To make useful wearable robotic devices that can help stroke patients or people with amputated limbs, the computer brains driving the systems must be trained. That takes time and money — lots of time and money. And researchers need specially equipped labs to collect mountains of human data for training.

Even when engineers have a working device and brain, called a controller, changes and improvements to the exoskeleton system typically mean data collection and training start all over again. The process is expensive and makes bringing fully functional exoskeletons or robotic limbs into the real world largely impractical.

Not anymore, thanks to Georgia Tech engineers and computer scientists.

They’ve created an artificial intelligence tool that can turn huge amounts of existing data on how people move into functional exoskeleton controllers. No data collection, retraining, and hours upon hours of additional lab time required for each specific device.

Their approach has produced an exoskeleton brain capable of offering meaningful assistance across a huge range of hip and knee movements that works as well as the best controllers currently available. Their worked was published Nov. 19 in Science Robotics.

Full details on the College of Engineering website.

Viral videos abound with humanoid robots performing amazing feats of acrobatics and dance but finding videos of a humanoid robot performing a common household task or traversing a new multi-terrain environment easily, and without human control, are much rarer. This is because training humanoid robots to perform these seemingly simple functions involves the need for simulation training data that lack the complex dynamics and degrees of freedom of motion that are inherent in humanoid robots. 

To achieve better training outcomes with faster deployment results, Fukang Liu and Feiyang Wu, graduate students under Professor Ye Zhao from the Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering and faculty member of the Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Machines, have published a duo of papers in IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters. This is a collaborative work with three other IRIM affiliated faculties, Profs. Danfei Xu, Yue Chen, and Sehoon Ha, as well as Prof. Anqi Wu from School of Computational Science and Engineering.

To develop more reliable motion learning for humanoid robots and enable humanoid robots to perform complex whole-body movements in the real world, Fukang led a team and developed Opt2Skill, a hybrid robot learning framework that combines model-based trajectory optimization with reinforcement learning.  Their framework integrates dynamics and contacts into the trajectory planning process and generates high-quality, dynamically feasible datasets, which result in more reliable motion learning for humanoid robots and improved position tracking and task success rates. This approach shows a promising way to augment the performance and generalization of humanoid RL policies using dynamically feasible motion datasets. Incorporating torque data also improved motion stability and force tracking in contact-rich scenarios, demonstrating that torque information plays a key role in learning physically consistent and contact-rich humanoid behaviors.

While other datasets, such as inverse kinematics or human demonstrations, are valuable, they don’t always capture the dynamics needed for reliable whole-body humanoid control.” said by Fukang Liu. “With our Opt2Skill framework, we combine trajectory optimization with reinforcement learning to generate and leverage high-quality, dynamically feasible motion data. This integrated approach gives robots a richer and more physically grounded training process, enabling them to learn these complex tasks more reliably and safely for real-world deployment. - Fukang Liu

In another line of humanoid research, Feiyang established a one-stage training framework that allows humanoid robots to learn locomotion more efficiently and with greater environmental adaptability. Their framework, Learn-to-Teach (L2T), unlike traditional two-stage “teacher-student” approaches, which first train an expert in simulation and then retrain a limited-perception student, teaches both simultaneously, sharing knowledge and experiences in real time. The result of this two-way training is a 50% reduction in training data and time, while maintaining or surpassing state-of-the-art performance in humanoid locomotion. The lightweight policy learned through this process enables the lab’s humanoid robot to traverse more than a dozen real-world terrains—grass, gravel, sand, stairs, and slopes—without retraining or depth sensors.

By training an expert and a deployable controller together, we can turn rich simulation feedback into a lightweight policy that runs on real hardware, letting our humanoid adapt to uneven, unstructured terrain with far less data and hand-tuning than traditional methods. - Feiyang Wu

By the application of these training processes, the team hopes to speed the development of deployable humanoid robots for home use, manufacturing, defense, and search and rescue assistance in dangerous environments. These methods also support advances in embodied intelligence, enabling robots to learn richer, more context-aware behaviors.Additionally, the training data process can be applied to research to improve the functionality and adaptability of human assistive devices for medical and therapeutic uses.

As humanoid robots move from controlled labs into messy, unpredictable real-world environments, the key is developing embodied intelligence—the ability for robots to sense, adapt, and act through their physical bodies,” said Professor Ye Zhao. “The innovations from our students push us closer to robots that can learn robust skills, navigate diverse terrains, and ultimately operate safely and reliably alongside people. - Prof. Ye Zhao

Author - Christa M. Ernst

Citations

Liu F, Gu Z, Cai Y, Zhou Z, Jung H, Jang J, Zhao S, Ha S, Chen Y, Xu D, Zhao Y. Opt2skill: Imitating dynamically-feasible whole-body trajectories for versatile humanoid loco-manipulation. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters. 2025 Oct 13.

Wu F, Nal X, Jang J, Zhu W, Gu Z, Wu A, Zhao Y. Learn to teach: Sample-efficient privileged learning for humanoid locomotion over real-world uneven terrain. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters. 2025 Jul 23.
 

 

Research Communications Program Manager

 

Klaus Advance Computing Building 1120E | 266 Ferst Drive | Atlanta GA | 30332

The Georgia Tech Library is proud to show a new piece from Hyojin Kwon and Nix Liu Xin on the Media Bridge, Synthetic Ecologies: AI-Translated Matter in Architectural Media.

The four-minute piece, which went live in November, is playing every hour at the ten-minute mark on Media Bridge, located between Price Gilbert and Crosland Tower.

 

About Synthetic Ecologies: AI-Translated Matter in Architectural Media

Rather than accelerating images, Synthetic Ecologies asks “how matter thinks.” New Materialism treats matter as an active partner; design emerges where human intention intra-acts with things, datasets, models, and light. Authorship becomes orchestration, and every dataset a canon—a politics of selection. Method, therefore, is ethics.

The project authors a white model first, fixing space, camera, light, and motion as temporal logic. AI then enters as a translator, moving on rails of depth/normal/segmentation with flow consistency. The surface reveals signs of behavior—gloss, scattering, porosity, accretion—rather than mere style. We publish provenance—sources and biases, node graphs and parameters, timelines and versions—so choices are traceable and contestable, transferable to learning, practice, and public decision.

From plastic toward a synthetic ecology, the work declares architecture thinking with media. AI is not authority but a transparent amplifier; authorship is not surrendered.

Spanning the Library, the Media Bridge is a civic threshold of study and routine, a common ceiling shared day and night. Installed overhead, the flow of plastics becomes a sky that prompts daily audiences to reflect on circulation, responsibility, and bias. Open provenance turns the piece into a public manifesto, linking campus AI literacy and circularity agendas to civic practice. The work does more than show images; it proposes a public curriculum where data and decisions, materials and culture, negotiate in view of the community.

 

Artist Bios

Hyojin Kwon is an Assistant Professor in the School of Architecture at the Georgia Institute of Technology and cofounder of Pre- and Post-, a research-driven design practice based in Atlanta and Boston. Her work explores how digital media — including animation, simulation, and AI-assisted image workflows — can function as both generative and critical tools within architectural design. Situated within a post digital framework, her recent projects investigate material agency and synthetic ecologies, often translating computational processes into civic installations and experimental representations. Her work has been exhibited internationally, including at the Museum of Brisbane, Tokyo Designers Week, Seoul Foundation for Arts and Culture, and Atlanta Contemporary, and supported by institutions such as MacDowell, Art Omi, and Autodesk.

Nix Liu Xin is a spatial computing artist and director, Harvard graduate, and the founder & CEO of OI (Onceness Intelligence), an experiential-AI startup. He envisions a future where 4D–AI interfaces enable everyone to record life moments, relive memories, and design immersive spatial experiences through intelligent 4D media.

He was named to the AACYF 30 Under 30 and has received accolades such as the Harvard Design Studies Domain Award, the CGarchitect 3D Awards, and the MIT AI Film Hack Award for Best Picture. 

Additionally, Nix was featured as an artist at the Lianzhou Photography Biennale. He also co-founded the HarvardXR Conference and the Creative.Tech Community.

“How will AI kill Creature?”
 

That was the question posed to Scheller College of Business Evening MBA students Katie Bowen (’25), Ellie Cobb (’26), and Christopher Jones (’26) in a marketing practicum course that paired them with Creature, a brand, product, and marketing transformation studio.
 

For 10 weeks, the students worked as consultants in a project that challenged them to rethink the role of artificial intelligence in creative industries. Course instructor Jarrett Oakley, director of Marketing at TOTO USA, guided the student project as they developed strategies to help Creature navigate the evolving landscape of AI-driven marketing.
 

Business School Meets Real Business
 

“Nothing accelerates the value of a business school education like applying it in real time to real businesses,” Oakley said. “This course mirrored a consulting engagement, turning classroom learning into actionable expertise through direct collaboration with local firms. It was designed to spark creative thinking, build confidence, and bridge theory with practice.”
 

What began as a traditional strategic analysis quickly evolved into a forward-looking exploration of AI’s impact on branding, user experience, and performance creative. “Our team realized early on that AI wasn’t a threat but a powerful tool,” the students shared. “We found that AI’s real impact lies not in replacing creativity, but in reshaping expectations, accelerating timelines, and redefining performance standards. It also gives forward-thinking agencies like Creature the opportunity to guide clients still catching up to the AI curve.”
 

Creature’s founders, Margaret Strickland and Matt Berberian, welcomed the collaboration. “We solve creative challenges across brand, product, and performance,” said Strickland. “AI is transforming each of these areas. The students helped us see how to stay ahead of the curve.”
 

Students applied frameworks like SWOT, Porter’s Five Forces, and the G-STIC model to diagnose challenges and develop actionable strategies. Weekly meetings with Creature allowed for iterative feedback and refinement.
 

One of the team’s most surprising insights came from primary research: many agencies hesitate to disclose their use of AI, fearing clients will demand lower prices. “We recommended Creature define and share their AI philosophy,” said the students. “Clients want transparency and innovation, and they’ll choose partners who embrace AI, not hide from it.”
 

Creature took the advice to heart. Since the project concluded, the firm has launched a new AI consulting offering, SNSE by Creature, and implemented automation across operations, resulting in a 21% boost in efficiency. They’ve also adopted an AI manifesto to guide future initiatives.
 

A Transformative Student Experience
 

Katie Bowen, Evening MBA '25
“This project let us apply MBA concepts to a real-world business challenge. We dove into Creature’s business and tailored our analysis to their needs. It pushed us to think critically about how companies stay competitive when AI tools are widely accessible. Using strategy, innovation, and marketing frameworks, we bridged theory and practice to deliver forward-looking recommendations.”
 

Ellie Cobb, Evening MBA ‘26
“This project strengthened my ability to use AI effectively in both personal and professional contexts—not just knowing how to use it, but when not to. Exploring such a fast-evolving topic made me more agile and open-minded, ready to follow where research and emerging trends lead.”
 

Christopher Jones, Evening MBA ‘26
“The Marketing Practicum with Creature was an eye-opening experience that deepened my understanding of AI’s impact on business. It sharpened my critical thinking as I navigated conflicting information about AI, and gave me practical insight into business strategy, from integrating new technology to managing innovation and diversifying product offerings.”
 

Education With Impact
 

Oakley believes the practicum will have lasting impact. “These students now understand how traditional marketing strategy integrates with emerging AI capabilities. They’re ready to lead in a rapidly evolving industry.”
 

As AI continues to reshape marketing, partnerships like the one between Scheller and Creature demonstrate the power of collaboration, innovation, and education in preparing future leaders for whatever comes next.

By Chris Gaffney, Managing Director, Georgia Tech Supply Chain and Logistics Institute | Supply Chain Advisor | Former Executive at Frito-Lay, AJC International, and Coca-Cola

In today's supply chain environment, the pace and scale of change are no longer episodic — they are constant. Network redesigns, automation investments, digital transformation, new product and business models, shifting customer expectations, cost pressure, and talent dynamics all converge at once. 

Here is the most direct insight I can offer — and one I have come to believe deeply through experience:

“If you want your organization, automation, or Digital/AI investments to pay off, change management is not optional. It is the highest-leverage point of failure or success.”

Despite decades of innovation, the uncomfortable truth is that most large-scale supply chain transformations still fall short. According to a recent Bain survey, 70% of major transformations fail to meet their objectives — a number that has remained stubbornly consistent over time. The reasons vary, but the most common root cause is not the technology — it’s the people side of the change.

This is why change management must be treated as a leadership discipline at the center of supply chain excellence. And it is why this topic continues to rise in conversations I have with industry partners, consulting clients, and the students entering the field. 

Where I First Learned the Power of Change Leadership 

This isn’t an abstract subject for me — it is something I experienced in my career. When I worked at The Coca-Cola Company, the business went through multiple waves of transformation over a 10–15 year period: acquisitions and integrations, major information-system deployments, shifts in the beverage portfolio, and cultural changes as carbonated soft drink growth slowed.

As the company diversified into new beverage categories, the economics shifted and productivity expectations rose. The technical challenges were significant, but what stood out to me was this:

“The difference between transformations that succeeded and those that stalled was how effectively people were brought into the change — how well they understood it, aligned with it, and adapted to it.”

Strong technical designs struggled if people weren’t aligned. But “good enough” solutions thrived when the organization invested in communication, role clarity, and capability-building.

Later in my career, during my time as President of Coca-Cola Supply, we made one of the most durable leadership investments I’ve ever seen: certifying the entire organization in the Coca-Cola change model. Many of those leaders still apply the same principles today — 15 to 20 years later — because the skills became part of how they led, not something they had to remember.

That experience shaped how I see change leadership today.

What Today’s Supply Chain Landscape Is Telling Us

Across industries — and especially across complex supply chains — the same patterns repeat.

WMS and automation vendors now budget change management into implementation plans. They’ve learned that even well-designed systems fail if associates fear job loss or can’t visualize the “after” state of their work.

Consulting firms see adoption challenges as the biggest barrier to client success. A firm we taught recently added change management to their executive education curriculum because their teams saw change gaps in almost every engagement. Months later, that module remains the highest-value part of the course.

Network design firms observe cultural resistance across geographies. Even optimized solutions don’t transfer cleanly from one region to another. Culture, norms, and expectations matter — often more than the math.

Robotics and automation projects fail for people reasons, not engineering reasons. At the recent RoboGeorgia Forum, the keynote emphasized that a surprising percentage of large automation investments fail because of unclear roles, resistance, weak communication, and fear — not limitations in the technology.

AI adoption mirrors these challenges. According to a recent McKinsey Global AI survey, only one-third say they are scaling AI enterprise-wide, and just 39% report measurable EBIT impact. The survey reinforces that even when technology works, the real barrier is organizational readiness — leadership alignment, redesigned processes, clear governance, and a reskilled workforce — not model performance.

There is also strong evidence showing that when change leadership is done well, project outcomes dramatically improve. In a benchmarking study of more than 2,600 initiatives, Prosci found that 88% of projects with excellent change management met or exceeded their objectives, compared with only 13% of those with poor change management. Projects with excellent change management were also 5 times more likely to stay on or ahead of schedule and 1.5 times more likely to stay on or under budget. These findings reinforce a simple truth: effective change leadership is directly correlated with higher performance, better adoption, and faster time to value.

Put simply:

“Technical innovation moves faster than organizational adoption — and the gap costs time, money, and credibility.”

Why We Still Struggle With Change, Even Though We “Know Better”

Here's where a critical-thinking lens helps:

• We have 50 years of research on how change works.
• We have widely used models.
• We have entire consulting practices devoted to change.
• And most leaders have lived through multiple transformations.

So why does the gap persist?

Leaders confuse technical readiness with organizational readiness. A strong design doesn’t guarantee strong adoption.

Self-interest is underestimated. Logic rarely moves people. Personal impact does.

Urgency pressures force shortcuts. Go-live dates push leaders to cut corners on communication, training, and role clarity — the exact things that prevent failure.

Leaders assume operations teams “will adjust.” This is the most common miscalculation. Operational excellence does not automatically translate to change readiness.

These points explain the paradox: even experienced leaders underestimate the work of leading people through change. 

The Two Leading Change Management Models: Kotter and ADKAR

Dozens of frameworks exist, but two stand clearly above the rest in terms of use, validation, and practical effectiveness in modern supply chain and technology environments: Kotter’s 8-Step Process and the Prosci ADKAR model.

Frameworks like Kotter and ADKAR are powerful, but they don't replace judgment. Real change leadership requires applying these tools with situational awareness, not following them mechanically.

Kotter’s 8 Steps focus on organization-wide transformation:

1. Create a sense of urgency: Show why change is necessary and the potential consequences of not changing.
2. Build a guiding coalition: Assemble a team with enough power and influence to lead the change effort and encourage teamwork.
3. Form a strategic vision: Develop a clear vision for the future and strategies to achieve it, making it clear how things will be different.
4. Communicate the change vision: Widely and often communicate the vision to get buy-in and inspire action from others.
5. Empower broad-based action: Remove obstacles and barriers, such as outdated processes or resistant individuals, to enable employees to act on the vision.
6. Generate short-term wins: Plan for and celebrate early successes to build momentum and prove that progress is being made.
7. Consolidate gains and build on the change: Use the credibility from initial wins to tackle larger, more complex changes, and don't declare victory too early.
8. Anchor new approaches in the culture: Reinforce the new behaviors, processes, and practices until they become a permanent part of the organization's culture. 

ADKAR focuses on individual adoption:

• Awareness  – Of the need for change
• Desire – To Participate and support the change
• Knowledge  – On how to change
• Ability  – To implement required skills and behaviors
• Reinforcement – To sustain the change

The synthesis: 
Kotter shows leaders how to orchestrate change. 
ADKAR shows leaders how to scale it through people. 
Supply chain leaders benefit from understanding both.

What Supply Chain Leaders Can Do on Monday

A practical call to action for building your own change leadership muscle:

1. Run a 15-minute clarity check with your team.

Ask:

• What change is coming?
• Why is it happening?
• Who will feel it most?
• What might they fear losing?

2. Identify the two individuals most affected by the change.

Ask:

• What will their new day actually look like?
• What one action can support them?

3. Choose one communication habit and make it consistent.

Options include:

• A Friday “What’s coming next” email
• A weekly dashboard
• A Monday 10-minute huddle

4. Map one current project against Kotter or ADKAR.

• Pick a project already underway.
• Identify the missing step.
• Strengthen it.

5. Model the behaviors you want to see.

• Be the first adopter.
• Be transparent.
• Be steady.

A Personal Reflection (Full Circle)

Looking back at my time at Coca-Cola Supply, the decision to certify the entire organization in change leadership stands out as one of the smartest investments we made. It gave us a shared language and a shared discipline for supporting people through transformation.

Fifteen to twenty years later, I still see those leaders applying those principles instinctively. That’s what happens when change management becomes part of a leadership culture — a natural reflex, not a task.

My hope is that every supply chain professional, whether student or senior leader, will build this capability. Because:

“Technology will keep evolving. People will remain the center of every transformation.”

Final Thought: “Says Easy, Does Hard” — But Always Worth It

Supply chains do not succeed because of perfect plans or flawless systems. They succeed because the people who operate them understand the change, believe in it, and are supported through it.

This is a muscle worth building. And it’s one that lasts.

If You Need Support — We’re Here to Help

If your organization is navigating a transformation and wants support building these capabilities, please reach out to us at the Georgia Tech Supply Chain and Logistics Institute (SCL). We are actively working with companies across Georgia and beyond, sharing what we’ve learned and offering short, practical workshops on change leadership for supply chain teams. We’re always happy to help organizations strengthen this essential muscle.

311 chatbots make it easier for people to report issues to their local government without long wait times on the phone. However, a new study finds that the technology might inhibit civic engagement.

311 systems allow residents to report potholes, broken fire hydrants, and other municipal issues. In recent years, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to provide 311 services to community residents has boomed across city and state governments. This includes an artificial virtual assistant (AVA) developed by third-party vendors for the City of Atlanta in 2023.

Through survey data, researchers from Tech’s School of Interactive Computing found that many residents are generally positive about 311 chatbots. In addition to eliminating long wait times over the phone, they also offer residents quick answers to permit applications, waste collection, and other frequently asked questions.

However, the study, which was conducted in Atlanta, indicates that 311 chatbots could be causing residents to feel isolated from public officials and less aware of what’s happening in their community.

Jieyu Zhou, a Ph.D. student in the School of IC, said it doesn’t have to be that way.

Uniting Communities

Zhou and her advisor, Assistant Professor Christopher MacLellan, published a paper at the 2025 ACM Designing Interactive Systems (DIS) Conference that focuses on improving public service chatbot design and amplifying their civic impact. They collaborated with Professor Carl DiSalvo, Associate Professor Lynn Dombrowski, and graduate students Rui Shen and Yue You.

Zhou said 311 chatbots have the potential to be agents that drive community organization and improve quality of life.

“Current chatbots risk isolating users in their own experience,” Zhou said. “In the 311 system, people tend to report their own individual issues but lose a sense of what is happening in their broader community. 

“People are very positive about these tools, but I think there’s an opportunity as we envision what civic chatbots could be. It’s important for us to emphasize that social element — engaging people within the community and connecting them with government representatives, community organizers, and other community members.”

Zhou and MacLellan said 311 chatbots can leave users wondering if others in their communities share their concerns.

“If people are at a town hall meeting, they can get a sense of whether the problems they are experiencing are shared by others,” Zhou said. “We can’t do that with a chatbot. It’s like an isolated room, and we’re trying to open the doors and the windows.”

Adding a Human Touch

In their paper, the researchers note that one of the biggest criticisms of 311 chatbots is they can’t replace interpersonal interaction.

Unlike chatbots, people working in local government offices are likely to:

• Have direct knowledge of issues
• Provide appropriate referrals
• Empathize with the resident’s concerns

MacLellan said residents are likely to grow frustrated with a chatbot when reporting issues that require this level of contextual knowledge.

One person in the researchers’ survey noted that the chatbot they used didn’t understand that their report was about a sidewalk issue, not a street issue.

“Explaining such a situation to a human representative is straightforward,” MacLellan said. “However, when the issue being raised does not fall within any of the categories the chatbot is built to address, it often misinterprets the query and offers information that isn’t helpful.”

The researchers offer some design suggestions that can help chatbots foster community engagement and improve community well-being:

• Escalation. Regarding the sidewalk report, the chatbot did not offer a way to escalate the query to a human who could resolve it. Zhou said that this is a feature that chatbots should have but often lack.
• Transparency. Chatbots could provide details about recent and frequently reported community issues. They should inform users early in the call process about known problems to help avoid an overload of user complaints.
• Education. Chatbots can keep users updated about what’s happening in their communities.
• Collective action. Chatbots can help communities organize and gather ideas to address challenges and solve problems.

“Government agencies may focus mainly on fixing individual issues,” Zhou said, “But recognizing community-level patterns can inspire collective creativity. For example, one participant suggested that if many people report a broken swing at a playground, it could spark an initiative to design a new playground together—going far beyond just fixing it.”

These are just a few examples of things, the researchers argue, that 311 services were originally designed to achieve.

“Communities were already collaborating on identifying and reporting issues,” Zhou said. “These chatbots should reflect the original intentions and collaboration practices of the communities they serve.

“Our research suggests we can increase the positive impact of civic chatbots by including social aspects within the design of the system, connecting people, and building a community view.”

One of the top conferences for AI and computer games is recognizing a School of Interactive Computing professor with its first-ever test-of-time award.

At its event this week in Alberta, Canada, the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment (AIIDE) is honoring Professor Mark Riedl. The award also honors University of Utah Professor and Division of Games Chair Michael Young, Riedl’s Ph.D. advisor.

Riedl studied under Young at North Carolina State University.

Their 2005 paper, From Linear Story Generation to Branching Story Graphs, highlighted the challenges of using AI to create interactive gaming narratives in which user actions influence the story’s progression. 

In 2005, computer game systems that supported linear, non-branching games were widely used. Riedl introduced an innovative mathematical formula for interactive stories ranging from choose-your-own-adventure novels to modern computer games.

“We didn’t use the term ‘generative AI’ back then, but I was working on AI for the generation of creative artifacts,” Riedl said. “This was before we had practical deep learning or large language models.

“One of the reasons this paper is still relevant 20 years later is that it didn’t just present a technology, it attempted to provide a framework for solving a grand challenge in AI.”

That challenge is still ongoing, Riedl said. Game designers continue to struggle with balancing story coherence against the amount of narrative control afforded to users.

“When users exercise a high degree of control within the environment, it is likely that their actions will change the state of the world in ways that may interfere with the causal dependencies between actions as intended within a storyline,” Riedl and Young wrote in the paper.

“Narrative mediation makes linear narratives interactive. The question is: Is the expressive power of narrative mediation at least as powerful as the story graph representation?”

AIIDE is being held this week at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta. Riedl will receive the award on Wednesday.

School of Mathematics Professor Anton Leykin is part of a research team selected to receive support through the AI for Math Fund, a new grant program created to accelerate the development of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning tools for mathematics.

“This grant gives me a foothold in a new world where AI can be used in a very concrete way,” says Leykin. “It’s an opportunity to move beyond the hype and develop tools that truly benefit mathematical research.”

With a total of $18 million in inaugural grants to 29 project teams, the AI for Math Fund backs initiatives that create open-source tools, expand high-quality datasets for AI training, and make advanced systems more accessible to mathematicians. The fund received 280 grant applications from researchers and mathematicians worldwide. 

Building bridges

Leykin’s global team includes researchers from the University of South Carolina, University of Warwick, and Cornell University. Their project, “Bridging Proof and Computation: For a Verified Lean-Macaulay2 Interface,” aims to connect two powerful systems: Lean, a platform for assisting and formalizing mathematical proofs, and Macaulay2, a computational algebra system widely used in research.

By developing a native interface — a built-in connection that allows the two systems to work together without external tools — and a Lean-based domain-specific language, the project will enable communication between these systems. This will allow Lean users to formulate tactics that involve sophisticated computation done by algorithms implemented in Macaulay2; in return, Macaulay2 users can formalize computer-assisted proofs via Lean with a little help from AI.

“This integration has the potential to transform how mathematicians work,” says Leykin. “It will not only connect Lean and Macaulay2 but also lay the groundwork for a general interface that could benefit other computer algebra systems in the future.”

His goal is to create a robust proof-assistance system where AI can help generate strategies and validate proofs, driving progress in areas that require both computational power and rigorous verification.

About the AI for Math Fund

A joint initiative developed in partnership between Renaissance Philanthropy and founding donor XTX Markets, the AI for Math Fund is one of the largest philanthropic commitments supporting the development of AI and machine learning tools to advance mathematics. Individual grants range up to $1 million for 24 months of work on open-source projects and research.

Cricket powder-based protein brownies. A visualization system for fencing blades. A personalized AI application for analyzing blood work. All I2P Showcase prototypes. See what Georgia Tech students have been developing this semester at the Fall 2025 Idea to Prototype (I2P) Showcase on Tuesday, Dec. 2, at 5 p.m. in the Marcus Nanotechnology Building. This year, attendees will have even more original inventions to view, with over 60 teams displaying prototypes. 

The event marks the culmination of the semester-long I2P course, where undergraduate students develop functional prototypes aimed at solving real-world problems. Prototypes this semester include a smart military drone, a gentler device for cervical cancer screening, a rotating espresso station, tools to keep AI safe, compact data centers, systems that simulate cyberattacks to help companies strengthen their defenses, and many more. 

The showcase is free and open to students, faculty, staff, and members of the local community. 

Winning teams will receive prizes and a “golden ticket” into CREATE-X’s Startup Launch, a summer accelerator that provides optional seed funding, accounting and legal service credits, mentorship, and more to help students turn their prototypes into viable startups.

This is a free event, and refreshments will be provided. Register for the Fall 2025 I2P Showcase today!