Effective July 1, W. Jud Ready will serve as the inaugural executive director of Georgia Tech’s new Space Research Institute (SRI), which will officially launch on the same date. 

The SRI builds upon Georgia Tech’s long and distinguished history in space research and exploration. By uniting experts across disciplines — from aerospace engineering to planetary science, astrophysics, robotics, policy, the arts, and origin of life explorations — the SRI aims to create a resilient ecosystem for space research that can adapt and thrive, even in an era of fiscal uncertainty. It is composed of faculty, staff, and students whose collaborative research spans a broad spectrum of space-related topics, all deeply connected to advancing our understanding of space and its impact on the human experience.

“The launch of the SRI comes at a pivotal moment for the scientific community,” said Vice President of Interdisciplinary Research Julia Kubanek. “As the federal government proposes major cuts to funding agencies, our interdisciplinary research institutes are striving to support faculty and make them more competitive across disciplinary boundaries. This institute will publicly showcase impactful research led by Georgia Tech faculty, attract new collaborators, and pursue alternative funding strategies via philanthropic and industry partners.”

The Space Research Institute will consist of an interdisciplinary community of faculty across Georgia Tech’s schools, colleges, and the Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI). 

“It is an honor to be appointed executive director of the Space Research Institute,” said Ready. “My plan is to provide internal and external space researchers with access to Georgia Tech’s world class facilities and turbocharge the space activities already underway. We’re committed to empowering our existing community while forging new partnerships that will expand our reach and impact across the global space ecosystem.”

Ready, a principal research engineer in GTRI’s Electro-Optical Systems Laboratory, is the first GTRI faculty member to serve in a long-term capacity as an IRI executive director. Prior to his appointment, he served as associate director of external engagement for the Georgia Tech Institute for Matter and Systems and director of the Georgia Tech Center for Space Technology and Research (CSTAR). He is also an adjunct professor in the School of Materials Science and Engineering at Georgia Tech.

Before joining the Georgia Tech faculty, Ready worked for General Dynamics and MicroCoating Technologies. Throughout his career, he has served as PI or co-PI for grants totaling more than $25M awarded by the Army, Navy, Air Force, DARPA, NASA, NSF, NIST, DOE, other federal sponsors, industry, charitable foundations, private citizens, and the States of Georgia and Florida. His current research focuses primarily on energy capture, storage, and delivery enabled by nanomaterial design. His research has been included on three missions to the International Space Station, two others to low earth orbit, and one perpetually in heliocentric orbit (Lunar Flashlight). His future space missions include MISSE-21 to the International Space Station and SSTEF-1 to the Lunar surface. A half dozen solar cells from his past missions to the International Space Station will be included in the permanent At Home in Space exhibit opening on the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's 50th Anniversary.

Ready has received numerous awards and honors for his work. His most recent awards include the Class of 1934 Outstanding Innovative Use of Education Technology award in 2025 and the Outstanding Achievement in Research Program Development award in 2023, both from Georgia Tech. He also received the One GTRI Collaboration Award in 2022, which he was awarded during GTRI’s annual Distinguished Performance Awards celebration.

Additional articles of interest:

10 Questions with Jud Ready
Space Station Testing Will Evaluate Photovoltaic Materials

News Contact

With so many paths to research careers at Georgia Tech, finding the right one can be daunting. In an ongoing feature series, Unexpected Paths, we explore the journeys of 12 research faculty members from across the Institute and learn about their unique paths to research. In this feature, follow Angshuman Guin as he discusses his research into traffic patterns and how faculty serve as the connective tissue of the Institute. 

Read more »

This week, Professor Joel Kostka was awar­ded the pres­ti­gi­ous Humboldt Research Award by the Al­ex­an­der von Hum­boldt Found­a­tion during its annual meeting and reception with Germany’s Federal President Steinmeier in Berlin. Every year, the Foundation grants up to 100 Humboldt Research Awards worldwide, which recognize internationally leading researchers of all disciplines.

The award’s €80,000 endowment will support a research trip to Germany for up to a year — during which Kostka will collaborate with Professor Mar­cel Kuypers, director of the Max Planck In­sti­tute for Mar­ine Mi­cro­bi­o­logy in Bre­men, Germany — to as­sess the role of mar­ine plant mi­cro­bi­o­mes in coastal mar­ine eco­sys­tem health and climate re­si­li­ence.

Kostka, who holds joint appointments in the School of Bio­lo­gical Sci­ences and School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, is also the as­so­ci­ate chair for re­search in Bio­lo­gical Sci­ences. He was ​​recently named the inaugural faculty director of Georgia Tech for Georgia's Tomorrow. The new Center, announced by the College of Sciences in December 2024, will drive research aimed at improving life across the state of Georgia. 

Wetlands in a changing climate

“Human population is centered on coastlines, and coastal ecosystems provide many services for people,” Kostka says. “Although they cover less than 1 percent of the ocean, coastal wetlands store over 50 percent of the seafloor’s rich carbon reserves.” But researchers aren’t sure how these ecosystems will respond to a changing climate.

Microbes may be the key. Microbes play a critical role in maintaining plant health and helping them adapt to stressors, Kostka says. Similar to human bodies, plants have microbiomes: a community of microbes intimately associated with the plant that help it take up nutrients, stimulate the plant’s immune system, and regulate plant hormones. 

“Our research indicates that plant microbiomes are fundamental to wetland ecosystem health, yet almost everything we know about them is from agricultural systems,” he adds. “We know very little about the microbes associated with these important marine plants that dominate coastal ecosystems.”

Kostka’s work in Germany will investigate how microbiomes help coastal marine plants adapt to stress and keep them healthy. From there, he will investigate how plant microbiomes contribute to the carbon and nutrient cycles of coastal ecosystems — and how they contribute to ecosystem resilience.

Expanding collaboration — and insights 

One goal of the collaboration is to exchange information on two types of marine plants that dominate coastal ecosystems worldwide: those associated with seagrass meadows and salt marshes.

“I’ve investigated salt marsh plants in the intertidal zone between tides, and my colleagues at the Max Planck Institute have focused on seagrass beds and seagrass meadows, which are subtidal, below the tides,” Kostka says. “While these two ecosystems have some different characteristics, they both cover large areas of the global coastline and are dominated by salt-tolerant plants.” 

In salt marshes, Kostka has shown that marine plants have symbiotic microbes in their roots that help them to take up nitrogen and deal with stress by removing toxic sulfides. He suspects that these plant-microbe interactions are critical to the resilience of coastal ecosystems. “The Max Planck Institute made similar observations in seagrass meadows as we did in salt marshes,” Kostka explains. “But they found different bacteria.”

From Georgia to Germany

Beyond supporting excellence in research, another key goal of the Humboldt Research Award is to support international collaboration — something very familiar to Kostka. “I've been working with Professor Kuypers and the Max Planck Institute in Bremen for many years,” he says, adding that he completed his postdoctoral research at the Institute. “Max Planck's labs are some of the best in the world for what they do, and their imaging technology can give us an unprecedented look at plant-microbe interactions at the cellular level.”

“This project is also special because I am collaborating with other scientists in northern Germany,” Kostka adds. “The University of Bremen is home to the Cen­ter for Mar­ine En­vir­on­mental Sci­ences (MARUM), which is designated as a Cluster of Excellence by the German National Science Foundation, so there are a number of fantastic research centers in Bremen to work with.”

His hope is that this project will deepen collaboration between the research at Georgia Tech and research in Germany. “I look forward to seeing what we can uncover about these critical systems while working together.”

News Contact

Researchers at Georgia Tech have taken a critical step forward in creating efficient, useful and brain-like artificial intelligence (AI). The key? A new algorithm that results in neural networks with internal structure more like the human brain.

The study, “TopoNets: High-Performing Vision and Language Models With Brain-Like Topography,” was awarded a spotlight at this year’s International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), a distinction given to only 2 percent of papers. The research was led by graduate student Mayukh Deb alongside School of Psychology Assistant Professor Apurva Ratan Murty.

Thirty-two of Tech’s computing, engineering, and science faculty represented the Institute at ICLR 2025, which is globally renowned for sharing cutting-edge research. 

“We started with this idea because we saw that AI models are unstructured, while brains are exquisitely organized,” says first-author Deb. “Our models with internal structure showed more than a 20 percent boost in efficiency with almost no performance losses. And this is out-of-the-box — it’s broadly applicable to other models with no extra fine-tuning needed.”

For Murty, the research also underscores the importance of a rapidly growing field of research at the intersection of neuroscience and AI. “There's a major explosion in understanding intelligence right now,” he says. “The neuro-AI approach is exciting because it helps emulate human intelligence in machines, making AI more interpretable.”

“In addition to advancing AI, this type of research also benefits neuroscience because it informs a fundamental question: Why is our brain organized the way it is?,” Deb adds. “Making AI more interpretable helps everyone.”

Brain-inspired blueprints

In the brain, neurons form topographic maps: neurons used for comparable tasks are closer together. The researchers applied this concept to AI by organizing how internal components (like artificial neurons) connect and process information. 

This type of organization has been tried in the past but has been challenging, Murty says. “Historically, rules constraining how the AI could structure itself often resulted in lower-performing models. We realized that for this type of biophysical constraint, you simply can’t map everything — you need an algorithmic solution.”

“Our key insight was an algorithmic trick that gives the same structure as brains without enforcing things that models don't respond well to,” he adds. “That breakthrough was what Mayukh (Deb) worked on.” 

The algorithm, called TopoLoss, uses a loss function to encourage brain-like organization in artificial neural networks, and it is compatible with many AI systems capable of understanding language and images. 

“The resulting training method, TopoNets, is very flexible and broadly applicable,” Murty says. “You can apply it to contemporary models very easily, which is a critical advancement when compared to previous methods.” 

Neuro-AI innovations

Murty and Deb plan to continue refining and designing brain-inspired AI systems. “All parts of the brain have some organization — we want to expand into other domains,” Deb says. “On the neuroscience side of things, we want to discover new kinds of organization in brains using these topographic systems.”

Deb also cites possibilities in robotics, especially in situations like space exploration where resources are limited. “Imagine running a model inside a robot with limited power,” he says. “Structured models can help us achieve 80 percent of performance with just 20 percent of energy consumption, saving valuable energy and space. This is still experimental, but it's the direction we are interested in exploring.”

“This success highlights the potential of a new approach, designing systems that benefit both neuroscience and AI — and beyond,” Murty adds. “We can learn so much from the human brain, and this project shows that brain-inspired systems can help current AI be better. We hope our work stimulates this conversation.”

News Contact

Solar cells account for approximately six percent of the electricity used on Earth; however, in space, they play a significantly larger role, with nearly all satellites relying on advanced solar cells for their power. That’s why Georgia Tech researchers will soon send 18 photovoltaic cells to the International Space Station for a study of how space conditions affect the devices’ operation over time.

“The main goal here is to improve power generation in space,” said Jud Ready, principal research engineer at the Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI) and Executive Director of Georgia Tech's Space Research Institute. “The limiting factor on the performance of a spacecraft is usually how much power you can produce. Power, size, weight, complexity, cost – all of these are tied closely to the electrical generation of the solar panels.”

Read the story in the GTRI newsroom.

News Contact

Overwhelmed doctors and nurses struggling to provide adequate patient care in South Korea are getting support from Georgia Tech and Korean-based researchers through an AI-powered robotic medical assistant.

Top South Korean research institutes have enlisted Georgia Tech researchers Sehoon Ha and Jennifer G. Kim to develop artificial intelligence (AI) to help the humanoid assistant navigate hospitals and interact with doctors, nurses, and patients.

Ha and Kim will partner with Neuromeka, a South Korean robotics company, on a five-year, 10 billion won (about $7.2 million US) grant from the South Korean government. Georgia Tech will receive about $1.8 million of the grant.

Ha and Kim, assistant professors in the School of Interactive Computing, will lead Tech’s efforts and also work with researchers from the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology and the Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute.

Neuromeka has built industrial robots since its founding in 2013 and recently decided to expand into humanoid service robots.

Lee, the group leader of the humanoid medical assistant project, said he fielded partnership requests from many academic researchers. Ha and Kim stood out as an ideal match because of their robotics, AI, and human-computer interaction expertise. 

For Ha, the project is an opportunity to test navigation and control algorithms he’s developed through research that earned him the National Science Foundation CAREER Award. Ha combines computer simulation and real-world training data to make robots more deployable in high-stress, chaotic environments. 

“Dr. Ha has everything we want to put into our system, including his navigation policies,” Lee said. “He works with robots and AI, and there weren’t many candidates in that space. We needed a collaborator who can create the software and has experience running it on robots.”

Ha said he is already considering how his algorithms could scale beyond hospitals and become a universal means of robot navigation in unstructured real-world environments.

“For now, we’re focusing on a customized navigation model for Korean environments, but there are ways to transfer the data set to different environments, such as the U.S. or European healthcare systems,” Ha said. 

“The final product can be deployed to other systems and industries. It can help industrial workers at factories, retail stores, any place where workers can get overwhelmed by a high volume of tasks.”

Kim will focus on making the robot’s design and interaction features more human. She’ll develop a large-language model (LLM) AI system to communicate with patients, nurses, and doctors. She’ll also develop an app that will allow users to input their commands and queries. 

“This project is not just about controlling robots, which is why Dr. Kim’s expertise in human-computer interaction design through natural language was essential.,” Lee said. 

Kim is interviewing stakeholders from three South Korean hospitals to identify service and care pain points. The issues she’s identified so far relate to doctor-patient communication, a lack of emotional support for patients, and an excessive number of small tasks that consume nurses’ time.

“Our goal is to develop this robot in a very human-centered way,” she said. “One way is to give patients a way to communicate about the quality of their care and how the robot can support their emotional well-being.

“We found that patients often hesitate to ask busy nurses for small things like getting a cup of water. We believe this is an area a robot can support.”

The robot’s hardware will be built in Korea, while Ha and Kim will develop the software in the U.S.

Jong-hoon Park, CEO of Neuromeka, said in a press release the goal is to have a commercialized product as soon as possible. 

“Through this project, we will solve problems that existing collaborative robots could not,” Park said. “We expect the medical AI humanoid robot technology being developed will contribute to reducing the daily work burden of medical and healthcare workers in the field.”

News Contact

News Contact

At least 14 nuclear scientists are believed to be among those killed in Israel’s Operation Rising Lion, launched on June 13, 2025, ostensibly to destroy or degrade Iran’s nuclear program and military capabilities.

Deliberately targeting scientists in this way aims to disrupt Iran’s knowledge base and continuity in nuclear expertise. Among those assassinated were Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, a theoretical physicist and head of Iran’s Islamic Azad University, and Fereydoun Abbasi-Davani, a nuclear engineer who led Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization.

Collectively, these experts in physics and engineering were potential successors to Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, widely regarded as the architect of the Iranian nuclear program, who was assassinated in a November 2020 attack many blame on Israel.

As two political scientists writing a book about state targeting of scientists as a counterproliferation tool, we understand well that nuclear scientists have been targeted since the nuclear age began. We have gathered data on nearly 100 instances of what we call “scientist targeting” from 1944 through 2025.

The most recent assassination campaign against Iranian scientists is different from many of the earlier episodes in a few key ways. Israel’s recent attack targeted multiple nuclear experts and took place simultaneously with military force to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, air defenses and energy infrastructure. Also, unlike previous covert operations, Israel immediately claimed responsibility for the assassinations.

But our research indicates that targeting scientists may not be effective for counterproliferation. While removing individual expertise may delay nuclear acquisition, targeting alone is unlikely to destroy a program outright and could even increase a country’s desire for nuclear weapons. Further, targeting scientists may trigger blowback given concerns regarding legality and morality.

A Policy With a Long History

Targeting nuclear scientists began during World War II when Allied and Soviet forces raced to capture Nazi scientists, degrade Adolf Hitler’s ability to build a nuclear bomb and use their expertise to advance the U.S. and Soviet nuclear programs.

In our data set, we classified “targeting” as cases in which scientists were captured, threatened, injured or killed as nations tried to prevent adversaries from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. Over time, at least four countries have targeted scientists working on nine national nuclear programs.

The United States and Israel have allegedly carried out the most attacks on nuclear scientists. But the United Kingdom and Soviet Union have also been behind such attacks.

Meanwhile, scientists working for the Egyptian, Iranian and Iraqi nuclear programs have been the most frequent targets since 1950. Since 2007 and prior to the current Israeli operation, 10 scientists involved in the Iranian nuclear program were killed in attacks. Other countries’ nationals have also been targeted: In 1980, Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, allegedly bombed Italian engineer Mario Fiorelli’s home and his firm, SNIA Techint, as a warning to Europeans involved in the Iraqi nuclear project.

Given this history, the fact that Israel attacked Iran’s nuclear program is not itself surprising. Indeed, it has been a strategic goal of successive Israeli prime ministers to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and experts had been warning of the increased likelihood of an Israeli military operation since mid-2024, due to regional dynamics and Iranian nuclear development.

By then, the balance of power in the Middle East had changed dramatically. Israel systematically degraded the leadership and infrastructure of Iranian proxies Hamas and Hezbollah. It later destroyed Iranian air defenses around Tehran and near key nuclear installations. The subsequent fall of Syria’s Assad regime cost Tehran another long-standing ally. Together, these developments have significantly weakened Iran, leaving it vulnerable to external attack and stripped of its once-feared proxy network, which had been expected to retaliate on its behalf in the event of hostilities.

With its proxy “axis of resistance” defanged and conventional military capacity degraded, Iranian leadership may have thought that expanding its enrichment capability was its best bet going forward.

And in the months leading up to Israel’s recent attack, Iran expanded its nuclear production capacity, moving beyond 60% uranium enrichment, a technical step just short of weapons-grade material. During Donald Trump’s first term, the president withdrew the U.S. from a multilateral nonproliferation agreement aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear program. After being reelected, Trump appeared to change tack by pursuing new diplomacy with Iran, but those talks have so far failed to deliver an agreement – and may be put on hold for the foreseeable future amid the war.

Most recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors declared Iran in non-compliance with its nuclear-nonproliferation obligations. In response, Iran announced it was further expanding its enrichment capacity by adding advanced centrifuge technology and a third enrichment site.

Even if the international community anticipated the broader attack on Iran, characteristics of the targeting itself are surprising. Historically, states have covertly targeted individual scientists. But the recent multiple-scientist attack occurred openly, with Israel taking responsibility, publicly indicating the attacks’ purpose. Further, while it is not new for a country to use multiple counter-proliferation tools against an adversary over time, that Israel is using both preventive military force against infrastructure and targeting scientists at once is atypical.

Additionally, such attacks against scientists are historically lower tech and low cost, with death or injury stemming from gunmen, car bombs or accidents. In fact, Abbasi – who was killed in the most recent attacks – survived a 2010 car bombing in Tehran. There are outliers, however, including the Fakhrizadeh assassination, which featured a remotely operated machine gun smuggled into Iranian territory.

Israel’s Logic In Going After Scientists

Why target nuclear scientists?

In foreign policy, there are numerous tools available if one state aims to prevent another state from acquiring nuclear weapons. Alongside targeting scientists, there are sanctions, diplomacy, cyberattacks and military force.

Targeting scientists may remove critical scientific expertise and impose costs that increase the difficulty of building nuclear weapons. Proponents argue that targeting these experts may undermine a state’s efforts, deter it from continuing nuclear developments and signal to others the perils of supporting nuclear proliferation.

Countries that target scientists therefore believe that doing so is an effective way to degrade an adversary’s nuclear program. Indeed, the Israel Defense Forces described the most recent attacks as “a significant blow to the regime’s ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction.”

Despite Israel’s focus on scientists as sources of critical knowledge, there may be thousands more working inside Iran, calling into question the efficacy of targeting them. Further, there are legal, ethical and moral concerns over targeting scientists.

Moreover, it is a risky option that may fail to disrupt an enemy nuclear program while sparking public outrage and calls for retaliation. This is especially the case if scientists, often regarded as civilians, are elevated as martyrs.

Targeting campaigns may, as a result, reinforce domestic support for a government, which could then redouble efforts toward nuclear development.

Regardless of whether targeting scientists is an effective counter-proliferation tool, it has been around since the start of the nuclear age – and will likely persist as part of the foreign policy toolkit for states aiming to prevent proliferation. In the case of the current Israeli conflict with Iran and its targeting of nuclear scientists, we expect the tactic to continue for the duration of the war and beyond.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

News Contact

A longstanding mystery of the periodic table involves a group of unique elements called lanthanides. Also known as rare earth elements, or REEs, these silvery-white metals are challenging to isolate, given their very similar chemical and physical properties. This similarity makes it difficult to distinguish REEs from one other during extraction and purification processes. 

The world has come to depend on lanthanides’ magnetic and optical properties to drive much of modern technology — from medical imaging to missiles to smart phones. These metals also are in short supply, and because they’re found in minerals, lanthanides are difficult to mine and separate.   But that may change — thanks to a Georgia Tech-led discovery of a new oxidation state for a lanthanide element known as praseodymium.  

For the first time ever, praseodymium achieved a 5+ oxidation state. Oxidation occurs when a substance meets oxygen or another oxidizing substance. (The browning on the flesh of a cut apple, as well as rust on metal, are examples of oxidation.)
   
As far back as the 1890s, scientists suspected lanthanides might have a 5+ oxidation state, but  lanthanides in that state were too unstable to see, said Henry ”Pete“ La Pierre, an associate professor in Georgia Tech’s School of Chemistry and Biochemistry. Discovering an element’s new oxidation state is like discovering a new element. As an example, La Pierre noted how plutonium’s discovery opened up a whole new area of the periodic table. 

“A new oxidation state tells us what we don’t know and gives us ideas for where to go,” he explained. “Each oxidation state of an element has distinct chemical and physical properties — so the first glimpse of a novel oxidation presents a roadmap for new possibilities.”
 
La Pierre and colleagues at University of Iowa and Washington State University recently discovered the 5+ oxidation state for lanthanides. 

“It was predicted but never seen until we found it,” said La Pierre, corresponding author of the study, “Praseodymium in the Formal +5 Oxidation State,” which was recently published in Nature Chemistry. “Lanthanides’ properties are really fantastic. We only use them commercially in one oxidation state — the 3+ oxidation state — which defines a set of magnetic and optical properties. If you can stabilize a higher oxidation state, it could lead to entirely new magnetic and optical properties.”
 
The researchers’ breakthrough will broaden the lanthanides’ technical applications in fields such as rare-earth mining and quantum technology and could lead to new electronic device architectures and applications. 

“Research in lanthanides has already yielded significant dividends for society in terms of technological development,” La Pierre added.
    
The researchers hope to discover new tools for mining critical REEs, including improving lanthanide separation and recycling processes. When mining these elements, lanthanide elements are frequently mixed together. The separation process is painstaking and inefficient, generating a significant amount of waste. But with increasing global demand for REEs, the U.S. faces a supply issue. Figuring out how to improve lanthanides separation, potentially through oxidation chemistry, will ultimately enhance the supply of these critical elements. 

— Anne Wainscott-Sargent
 
Funding: This research was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Energy. 
 

News Contact