–587 (2024).
Nguyen, O. T. et al. Primary care physicians’ electronic health record proficiency and efficiency behaviors and time interacting with electronic health records: a quantile regression analysis. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA 29, 461–471 (2021).
Chen, B. et al. Mining tasks and task characteristics from electronic health record audit logs with unsupervised machine learning. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 28, 1168–1177 (2021).
Lou, S. S., Liu, H., Harford, D., Lu, C. & Kannampallil, T. Characterizing the macrostructure of electronic health record work using raw audit logs: an unsupervised action embeddings approach. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 539–544 (2023).
Tiase, V. L., Sward, K. A. & Facelli, J. C. A scalable and extensible logical data model of electronic health Record Audit Logs for Temporal Data Mining (RNteract): model conceptualization and formulation. JMIR Nurs. 7, e55793 (2024).
Zhang, X., Zhao, Y., Yan, C., Derr, T. & Chen, Y. Inferring EHR utilization workflows through audit logs. Amia. Annu. Symp. Proc. 2022, 1247–1256 (2023).
Chen, Y., Adler-Milstein, J. & Sinsky, C. Measuring and maximizing undivided attention in the context of electronic health records. Appl. Clin. Inform. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1892-1437. (2022)
Moy, A. J. et al. Characterizing multitasking and workflow fragmentation in electronic health records among emergency department clinicians: using time-motion data to understand documentation burden. Appl. Clin. Inform. 12, 1002–1013 (2021).
Jones, B., Zhang, X., Malin, B. A. & Chen, Y. Learning tasks of pediatric providers from electronic health record audit logs. Amia. Annu. Symp. Proc. 2020, 612–618 (2021).
Li, P. et al. Measuring collaboration through concurrent electronic health record usage: network analysis study. JMIR Med. Inform. 9, e28998 (2021).
Mannering, H. et al. Assessing neonatal intensive care unit structures and outcomes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: network analysis study. J. Med. Internet Res. 23, e27261 (2021).
Chen, Y., Yan, C. & Patel, M. B. Network analysis subtleties in ICU structures and outcomes. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 202, 1606–1607 (2020).
Chen, Y., Lorenzi, N. M., Sandberg, W. S., Wolgast, K. & Malin, B. A. Identifying collaborative care teams through electronic medical record utilization patterns. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA 24, e111–e120 (2017).
Yan, C. et al. Collaboration structures in COVID-19 critical care: retrospective network analysis study. JMIR Hum. Factors 8, e25724 (2021).
Kelly Costa, D., Liu, H., Boltey, E. M. & Yakusheva, O. The structure of critical care nursing teams and patient outcomes: a network analysis. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 201, 483–485 (2020).
Kim, C. et al. Provider Networks in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Associate with Length of Stay. In 2019 IEEE 5th International Conference on Collaboration and Internet Computing (CIC) 127–134. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIC48465.2019.00024. (2019)
Apathy, N. C., Holmgren, A. J. & Cross, D. A. Physician EHR time and visit volume following adoption of team-based documentation support. JAMA Intern. Med. 184, 1212–1221 (2024).
Tang, M., Holmgren, A. J., Huckman, R. S., Pany, M. J. & McWilliams, J. M. Modalities, Mo Problems: impacts of provider modality switching in hybrid outpatient clinics. Acad. Manag. Proc. 2024, 13107 (2024).
Jiang, S. Y., Hum, R. S., Vawdrey, D. & Mamykina, L. In search of social translucence: an audit log analysis of handoff documentation views and updates. Amia. Annu. Symp. Proc. 2015, 669–676 (2015).
Lyles, C. R. et al. Using electronic health record portals to improve patient engagement: research priorities and best practices. Ann. Intern. Med. 172, S123–S129 (2020).
Zhang, X. et al. Association between patient portal engagement and weight loss outcomes in patients after bariatric surgery: longitudinal observational study using electronic health records. J. Med. Internet Res. 26, e56573 (2024).
Davis, S. E., Embí, P. J. & Matheny, M. E. Sustainable deployment of clinical prediction tools—a 360° approach to model maintenance. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 31, 1195–1198 (2024).
Guo, L. L. et al. EHR foundation models improve robustness in the presence of temporal distribution shift. Sci. Rep. 13, 3767 (2023).
Brown, K. E. et al. Large language models are less effective at clinical prediction tasks than locally trained machine learning models. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. ocaf038. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf038. (2025)
Wornow, M. et al. The shaky foundations of large language models and foundation models for electronic health records. Npj Digit. Med. 6, 1–10 (2023).
Moor, M. et al. Foundation models for generalist medical artificial intelligence. Nature 616, 259–265 (2023).
Zhou, Y. et al. A foundation model for generalizable disease detection from retinal images. Nature 622, 156–163 (2023).
Guo, L. L. et al. A multi-center study on the adaptability of a shared foundation model for electronic health records. Npj Digit. Med. 7, 1–9 (2024).
Peng, C. et al. A study of generative large language model for medical research and healthcare. NPJ Digit. Med. 6, 210 (2023).
Krishnan, R., Rajpurkar, P. & Topol, E. J. Self-supervised learning in medicine and healthcare. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 6, 1346–1352 (2022).
Katsoulakis, E. et al. Digital twins for health: a scoping review. NPJ Digit. Med. 7, 77 (2024).
Embí, P. J., Rhew, D. C., Peterson, E. D. & Pencina, M. J. Launching the Trustworthy and Responsible AI Network (TRAIN): A Consortium to Facilitate Safe and Effective AI Adoption. JAMA https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.1331. (2025)
Maddox, T. M. et al. Generative AI in Medicine — Evaluating Progress and Challenges. N. Engl. J. Med. 0
You, J. G., Hernandez-Boussard, T., Pfeffer, M. A., Landman, A. & Mishuris, R. G. Clinical trials informed framework for real world clinical implementation and deployment of artificial intelligence applications. Npj Digit. Med. 8, 1–5 (2025).
McCoy, A. B. et al. Clinician collaboration to improve clinical decision support: the Clickbusters initiative. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 29, 1050–1059 (2022).
Baxter, S. L., Apathy, N. C., Cross, D. A., Sinsky, C. & Hribar, M. R. Measures of electronic health record use in outpatient settings across vendors. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA 28, 955–959 (2021).
Cohen, G. R., Boi, J., Johnson, C., Brown, L. & Patel, V. Measuring time clinicians spend using EHRs in the inpatient setting: a national, mixed-methods study. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. JAMIA 28, 1676–1682 (2021).
Wu, D. T. Y. et al. Using EHR audit trail logs to analyze clinical workflow: A case study from community-based ambulatory clinics. Amia. Annu. Symp. Proc. 2017, 1820–1827 (2018).
Sinsky, C. et al. Allocation of physician time in ambulatory practice: a time and motion study in 4 specialties. Ann. Intern. Med. 165, 753–760 (2016).
Were, M. C. et al. Role and use of race in artificial intelligence and machine learning models related to health. J. Med. Internet Res. 27, e73996 (2025).
Rajkomar, A. et al. Scalable and accurate deep learning with electronic health records. Npj Digit. Med. 1, 1–10 (2018).
Grabowska, M. E. et al. Developing and evaluating pediatric phecodes (Peds-Phecodes) for high-throughput phenotyping using electronic health records. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 31, 386–395 (2024).
Hripcsak, G. & Albers, D. J. Next-generation phenotyping of electronic health records. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 20, 117–121 (2013).
Yasrebi-de Kom, I. A. R. et al. Electronic health record-based prediction models for in-hospital adverse drug event diagnosis or prognosis: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 30, 978–988 (2023).
Dos Santos, F. C. et al. The effect of a combined mHealth and community health worker intervention on HIV self-management. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 32, 510–517 (2025).
Liu, S. et al. Leveraging explainable artificial intelligence to optimize clinical decision support. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 31, 968–974 (2024).
Ozkaynak, M., Ponnala, S. & Werner, N. E. Patient-Oriented Workflow Approach. In Reengineering Clinical Workflow in the Digital and AI Era: Toward Safer and More Efficient Care (eds. Zheng, K., Westbrook, J. & Patel, V. L.) 213–229 (Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-82971-0_11. 2025).
Sánchez-Salmerón, R. et al. Machine learning methods applied to triage in emergency services: A systematic review. Int. Emerg. Nurs. 60, 101109 (2022).
AI Research
As they face conflicting messages about AI, some advice for educators on how to use it responsibly
When it comes to the rapid integration of artificial intelligence into K-12 classrooms, educators are being pulled in two very different directions.
One prevailing media narrative stokes such profound fears about the emerging strengths of artificial intelligence that it could lead one to believe it will soon be “game over” for everything we know about good teaching. At the same time, a sweeping executive order from the White House and tech-forward education policymakers paint AI as “game on” for designing the educational system of the future.
I work closely with educators across the country, and as I’ve discussed AI with many of them this spring and summer, I’ve sensed a classic “approach-avoidance” dilemma — an emotional stalemate in which they’re encouraged to run toward AI’s exciting new capabilities while also made very aware of its risks.
Even as educators are optimistic about AI’s potential, they are cautious and sometimes resistant to it. These conflicting urges to approach and avoid can be paralyzing.
Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.
What should responsible educators do? As a learning scientist who has been involved in AI since the 1980s and who conducts nationally funded research on issues related to reading, math and science, I have some ideas.
First, it is essential to keep teaching students core subject matter — and to do that well. Research tells us that students cannot learn critical thinking or deep reasoning in the abstract. They have to reason and critique on the basis of deep understanding of meaningful, important content. Don’t be fooled, for example, by the notion that because AI can do math, we shouldn’t teach math anymore.
We teach students mathematics, reading, science, literature and all the core subjects not only so that they will be well equipped to get a job, but because these are among the greatest, most general and most enduring human accomplishments.
You should use AI when it deepens learning of the instructional core, but you should also ignore AI when it’s a distraction from that core.
Second, don’t limit your view of AI to a focus on either teacher productivity or student answer-getting.
Instead, focus on your school’s “portrait of a graduate” — highlighting skills like collaboration, communication and self-awareness as key attributes that we want to cultivate in students.
Much of what we know in the learning sciences can be brought to life when educators focus on those attributes, and AI holds tremendous potential to enrich those essential skills. Imagine using AI not to deliver ready-made answers, but to help students ask better, more meaningful questions — ones that are both intellectually rigorous and personally relevant.
AI can also support student teams by deepening their collaborative efforts — encouraging the active, social dimensions of learning. And rather than replacing human insight, AI can offer targeted feedback that fuels deeper problem-solving and reflection.
When used thoughtfully, AI becomes a catalyst — not a crutch — for developing the kinds of skills that matter most in today’s world.
In short, keep your focus on great teaching and learning. Ask yourself: How can AI help my students think more deeply, work together more effectively and stay more engaged in their learning?
Related: PROOF POINTS: Teens are looking to AI for information and answers, two surveys show
Third, seek out AI tools and applications that are not just incremental improvements, but let you create teaching and learning opportunities that were impossible to deliver before. And at the same time, look for education technologies that are committed to managing risks around student privacy, inappropriate or wrong content and data security.
Such opportunities for a “responsible breakthrough” will be a bit harder to find in the chaotic marketplace of AI in education, but they are there and worth pursuing. Here’s a hint: They don’t look like popular chatbots, and they may arise not from the largest commercial vendors but from research projects and small startups.
For instance, some educators are exploring screen-free AI tools designed to support early readers in real-time as they work through physical books of their choice. One such tool uses a hand-held pointer with a camera, a tiny computer and an audio speaker — not to provide answers, but to guide students as they sound out words, build comprehension and engage more deeply with the text.
I am reminded: Strong content remains central to learning, and AI, when thoughtfully applied, can enhance — not replace — the interactions between young readers and meaningful texts without introducing new safety concerns.
Thus, thoughtful educators should continue to prioritize core proficiencies like reading, math, science and writing — and using AI only when it helps to develop the skills and abilities prioritized in their desired portrait of a graduate. By adopting ed-tech tools that are focused on novel learning experiences and committed to student safety, educators will lead us to a responsible future for AI in education.
Jeremy Roschelle is the executive director of Digital Promise, a global nonprofit working to expand opportunity for every learner.
Contact the opinion editor at opinion@hechingerreport.org.
This story about AI in the classroom was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter.
AI Research
Now Artificial Intelligence (AI) for smarter prison surveillance in West Bengal – The CSR Journal
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman walks on the day of a meeting of the White House Task Force on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Education in the East Room at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 4, 2025.
Brian Snyder | Reuters
OpenAI has sharply raised its projected cash burn through 2029 to $115 billion as it ramps up spending to power the artificial intelligence behind its popular ChatGPT chatbot, The Information reported on Friday.
The new forecast is $80 billion higher than the company previously expected, the news outlet said, without citing a source for the report.
OpenAI, which has become one of the world’s biggest renters of cloud servers, projects it will burn more than $8 billion this year, some $1.5 billion higher than its projection from earlier this year, the report said.
The company did not immediately respond to Reuters request for comment.
To control its soaring costs, OpenAI will seek to develop its own data center server chips and facilities to power its technology, The Information said.
OpenAI is set to produce its first artificial intelligence chip next year in partnership with U.S. semiconductor giant Broadcom, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, saying OpenAI plans to use the chip internally rather than make it available to customers.
The company deepened its tie-up with Oracle in July with a planned 4.5-gigawatts of data center capacity, building on its Stargate initiative, a project of up to $500 billion and 10 gigawatts that includes Japanese technology investor SoftBank. OpenAI has also added Alphabet’s Google Cloud among its suppliers for computing capacity.
The company’s cash burn will more than double to over $17 billion next year, $10 billion higher than OpenAI’s earlier projection, with a burn of $35 billion in 2027 and $45 billion in 2028, The Information said.
-
Business1 week agoThe Guardian view on Trump and the Fed: independence is no substitute for accountability | Editorial
-
Tools & Platforms4 weeks ago
Building Trust in Military AI Starts with Opening the Black Box – War on the Rocks
-
Ethics & Policy1 month agoSDAIA Supports Saudi Arabia’s Leadership in Shaping Global AI Ethics, Policy, and Research – وكالة الأنباء السعودية
-
Events & Conferences4 months agoJourney to 1000 models: Scaling Instagram’s recommendation system
-
Jobs & Careers2 months agoMumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Education2 months agoVEX Robotics launches AI-powered classroom robotics system
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoHappy 4th of July! 🎆 Made with Veo 3 in Gemini
-
Education2 months agoMacron says UK and France have duty to tackle illegal migration ‘with humanity, solidarity and firmness’ – UK politics live | Politics
-
Funding & Business2 months agoKayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months agoOpenAI 🤝 @teamganassi