Connect with us

AI Insights

Minister tells UK’s Turing AI institute to focus on defence

Published

on


Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle has written to the UK’s national institute for artificial intelligence (AI) to tell its bosses to refocus on defence and security.

In a letter, Kyle said boosting the UK’s AI capabilities was “critical” to national security and should be at the core of the Alan Turing Institute’s activities.

Kyle suggested the institute should overhaul its leadership team to reflect its “renewed purpose”.

The cabinet minister said further government investment in the institute would depend on the “delivery of the vision” he had outlined in the letter.

A spokesperson for the Alan Turing Institute said it welcomed “the recognition of our critical role and will continue to work closely with the government to support its priorities”.

“The Turing is focussing on high-impact missions that support the UK’s sovereign AI capabilities, including in defence and national security,” the spokesperson said.

“We share the government’s vision of AI transforming the UK for the better.”

The letter comes after Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer committed to a Nato alliance target of increasing UK defence spending to 5% of national income by 2035 and invest more in military uses of AI technology.

A recent government review of UK defence said “an immediate priority for force transformation should be a shift towards greater use of autonomy and artificial intelligence”.

Set up under Prime Minister David Cameron’s government as the National Institute for Data Science in 2015, the institute added AI to its remit two years later.

It receives public funding and was given a grant of £100m by the previous Conservative government last year.

The Turing institute’s work has focused on AI and data science research in three main areas – environmental sustainability, health and national security.

Lately, the institute has focused more on responsible AI and ethics, and one of its recent reports was on the increasing use of the tech by romance scammers.

But Kyle’s letter suggests the government wants the Turing institute to make defence its main priority, which would be a significant pivot for the organisation.

“There is an opportunity for the ATI to seize this moment,” Kyle wrote in the letter to the institute’s chairman, Dr Douglas Gurr.

“I believe the institute should build on its existing strengths, and reform itself further to prioritise its defence, national security and sovereign capabilities.”

It’s been a turbulent few months for the institute, which finds itself in survival mode in 2025.

A review last year by UK Research and Innovation, the government funding body, found “a clear need for the governance and leadership structure of the Institute to evolve”.

At the end of 2024, 93 members of staff signed a letter expressing lack of confidence in its leadership team.

In March, Jean Innes, who was appointed chief executive in July 2023, said the Turing needed to modernise and focus on AI projects, in an interview with the Financial Times.

She said “a big strategic shift to a much more focused agenda on a small number of problems that have an impact in the real world”.

In April, Chief Scientist Mark Girolami said in an interview the organisation would be taking forward just 22 projects out of a portfolio of 104.

Kyle’s letter said the institute “should continue to receive the funding needed to implement reforms and deliver Turing 2.0”.

But he said there could be a review of the ATI’s “longer-term funding arrangement” next year.

The use of AI in defence is as powerful as it is controversial.

Google’s parent company Alphabet faced criticism earlier this year for removing a self-imposed ban on developing AI weapons.

Meanwhile, the British military and other forces are already investing in AI-enabled tools.

The government’s defence review said AI technologies “would provide greater accuracy, lethality, and cheaper capabilities”.

The review said “uncrewed and autonomous systems” could be used within the UK’s conventional forces within the next five years.

In one example, the review said the Royal Navy could use “acoustic detection systems powered by artificial intelligence” to monitor the “growing underwater threat from a modernising Russian submarine force”.

The tech firm Palantir has provided data operations software to the UK’s armed forces.

Louis Mosley, the head of Palantir UK, told the BBC that shift the institute’s focus to AI defence technologies was a good idea.

He said: “Right now we face a daunting combination of darkening geopolitics and technological revolution – with the world becoming a more dangerous place right at the moment when artificial intelligence is changing the face of war and deterrence.

“What that means in practice is that we are now in an AI arms race against our adversaries.

“And the government is right that we need to put all the resources we have into staying ahead – because that is our best path to preserving peace.”

Additional reporting by Chris Vallance, senior technology reporter



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

AI Insights

Do AI systems socially interact the same way as living beings?

Published

on


Key takeaways

  • A new study that compares biological brains with artificial intelligence systems analyzed the neural network patterns that emerged during social and non-social tasks in mice and programmed artificial intelligence agents.
  • UCLA researchers identified high-dimensional “shared” and “unique” neural subspaces when mice interact socially, as well as when AI agents engaged in social behaviors.
  • Findings could help advance understanding of human social disorders and develop AI that can understand and engage in social interactions.

As AI systems are increasingly integrated into from virtual assistants and customer service agents to counseling and AI companions, an understanding of social neural dynamics is essential for both scientific and technological progress. A new study from UCLA researchers shows biological brains and AI systems develop remarkably similar neural patterns during social interaction.

The study, recently published in the journal Nature, reveals that when mice interact socially, specific brain cell types create synchronize in “shared neural spaces,” and artificial intelligence agents develop analogous patterns when engaging in social behaviors.     

The new research represents a striking convergence of neuroscience and artificial intelligence, two of today’s most rapidly advancing fields. By directly comparing how biological brains and AI systems process social information, scientists can now better understand fundamental principles that govern social cognition across different types of intelligent systems. The findings could advance understanding of social disorders like autism while simultaneously informing the development of more sophisticated, socially  aware AI systems.  

This work was supported in part by , the National Science Foundation, the Packard Foundation, Vallee Foundation, Mallinckrodt Foundation and the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation.

Examining AI agents’ social behavior

A multidisciplinary team from UCLA’s departments of neurobiology, biological chemistry, bioengineering, electrical and computer engineering, and computer science across the David Geffen School of Medicine and UCLA Samueli School of Engineering used advanced brain imaging techniques to record activity from molecularly defined neurons in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex of mice during social interactions. The researchers developed a novel computational framework to identify high-dimensional “shared” and “unique” neural subspaces across interacting individuals. The team then trained artificial intelligence agents to interact socially and applied the same analytical framework to examine neural network patterns in AI systems that emerged during social versus non-social tasks.

The research revealed striking parallels between biological and artificial systems during social interaction. In both mice and AI systems, neural activity could be partitioned into two distinct components: a “shared neural subspace” containing synchronized patterns between interacting entities, and a “unique neural subspace” containing activity specific to each individual.

Remarkably, GABAergic neurons — inhibitory brain cells that regulate neural activity —showed significantly larger shared neural spaces compared with glutamatergic neurons, which are the brain’s primary excitatory cells. This represents the first investigation of inter-brain neural dynamics in molecularly defined cell types, revealing previously unknown differences in how specific neuron types contribute to social synchronization.

When the same analytical framework was applied to AI agents, shared neural dynamics emerged as the artificial systems developed social interaction capabilities. Most importantly, when researchers selectively disrupted these shared neural components in artificial systems, social behaviors were substantially reduced, providing the direct evidence that synchronized neural patterns causally drive social interactions.

The study also revealed that shared neural dynamics don’t simply reflect coordinated behaviors between individuals, but emerge from representations of each other’s unique behavioral actions during social interaction.

“This discovery fundamentally changes how we think about social behavior across all intelligent systems,” said Weizhe Hong, professor of neurobiology, biological chemistry and bioengineering at UCLA and lead author of the new work. “We’ve shown for the first time that the neural mechanisms driving social interaction are remarkably similar between biological brains and artificial intelligence systems. This suggests we’ve identified a fundamental principle of how any intelligent system — whether biological or artificial — processes social information. The implications are significant for both understanding human social disorders and developing AI that can truly understand and engage in social interactions.”

Continuing research for treating social disorders and training AI

The research team plans to further investigate shared neural dynamics in different and potentially more complex social interactions. They also aim to explore how disruptions in shared neural space might contribute to social disorders and whether therapeutic interventions could restore healthy patterns of inter-brain synchronization. The artificial intelligence framework may serve as a platform for testing hypotheses about social neural mechanisms that are difficult to examine directly in biological systems. They also aim to develop methods to train socially intelligent AI.

The study was led by UCLA’s Hong and Jonathan Kao, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering. Co-first authors Xingjian Zhang and Nguyen Phi, along with collaborators Qin Li, Ryan Gorzek, Niklas Zwingenberger, Shan Huang, John Zhou, Lyle Kingsbury, Tara Raam, Ye Emily Wu and Don Wei contributed to the research.



Source link

Continue Reading

AI Insights

I tried recreating memories with Veo 3 and it went better than I thought, with one big exception

Published

on


If someone offers to make an AI video recreation of your wedding, just say no. This is the tough lesson I learned when I started trying to recreate memories with Google’s Gemini Veo model. What started off as a fun exercise ended in disgust.

I grew up in the era before digital capture. We took photos and videos, but most were squirreled away in boxes that we only dragged out for special occasions. Things like the birth of my children and their earliest years were caught on film and 8mm videotape.



Source link

Continue Reading

AI Insights

That’s Our Show

Published

on


July 07, 2025

This is the last episode of the most meaningful project we’ve ever been part of.

The Amys couldn’t imagine signing off without telling you why the podcast is ending, reminiscing with founding producer Amanda Kersey, and fitting in two final Ask the Amys questions. HBR’s Maureen Hoch is here too, to tell the origin story of the show—because it was her idea, and a good one, right?

Saying goodbye to all the women who’ve listened since 2018 is gut-wrenching. If the podcast made a difference in your life, please bring us to tears/make us smile with an email: womenatwork@hbr.org.

If and when you do that, you’ll receive an auto reply that includes a list of episodes organized by topic. Hopefully that will direct you to perspectives and advice that’ll help you make sense of your experiences, aim high, go after what you need, get through tough times, and take care of yourself. That’s the sort of insight and support we’ve spent the past eight years aiming to give this audience, and you all have in turn given so much back—to the Women at Work team and to one another.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending