Transistors, the building blocks of modern electronics, are typically made of silicon. Because it’s a semiconductor, this material can control the flow of electricity in a circuit. But silicon has fundamental physical limits that restrict how compact and energy-efficient a transistor can be.

MIT researchers have now replaced silicon with a magnetic semiconductor, creating a magnetic transistor that could enable smaller, faster, and more energy-efficient circuits. The material’s magnetism strongly influences its electronic behavior, leading to more efficient control of the flow of electricity. 

The team used a novel magnetic material and an optimization process that reduces the material’s defects, which boosts the transistor’s performance.

The material’s unique magnetic properties also allow for transistors with built-in memory, which would simplify circuit design and unlock new applications for high-performance electronics.

“People have known about magnets for thousands of years, but there are very limited ways to incorporate magnetism into electronics. We have shown a new way to efficiently utilize magnetism that opens up a lot of possibilities for future applications and research,” says Chung-Tao Chou, an MIT graduate student in the departments of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) and Physics, and co-lead author of a paper on this advance.

Chou is joined on the paper by co-lead author Eugene Park, a graduate student in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (DMSE); Julian Klein, a DMSE research scientist; Josep Ingla-Aynes, a postdoc in the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center; Jagadeesh S. Moodera, a senior research scientist in the Department of Physics; and senior authors Frances Ross, TDK Professor in DMSE; and Luqiao Liu, an associate professor in EECS, and a member of the Research Laboratory of Electronics; as well as others at the University of Chemistry and Technology in Prague. The paper appears today in Physical Review Letters.

Overcoming the limits

In an electronic device, silicon semiconductor transistors act like tiny light switches that turn a circuit on and off, or amplify weak signals in a communication system. They do this using a small input voltage.

But a fundamental physical limit of silicon semiconductors prevents a transistor from operating below a certain voltage, which hinders its energy efficiency.

To make more efficient electronics, researchers have spent decades working toward magnetic transistors that utilize electron spin to control the flow of electricity. Electron spin is a fundamental property that enables electrons to behave like tiny magnets.

So far, scientists have mostly been limited to using certain magnetic materials. These lack the favorable electronic properties of semiconductors, constraining device performance.

“In this work, we combine magnetism and semiconductor physics to realize useful spintronic devices,” Liu says.

The researchers replace the silicon in the surface layer of a transistor with chromium sulfur bromide, a two-dimensional material that acts as a magnetic semiconductor.

Due to the material’s structure, researchers can switch between two magnetic states very cleanly. This makes it ideal for use in a transistor that smoothly switches between “on” and “off.”

“One of the biggest challenges we faced was finding the right material. We tried many other materials that didn’t work,” Chou says.

They discovered that changing these magnetic states modifies the material’s electronic properties, enabling low-energy operation. And unlike many other 2D materials, chromium sulfur bromide remains stable in air.

To make a transistor, the researchers pattern electrodes onto a silicon substrate, then carefully align and transfer the 2D material on top. They use tape to pick up a tiny piece of material, only a few tens of nanometers thick, and place it onto the substrate.

“A lot of researchers will use solvents or glue to do the transfer, but transistors require a very clean surface. We eliminate all those risks by simplifying this step,” Chou says.

Leveraging magnetism

This lack of contamination enables their device to outperform existing magnetic transistors. Most others can only create a weak magnetic effect, changing the flow of current by a few percent or less. Their new transistor can switch or amplify the electric current by a factor of 10.

They use an external magnetic field to change the magnetic state of the material, switching the transistor using significantly less energy than would usually be required.

The material also allows them to control the magnetic states with electric current. This is important because engineers cannot apply magnetic fields to individual transistors in an electronic device. They need to control each one electrically.

The material’s magnetic properties could also enable transistors with built-in memory, simplifying the design of logic or memory circuits.

A typical memory device has a magnetic cell to store information and a transistor to read it out. Their method can combine both into one magnetic transistor.

“Now, not only are transistors turning on and off, they are also remembering information. And because we can switch the transistor with greater magnitude, the signal is much stronger so we can read out the information faster, and in a much more reliable way,” Liu says.

Building on this demonstration, the researchers plan to further study the use of electrical current to control the device. They are also working to make their method scalable so they can fabricate arrays of transistors.

This research was supported, in part, by the Semiconductor Research Corporation, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Army Research Office, and the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports. The work was partially carried out at the MIT.nano facilities.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 September 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02743-5

Global warming and urban development combine to shape the temperatures people experience in cities. Here I revisit a 2016 attribution study of urban warming in China and consider what its legacy reveals about urban climate knowledge, responsibility and action.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 September 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02733-7

The authors consider greening trends and interannual variability, linked to ecosystem stability, in dryland ecosystems across 40 years (1982–2020). They show persistent greening yet increased interannual variability, with the latter driven by increasing rainfall sensitivity.

Law enforcement agencies across the country are increasingly relying on spying technologies—automated license plate readers (ALPR), cell-site simulators, and facial recognition, to name a few--causing an outcry in many communities where people are rightly concerned about the threat to civil rights and civil liberties these tools present.

Some authorities are responding to these concerns by trying to hide what they’re doing. Police departments are telling officers not to mention ALPRs when stopping vehicles and concealing their use of ALPRs to avoid citizens’ public records requests. Concealing the use of unpopular spying tools isn’t anything particularly new for law enforcement—cops have been doing it for years—but it’s just as wrong now as it was 20 years ago.

These practices prevent the public from knowing about and questioning how agencies are spending taxpayer dollars on spying technologies and holding them accountable. This is especially troubling when many towns are signing contracts with Flock and other ALPR vendors with little to no public oversight. The practice also violates disclosure obligations, allows cops and prosecutors to hide their tactics from judges, and cheats defendants from being able to challenge the use of evidence gathered by spy tech from being used against them.

404 Media recently revealed that in its usage policy for Flock ALPR cameras, one county in Iowa tells police to keep them a secret when detaining people: “DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE TO THE OCCUPANTS OF THE VEHICLE,” the policy document reads. “DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE IN YOUR REPORT OR COMPLAINT UNLESS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.” If writing a report about an incident, police are told to say they used “county resources” in making a stop instead of acknowledging use of ALPRs.

In Houston, police officers are likewise instructed to “be as vague as permissible” about why they are using Flock because the searches they run on Flock’s surveillance system could be obtained via public records requests.

There is growing public alarm about the threat to civil liberties posed by ALPR cameras and reports of police abusing the tech by using it to spy on their exes. Some cities have the cameras covered up, and others are cancelling their use of ALPR networks. Two states have recently stepped back from ALPRs. This trend is certainly not lost on law enforcement agencies. Hiding the fact that they’re using ALPRs from Flock and other vendors is one way of avoiding scrutiny and bad PR.

But law enforcement and their spy tech vendors keeping people in the dark about the surveillance technologies trained on them predates the Flock backlash by decades. For example, AT&T built a powerful phone surveillance tool for police, called Hemisphere, in the mid 2000s, and the company required agencies not to use evidence gathered by Hemisphere in court unless there was no other admissible evidence. If evidence obtained through Hemisphere was used, police were required to recreate it through a traditional subpoena, a process they called “parallel construction.” We called it “evidence laundering.”

Likewise, police and prosecutors have taken far-reaching steps to hide from the public and courts their use of cell site simulators, also known as stingrays. Police have used these devices, which trick cell phones into connecting to them instead of phone towers to try locating suspects, to obtain people’s location data without a warrant by deceptively obtaining basic pen register orders from courts. Pen register orders are for obtaining call log data and police don’t need to prove they have probable cause to get one.

In Baltimore, for example, a judge concluded that law enforcement had used a standard pen register order to intentionally hide its use of a Stingray from the court in violation of its legal disclosure obligations, leading to a landmark 2015 privacy ruling that cops need a warrant to use the device.

That didn’t stop police from continuing to try to pull the wool over the eyes of courts and defense attorneys when they used stingrays, however. Prosecutors have accepted plea deals to hide their use of cell-site simulators and have even dropped cases rather than reveal information about their use of the technology. U.S. Marshalls have driven files hundreds of miles to thwart public records requests.

Fortunately, our commitment to shining a light on the use of surveillance tech is just as strong, if not stronger, than law enforcement’s quest to hide it. We’re working with privacy advocates and community groups to bring awareness about existing and emerging spy tools that threaten civil liberties and we’re encouraging policymakers and lawmakers to do more to restrain warrantless mass surveillance and stop it before it ever takes hold.  

If you're curious about whether your local police have contracts for ALPRS or other surveillance technologies, you can search EFF's Atlas of Surveillance.

 

The term “digital sovereignty” has become ubiquitous. European officials invoke it in debates about cloud infrastructure, AI, semiconductors, and platform regulation. Governments throughout the global majority use it to argue for greater control over data and communications infrastructure and boost their economies. Companies market “sovereign cloud” products designed to reassure their customers that their information stays under local jurisdiction. But digital sovereignty could be something more: an opportunity for users around the world to build more resilient, open  systems and the skills and infrastructure to maintain them.

There is no singular definition of digital sovereignty, nor is there a single coherent position in the digital rights space. Despite its growing popularity, the term remains frustratingly vague. Policymakers, regulators, civil society groups, and others can mean very different things when they use the term. But to start simply with a broad definition, we can say that it means having the capacity to control one’s digital destiny—though the implications of that will obviously differ considerably whether you’re talking about an individual or a country.

We can start by developing  a shared understanding of what digital sovereignty actually means. We’ve also included a glossary of terms at the bottom of this post. 

In Europe and other places where digital sovereignty has become a topic of policy, discussions focus on reducing dependency: on foreign (and particularly American) cloud infrastructure, chips, platforms, and at times, foreign political priorities. The concern is both economic and geopolitical. If essential infrastructure is controlled by companies elsewhere—and thus subject to the laws of another jurisdiction—then what control does a country actually have over its own digital future?

In global majority countries in particular, wars, sanctions, and the growing fragmentation of the internet have demonstrated for many that the physical infrastructure that underlies digital life is neither neutral nor invulnerable. 

Amidst this increasing geopolitical instability governments and civil society should consider whether digital sovereignty can help shore up that infrastructure. 

What are we talking about when we talk about digital sovereignty? 

A recent Franco-German joint paper on digital sovereignty defines it as the “capability and capacity to develop, provide, use, adapt and control digital technologies including hardware in an independent, self-determined and secure manner” and puts forward a framework to operationalize Europe’s capacity to act in the digital domain. 

Some governments, such as Germany’s, have started to put funding behind sovereignty efforts through initiatives like the Sovereign Tech Agency, which “invest[s] globally in the open software components that underpin Germany's and Europe's competitiveness and ability to innovate.” 

Positions on digital sovereignty among EFF’s allies across Europe vary. Open Rights Group have defined digital sovereignty as “the ability of a country to have control over its digital infrastructure, data, and technology” and states it to be “critical for the UK’s economic and national security.” 

Similarly, the European Partnership for Democracy has expressed concern that “a few Big Tech corporations decide our collective destiny,” and argue that the EU should explore “alternative ownership models for tech companies and clearly [define] their purpose and mission.” And our friends at EDRi (of which EFF is a member) have stated clearly that “Europe’s digital sovereignty starts with open source.” Some initiatives, such as DI.DAY, consider digital sovereignty an opportunity to free users from Big Tech dependencies.

Elsewhere in the world, conversations about digital sovereignty often take a different shape. Indigenous discussions of the topic have been ongoing for more than a decade and focus on the inherent right of Native nations to govern their own digital ecosystems. In Southeast Asia, the desire for digital sovereignty has created growth in the sovereign cloud industry, but the conversation isn’t purely economic: Concerns about jurisdiction for where data is held are driving much of the conversation. 

In Latin America, digital public infrastructure is often a key aspect of debates. Across Africa, leaders speak of a desire to shift the continent from being consumers of technology to becoming architects of their own digital infrastructure and data ecosystems. And in the Middle East and North Africa, concerns about reliance on U.S. technology companies—which have engaged in conflict and disproportionate censorship (particularly of Palestinian voices) in the region—are often paramount.

Reem Almasri, a senior researcher based in Jordan, recently spoke to EFF about digital sovereignty, which she sees as “the ability of people and communities to choose, control, and use technology that serves their needs and values,” particularly in light of the role that U.S. companies have played in regional conflicts.

In a January article, Almasri pointed to growing concerns about granting greater sovereignty and influence to governments over citizens’ data, communications, and websites, writing: “This is particularly worrisome in countries that impose high levels of internet and media censorship and run unaccountable surveillance programs on their citizens’ data.”

Indeed, while pushing for greater sovereignty from Big Tech has benefits, there is an inherent risk that some states will pursue digital sovereignty as a means of cutting off or splintering access—as we’ve already seen in Iran, Russia, and elsewhere.

For that reason, it’s no surprise that some, such as Iranian professor Azadeh Akbari, believe that “the current wave pushing digital sovereignty as the key to ending dependency on American and Chinese technology is negligent of its Eurocentric bias.” 

What does EFF believe?

In a world where people have digital sovereignty, civil society should be able to communicate freely, privately, and anonymously if they wish. People should be able to easily understand where their data lives and who has access to it. That data should be easily portable between platforms and services.

At EFF, we view digital sovereignty not as a walled garden, but as an opportunity for resilience and development of industries and skills. We believe that governments can and should take a role in crafting digital sovereignty that centers the autonomy of users rather than just re-creating a state of digital dependency with a new set of companies. Governments should support and use free and open source tools and projects built using principles of interoperability and data portability. This support should include employing full-time developers, UX designers, and community managers. Government policy and legislation should grant users control of their own data and a clear understanding of who can lawfully access it. Digital sovereignty should foster users’ ability to choose how they use digital products and services, free from unfair lock-ins, coercive terms and manipulative defaults. It should also foster the broader public interest internet, the part of the web that provides public goods and useful services without requiring the scale or the business practices of the tech giants.

Encryption backdoors are fundamentally incompatible with a vision of data sovereignty that centers user control. Governments should support the development and normalization of reputable end-to-end encrypted communications as well as strong encryption for data at rest. This support should include employing cryptographers and contributing to strong, peer-reviewed encryption standards strengthened by data minimization as a fundamental design principle, as well as refraining from legislating mandates for “lawful access” or any other reason.  

As technologists, we don’t have to wait for governments to act in order to create the digital sovereignty we want. We get the internet that we build. We can contribute to open source, decentralized, and end-to-end encrypted projects. We can build standards that make interoperability and data portability a feature from the very beginning. We can resist the call of proprietary solutions, user lock-in, and encryption backdoors.

And finally, while digital sovereignty is often framed as a response to the dominance of Big Tech, that does not mean that there is no role for private companies to play. There is no point in replacing the influence of a few mostly US-based tech companies with a handful of giants based elsewhere. Companies can and should build platforms and services on top of open source, decentralized protocols and contribute to the ecosystem. Companies should also minimize processing a person’s data except as strictly necessary to provide them what they asked for, and only with opt-in consent that makes it clear to users what data they are gathering, where it is stored, and who has access to it. And companies should build their tools and platforms in a way that allows interoperability and that makes it easy for users to leave with their data. Some of these practices are already required by law in some jurisdictions, but companies don’t have to merely do the bare minimum the law demands: they should respect their users and support data sovereignty right now.

A glossary of terms

The following terms are useful for understanding this blog post as well as the broader conversation about Digital Sovereignty:

Intermediary liability: the legal responsibility of online service providers (ISPs, websites, social media platforms) for unlawful activities by their users, such as defamation, copyright infringement, or illegal hate speech.

The stack: a secure, open-source technology framework, often focusing on European alternatives, designed to break dependencies on (mostly) US-based technology providers. It comprises interoperable, vendor-neutral, and transparent digital infrastructures designed to regain control over data, infrastructure, and technology.

Digital sovereignty: the ability of people, as nations, organizations, and individuals, to control their own digital destiny by retaining authority over their own data, technology, and infrastructure.

Data sovereignty: the principle that digital information is subject to the laws and governance frameworks of the country or region where it is physically collected, stored, or processed. It dictates that data remains bound by the specific privacy protections and regulations of its originating jurisdiction, regardless of where the collecting organization is located.

Digital commons: a shared, online resource, such as knowledge, software, and data, that is collectively produced, governed, and maintained by a community, intended for public access. Examples include Wikipedia, open source operating systems such as Linux, and Creative Commons licensed content.

Data portability/interoperability: the ability to easily transfer personal data from one service provider to another, or to a personal system, in a structured, machine-readable format. It empowers users to move away from "walled gardens," reducing vendor lock-in and enhancing user autonomy.

Digital dependency: the opposite of digital sovereignty. The inability of people as nations, organizations, and individuals to control their own digital destiny through control over their own data, technology, and infrastructure. 

Decentralization: a shift away from relying on centralized, often US-based, corporate platforms toward a distributed, user-centric internet where individuals, communities, and nations maintain control over their data, digital identity, and infrastructure.

End-to-end encryption (e2ee): a secure communication process where only the sender and intended recipient can access, read, or decrypt messages or data.

Fairness (à la the Digital Fairness Act): the absence of deceptive, manipulative, or addictive design practices that distort consumer choice and exploit vulnerabilities. 

User sovereignty: the concept that individuals possess absolute control over their personal data, digital identity, and online privacy, rejecting the centralization of power by large technology platforms. It emphasizes user consent, decentralization, and the ability to manage personal data using secure and independent tools.

A database of 153 million drivers licenses is for sale on the dark web. Brian Krebs has more detail.

EFF is pleased to announce that Access Now, 7amleh – The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media, DeFlock, and New Media Rights have received 2026 EFF Awards for their vital work in ensuring that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all people. 

The EFF Awards recognize specific and substantial technical, social, economic, or cultural contributions in diverse fields including journalism, art, digital access, legislation, technology development, and law. 

For the past 30 years, the EFF Awards—previously known as the Pioneer Awards—have recognized and honored key leaders in the fight for freedom and innovation online. Started when the internet was new, the Awards now reflect the fact that the online world has become both a necessity in modern life and a continually evolving set of tools for communication, organizing, creativity, and increasing human potential.  

Supporting a global community advancing digital rights, defending digital access in crisis zones, empowering communities to take action against surveillance, and providing free legal assistance for creators and consumers to fight back against digital threats are high callings that help bring about a better tech future for all. We are pleased to honor these organizations with 2026 EFF Awards. 

Access Now – Fostering Change in Human Rights and Technology

Access Now, founded in 2009 as an emergency response team helping Iranian activists get back online and communicate safely, has grown into one of the world’s foremost organizations defending and extending the digital rights of people and communities at risk and supporting the global fight against technological repression.  

Its 24/7 Digital Security Helpline offers real-time, direct technical assistance and advice to civil society groups and activists, media organizations, journalists and bloggers, and human rights defenders. It provides grants to frontline organizations working with people and communities most impacted by digital rights violations. It educates decision makers and pressures the powerful. And it organizes RightsCon, a leading annual summit on human rights in the digital age, where activists, technologists, policymakers, business leaders, journalists, philanthropists, researchers, and artists can connect, collaborate, and drive change at the intersection of human rights and technology. 

7amleh – The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media – Defending and Advancing Digital Access and Rights Across the MENA Region

7amleh - The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media protects and expands digital access and rights for Palestinians and across the MENA region. The nonprofit investigates and monitors challenges to digital rights, focusing on internet access, privacy, freedom of expression and association online. It builds the capacity of activists, human rights defenders, and civil society organizations to provide training about digital rights, gender sensitive digital security, and effective online advocacy.  

7amleh also advocates for changes to the digital rights policies and practices of governments, corporations and other influential institutions and individuals locally, regionally and internationally. It plans and manages advocacy and awareness-raising campaigns and builds networks and coalitions to promote access to safe, fair and free online spaces. For example, 7amleh has led the #ReconnectGaza campaign, supported by dozens of international NGOs including EFF, to restore full internet access in Gaza – a crucial lifeline for residents, journalists, activists, and first responders.  

DeFlock – Exposing the ALPR Surveillance Network

DeFlock is an open-source, volunteer-powered project that maps surveillance devices across the world, helping communities hold their governments and surveillance vendors accountable and understand where and how they're being watched. Founded in 2024 by software engineer and privacy advocate Will Freeman, DeFlock shines a light on the widespread use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) technology and the threats it poses to personal privacy and civil liberties.  

DeFlock resources help people request public records, speak to local lawmakers, and take action against ALPR surveillance. Its work has helped foster a national grassroots community of anti-surveillance activists fighting back against this dangerous surveillance technology. 

New Media Rights – Helping Creators Fight Back Against IP Bullies

New Media Rights (NMR) is a San Diego-based nonprofit program of California Western School of Law dedicated to defending digital rights through legal services, education, and public policy advocacy. Since its inception, NMR has been at the forefront of protecting creators, entrepreneurs, and internet users from digital threats such as copyright abuse, online harassment, and privacy violations. 

In addition to providing free legal assistance, NMR has produced hundreds of freely available video and written legal education guides for creators and consumers, including the Fair Use App for filmmakers and video creators. It has participated in regulatory proceedings on net neutrality, Digital Millennium Copyright Act anti-circumvention, and copyright reform. Its work has also helped support access to public information and greater business and government accountability. 

As a liquid that is easily stored and transported, ammonia (NH3) is an attractive carrier for hydrogen, which is used in fuel cells, semiconductor manufacturing, chemical processing, and other applications. However, breaking ammonia into hydrogen and nitrogen typically requires high temperatures, and the resulting gas mixture must undergo additional purification before the hydrogen can be used in many applications. 

MIT researchers have now developed an electrochemical approach to promote hydrogen release from ammonia while simultaneously separating and concentrating the hydrogen into a high-purity stream. Their strategy, which uses electricity to speed up the extraction, reduces the temperature and energy required to recover hydrogen from ammonia and other hydrogen carriers.

In a new study, the researchers showed that their approach can generate highly concentrated, pure streams of hydrogen.

“We have shown the ability to use electrochemistry to drive thermodynamically uphill and kinetically difficult dehydrogenation reactions,” says Yogesh Surendranath, the Donner Professor of Science and a professor of chemistry and chemical engineering. “In this case, we studied the conversion of ammonia and a liquid organic molecule because of their importance as possible hydrogen carriers for a hydrogen economy. But the concepts we learned here could in principle be translated further, and we’re actively working on translating it to other important dehydrogenation reactions.”

Surendranath is the corresponding author of the study, which appears today in Nature. MIT postdoc Rui Zeng, now a professor of materials science and engineering at Harbin Institute of Technology in Shenzhen, China, is the paper’s lead author.

Extracting hydrogen

Hydrogen is widely used in semiconductor manufacturing and chemical processing and is also an energy carrier in fuel cells that use hydrogen and oxygen to generate electricity without combustion. Expanding its use, however, will require practical ways to store and distribute it.

Hydrogen gas itself is difficult to transport efficiently without compression or liquefaction. One alternative is to store hydrogen chemically in compounds that are liquids or can be readily liquefied, then release it where and when it is needed.

Ammonia is one promising hydrogen carrier because it is already produced and transported across large distances, but recovering hydrogen from ammonia remains challenging. That process, known as “cracking,” requires temperatures higher than 500 degrees Celsius to achieve high reaction rates and conversion. The hydrogen must then be separated from nitrogen and unreacted ammonia.

“We wanted to ask whether we could use electrical inputs to drive what would otherwise be an unfavorable dehydrogenation reaction, and simultaneously do it in a way that would separate the hydrogen from the hydrogen carrier, so that it would be very pure and could be used directly in a fuel cell or other application that requires a high purity hydrogen stream,” Surendranath says. 

The key element of the researchers’ new design is the coupling of a palladium-based separation membrane with a hydrogen-generating electrode through a molten hydroxide electrolyte. The separation membrane selectively transports hydrogen while preventing other components of the reaction mixture from passing through.

Using the new setup, ammonia is first dehydrogenated by a catalyst containing ruthenium and cesium. The hydrogen then reaches the separation membrane, whose opposite side is in contact with a molten hydroxide electrolyte. 

The electrochemical gradient across this membrane effectively creates a “vacuum” for hydrogen, providing a strong driving force for its transport across the membrane. It also converts the hydrogen into protons and electrons, which travel separately through the molten electrolyte and external circuit, respectively, before recombining at a second electrode to form hydrogen gas. 

Because the membrane selectively transports hydrogen, the system produces a concentrated stream of hydrogen gas without requiring a separate downstream purification process.

“Using this electrochemical process, we’re able to do this active pumping of hydrogen from a low concentration to a high concentration,” Surendranath says.

Continuously extracting hydrogen can also help drive the dehydrogenation reaction forward, especially when the presence of hydrogen inhibits the reaction. In this way, this strategy does more than separate the product: It changes the reaction environment and enables hydrogen recovery under milder conditions.

This process thus can be performed at temperatures around 200 or 300 degrees Celsius, much lower than those required for conventional ammonia cracking. Another advantage is that it creates a pure stream of hydrogen that doesn’t need to be purified later on — a step that requires additional energy.

Curtis Berlinguette, a professor of chemistry and chemical and biological engineering at the University of British Columbia, described the method as “a powerful new way” to solve the problem of obtaining a pure stream of hydrogen from ammonia and other hydrogen carriers. 

“By using electricity to pull hydrogen through the membrane as it is released, they accelerate the dehydrogenation of ammonia and liquid organic hydrogen carriers while simultaneously producing a purified hydrogen stream. This is an important advance for the energy sciences because it opens a credible pathway for transporting hydrogen in stable chemical carriers and releasing it where and when it is needed,” says Berlinguette, who was not involved in the research.

Powering transportation

In this study, the researchers showed that this approach could be used to dehydrogenate not only ammonia but also methylcyclohexane. This molecule is part of a class known as liquid organic hydrogen carriers (LOHCs), which also hold potential as an energy carrier.

The researchers envision that their new strategy could be useful for transportation applications, such as powering cars, buses, or ships, or for fabricating semiconductors or electronics. Pure hydrogen gas is used for several steps in semiconductor manufacturing, where it plays important roles in boosting manufacturing yields and reducing surface defects.

Because palladium is an expensive metal, the researchers are now working on ways to reduce the amount of palladium needed for the separation membrane. They are also working on scaling up the process, and on applying it to other dehydrogenation reactions that could be industrially useful.

The research was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation.

Claude Fable 5.1 solved a 370-year-old cipher in forty-four minutes.

This tracks with what I wrote about AIs doing mathematics: It’s good at things that involve lots of searching and testing.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 09 September 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02738-2

How much ectothermic animals can rely on plastic adjustments in their physiology remains a central challenge when forecasting climate change impacts. Here, I look back on a 2015 paper that examined the role of physiological plasticity in thermal performance and discuss subsequent research and broader conservation implications.

EFF sued the government back in March for information about the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) model, a new Medicare program that uses AI to evaluate prior authorization requests for certain medical services. Today, we’re releasing approximately 1,000 pages of records obtained from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) through this litigation, including contracts with tech companies, internal status reports and providers’ complaints about the program. The documents (available here) show that WISeR has resulted in widespread delays and denials of care, operational chaos, and reports of patient harm.

Why We Sued for Records about WISeR

EFF filed the FOIA lawsuit to gain badly needed transparency into an experimental AI program that could jeopardize Medicare beneficiaries' access to care. In January 2026, CMS launched the WISeR model, subjecting seniors in six states to AI-driven prior authorization decisions. Medical providers must now request permission before delivering certain medical treatments if they want assurance that Medicare will cover them. Private companies contracted by CMS evaluate the requests using AI. In the absence of rigorous safeguards, AI-driven prior authorization determinations can lead to unwarranted—and even discriminatory—delays or denials of necessary medical care. 

Little is known about the AI systems that WISeR vendors are using to process prior authorization requests. Although CMS says that a qualified human clinician must review all denials, research has shown that AI-generated recommendations often influence human decisions. And the design of the WISeR program creates a financial incentive for vendors to deny care, since they are paid for averted expenditures. Just months after the program launched, medical providers reported improper denials, administrative friction, and lengthy delays that have left patients waiting in pain.

EFF’s FOIA request sought records pertaining to the CMS contracts with WISeR software vendors; any tests for accuracy, bias, or hallucinations in vendors' technology; and any audits, monitoring, or evaluation of WISeR and participating vendors.

CMS Documents Highlight Issues with the WISeR Model

CMS records obtained by EFF echo issues that medical providers, patient advocates, and lawmakers have warned about since WISeR began. This includes long wait times, rampant technical failures, inappropriate denials, and harm to patients.

Delayed Responses to Prior Authorization Requests

CMS publicly states that WISeR vendors should respond to prior authorization requests within 72 hours, but records received by EFF show widespread delays. Internal status reports from the first few months of the program show that WISeR vendors failed to respond within 72 hours for a significant number of requests. One status report cites a prior authorization request that went unanswered for 83 days ("WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records," page 234). These delayed responses can have serious consequences for patients. Medical providers reported that WISeR has delayed medically necessary care and left patients in pain as they waited for approvals.

Timeliness data for two WISeR vendors in January 2026 show that a significant number of requests did not receive a response within 72 hours (WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records, page 410)

Payment Methodology Provides Financial Incentive to Deny Care 

The released records confirm that WISeR’s payment methodology creates a financial incentive to deny care. Specifically, WISeR vendors are paid for requests that they deny (though not for denials reversed on appeal). This profit motive aggravates the risk that AI-assisted decision-making may unfairly deprive people of the services they need.

CMS publicly claims that it safeguards against inappropriate denials by tying vendors’ payment rates to “quality scores,” which reflect the timeliness and accuracy of vendors’ decisions. However, the recently released WISeR Data Reporting Guide shows that low quality scores reduce payments by only 5-10%.

Impact of low quality scores on payment rates described in the WISeR Data Reporting Guide (WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records, page 99)

WISeR Vendors Have Denied Thousands of Prior Authorization Requests

Documents obtained by EFF appear to support reports that WISeR vendors may be denying claims at unusually high rates. Two companies alone denied over 20,000 prior authorization requests in the first 3 months of the program. One company, Virtix, the vendor that CMS required to submit a Corrective Action Plan, denied more requests than it approved during this time period.

Prior authorization decision data for two vendors in a March 30th, 2026 status report (WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records, page 322)

Medical Provider Feedback Ties WISeR Delays to Patient Harm

Feedback from medical providers emphasize that WISeR delays have harmed patients. The released records include March 2026 responses to a feedback form about Innovaccer, the WISeR vendor processing requests for Ohio. Medical providers complained about a lack of communication, administrative issues, and long response times. Several responses emphasize that long response times from the WISeR vendor harmed patients ("WISeR FOIA Response - Feedback Survey Responses"):

“We have patients calling our offices crying in pain because their procedures are being delayed while awaiting approvals or guidance tied to this model. A 3–4 day delay for necessary pain procedures is already difficult for vulnerable patients, but when providers cannot obtain answers for weeks, the situation becomes unacceptable.”

“I HAVE HAD TO WATCH 3 PATIENTS CRY AT BEDSIDE FOR NOT HEARING BACK ON THEIR PRIOR AUTH FOR KYPHOPLASTY/VERTABRAL AUGMENTIATION PROCEDURE. THESE PATIENTS ARE IN DEEP PAIN.”

“I have had cases submitted and waiting over 1 1/2 months for a UTN to be generated… In the meantime patients are having to be cancelled for surgeries they need. This is not acceptable they are severely hindering patient care.”

Rushed Rollout Amidst Widespread Technical Failures 

CMS WISeR launched in January 2026, just six months after it was announced. Despite warnings from both medical providers and a vendor about insufficient preparation time, CMS chose not to delay the launch. 

Approximately a month before the launch, one of the vendors, Innovaccer, alerted CMS that it intended to go live with a version of its software that lacked full functionality and had not been fully tested. It cited several barriers to going live with full functionality, including changing requirements and expectations, unclear governance processes, and lack of time for end-to-end testing with the provider community ("WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records,", page 216-217). Innovaccer said it would auto-affirm all prior authorization requests until it could develop full functionality and explained that “Given CMS's decision not to delay the model start date, auto-affirming is the only path available” ("WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records," page 217).

Innovaccer had not yet finished developing or testing some features several months into the program, according to an April 2026 status report. Innovaccer was not the only vendor who faced technical challenges before and after WISeR launched. Weekly status reports and provider feedback in the released records show widespread challenges associated with WISeR’s rushed rollout (for example, "WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records," pages 238 and 383).

A status report from April 6th, 2026 describes issues with incomplete solutions from Innovaccer (WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records, page 200)

More Urgent Medical Services Considered for Inclusion in Future Years of WISeR Model

In its first year, the WISeR model introduced prior authorization requirements for a set of 13 medical services. The June 2025 Innovation Center Investment Plan for WISeR lists medical services that could be added to the program in future years. This planning document considers the possibility of adding services “where prior authorization would have to be done on a more urgent or emergent basis,” including air ambulance transport, cancer treatment, MRI scans, and medications without publicly available coverage criteria.

A planning document from June 2025 lists ideas for the expansion of WISeR to additional medical services (WISeR FOIA Response - Combined Records, page 22)

More Transparency is Needed About Medicare’s AI Experiment

CMS continues to produce records in response to EFF’s lawsuit. Records released thus far echo concerns that providers have raised since WISeR launched, including long delays, financial incentives to deny care, and technical problems. But important questions remain about the AI systems private companies are using to inform decisions about whether to provide people with Medicare benefits. As CMS continues to produce documents, we will continue to make them available to the public. The public deserves to know how AI is driving decisions that affect patients’ access to care.

Related Cases: EFF v. CMS

This essay was written with Barath Raghavan, and originally appeared in Lawfare.

In April, an artificial intelligence (AI) agent conducting a routine task at a company hit a snag, tried to solve it, and soon ended up deleting the company’s database along with all of its backups. In July, OpenAI asked an unreleased AI model to attempt a hacking test. Instead of staying in the isolated box the developers had put it in, the model hacked onto the open internet and into another company to steal the answers. And as reported in August, an AI agent booked someone into a full gym class by ...

Interesting research: “Stealing Reasoning Traces from Proprietary LLM APIs“:

Abstract: Leading large language model providers now conceal their models’ step-by-step reasoning, or chain-of-thought, to protect intellectual property and limit information leakage. Rather than storing these traces server-side, providers return them to the client as blocks of encrypted text, which the client passes back with each subsequent request. Building on prior research, we identify an architectural vulnerability: these encrypted blocks are fully compatible and interchangeable across different sessions, users, and models within a provider’s ecosystem. We exploit this compatibility to develop a scalable decryption jailbreak. By injecting an encrypted reasoning trace from a given model into a weaker, and less safeguarded model from the same provider, we force it to decode and output the trace verbatim in plaintext, without ever jailbreaking the more capable model directly. This vulnerability enables four distinct attack vectors. First, it circumvents anti-distillation mechanisms, allowing adversaries to extract a proprietary model’s reasoning, as we demonstrate across Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google. Second, it allows for large-scale private data extraction. Developers frequently share session logs publicly, unaware of contents of the encrypted blocks. By decoding 315,320 reasoning blocks scraped from public repositories, we recovered 367 Personally Identifiable Information (PII) artifacts and 182 credentials. Third, it inadvertently reveals hazardous information hidden within the reasoning process, even in cases where the model’s final, visible output safely rejects a malicious request. Fourth, attackers can leverage this flaw to execute invisible prompt injections, embedding malicious payloads entirely within encrypted blocks to poison public agentic rollouts. Following responsible disclosure, we propose concrete cryptographic and system-level mitigations to secure client-side reasoning...

How will global access to food, water, and energy evolve in coming decades? A new study co-authored by MIT researchers suggests the answers could be very different depending on region, resource, and income.

Based on extensive modeling of many different resource scenarios, the study finds that in some regions, lower-income people could be spending roughly 50 percent of their income on food by the year 2050, in contrast to higher-income groups that could spent about 5 percent of income on food in the same areas. 

“For a lot of these outcomes, the lower-income groups see much worse potential insecurity,” says Jennifer Morris, a principal research scientist at the MIT Center for Sustainability Science and Strategy and the MIT Energy Initiative, and co-author of a new paper detailing the findings. The results, she notes, can be evaluated by policymakers in different global regions to understand what the long-term, large-scale resource security risks may become for different parts of their populations. 

“Anything that’s taking up half of your income is potentially destabilizing for your entire life because it leaves so few resources for the other critical needs and basic life necessities,” Morris says. 

The study focuses on projecting future access to food, water, and energy, based on long-term variation across a dozen major factors influencing their availability, from economic conditions and agriculture production to trade conditions, climate, land use, and more. 

“This study shows that there is no single driver of future food, energy, and water insecurity,” says Gi Joo Kim, a research scientist at Tulane University and co-author of the paper. “Income is important, but regional conditions, land use, energy systems, water availability, and consumer behavior all shape the risks people face.” For policymakers, he adds, “This means they need to consider specific combinations of factors that create vulnerability in each region.”

The paper, “Identifying Key Uncertainties and Drivers of Future Resource Security Outcomes Through a Multisector Scenario Ensemble,” appears in the journal Earth’s Future.

In addition to Morris and Kim, the authors include Brian O’Neill, an earth scientist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Marshall Wise, a system engineer at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; John Weyant, a professor of management science and engineering at Stanford University; and Jonathan Lamontagne, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Tufts University. 

Filling a gap

The current study fills a gap in modeling among scientists studying issues such as long-term resource security. Given the complications of long-term analyses, many studies have used what scientists term “shared socioeconomic pathway” circumstances, a small set of senarios spanning broad global narratives about the future, rather than exploring specific outcomes such as how long-term resource access may shift in linked fashion across income groups in different regions of the world. Two years ago, the same group of authors wrote a paper calling for more socioeconomically specific scenario analysis focused on outcomes for human well-being; the current study is their effort to develop that kind of modeling. 

“For this type of study, where we’re focused on human well-being outcomes, the income piece is really important,” Morris says. 

To conduct the study, the researchers adopted an existing framework in the field, the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM) version 7.1, which represents interactions between energy, economies, water, land, and climate while dividing the world into 32 regions, 235 water basins, and 384 land-use regions and making adjustments for things like estimated commodity prices over time.

The research group used 12 main variables connected to resource availability, including population, GDP, income distribution, carbon intensity, land use, agricultural trade, multiple energy consumption scenarios, multiple water-use projections, and more. They ran simulations for 3,735 different scenarios involving these factors, to better understand the range of possible resource outcomes by 2050. 

Broadly, the modeling does uncover some significant regional variations. In 2050 food security may be most acute in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, while energy security could be most acute for low-income residents in some parts of Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East. 

But within any region, there may still be substantial variation in resource security. In southern Africa, the modeling suggests that the poorest 10 percent of the population by income could be spending 49.6 percent of its income on food, compared to just 5.5 percent for the wealthiest 10 percent of the population. In West and East Africa the projected food burden for the bottom 10 percent of the population in terms of income is projected to be 48.4 percent and 42.5 percent, respectively. 

To understand the potential change this represents over time, the researchers compared the results to data from the year 2015 in the GCAM model. For the lowest-income group across western Africa in 2015, the average food burden was about 25 percent of people’s income, compared to estimates for 2050 that range from about 20 percent to 75 percent of income. In southern Africa, the lowest-income group spent about 20 percent of their income on food in 2015, but the scholars’ modeling projects an increase in food burden ranging from 25 percent to 65 percent of income. The wide variation in projected burden reflects the wide range in possible future scenarios.

When it comes to energy, variation by income is also apparent. In some parts of the Middle East, for instance, the residential energy burden in 2050 is estimated to be just 1.7 percent for the highest income bracket but 18.9 for the lowest income bracket; in Eastern Europe, the energy burden reaches 11.3 percent of income for the lowest-income bracket, while resting at under 5 percent for the highest-income bracket. 

“Regional averages can make future resource-security risks appear more manageable than they actually are,” Kim says. “This means analyses that stop at the average may miss exactly the populations most vulnerable to future change.”

Understanding the dynamics

To be sure, as the scholars emphasize, there are many uncertainties when it comes to resource access, and uncertainty is always part of modeling the global economy and resources. Still, they believe these kinds of projections can provide a more detailed outlook about social conditions in 2050 than has previously been available.

“At the very least, it’s highlighting areas of concern and showing that they differ in different parts of the world,” Morris says. “One of the outputs of this type of study is to map that out and provide that kind of insight. That can also inform the focus of further studies into specific regions and concerns.”

The researchers also believe the results will provide a new roadmap for policymakers who may be concerned about long-term resource provision across the entirety of their societies. While having new projections is valuable, modeling also helps analysts and policymakers see which factors most clearly influence future resource outcomes, as well.

“Our method was designed to identify the conditions that produce different resource security outcomes, rather than to predict one most likely future,” Kim says. 

“It’s a different approach to scenarios than we typically see,” Morris adds. “The approach and method have been appealing to people because they have a broad range of uses and applications.”

The research was supported, in part, by the U.S. Department of Energy; Stanford University; and the National Research Foundation of Korea. 

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 08 September 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02737-3

The authors analyse the impacts of the adoption of genetically engineered crops in the USA over 40 years. They show that genetically engineered crop adoption has led to some increases in yield and reduced yield volatility, while also acting as an adaptation against climate change-driven northward shifts.

Not sure it’s practical, but it’s certainly striking.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 07 September 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02761-3

Author Correction: Tree species richness relates to long-term forest photosynthesis increase

Looks tasty.

As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven’t covered.

Blog moderation policy.

It won’t work:

My suspicion was that GPT 5.6-Cyber would succeed, but the frequency and manner of its success removed all doubt. We have to reassess sandboxing quality for capable AI agents, and in general the software stack with which they interact.

An off-the-shelf VM is not enough to contain a modern, cyber-capable AI agent. There is simply too much attack surface. Even innocuous features (like running with a display) add extra, exploitable attack surface.

Beneath the Arctic Ocean is an orchestra featuring natural and human composers, from cracking sea ice and whistling beluga whales to humming shipping-vessel engines. Researchers from MIT Lincoln Laboratory heard some of this cacophony when analyzing data from commercial off-the-shelf sensors that they integrated and deployed in 2024 during the U.S. Navy's Operation Ice Camp (OIC). This past March, during OIC 2026, the researchers returned to the Arctic with a higher-fidelity version of one of the sensors, a geophone, which detects vibrations in the sea ice.

"We're interested in things that make sound underneath the ice," says Ben Evans, a researcher in the laboratory's Advanced Undersea Systems and Technology Group. "For example, our OIC 2024 data contained marine-mammal songs. We need a better understanding of how such signals propagate through ice, and how to distinguish these signals from other sources."

This underwater soundscape is shifting as sheets of Arctic sea ice rapidly break and melt, opening previously impassable maritime routes for military and commercial activity. Determining the unique sound profiles, or acoustic signatures, produced by fracturing ice will enable researchers to develop predictive capabilities for building coastal community resilience, informing geopolitical strategy, and surveilling adversary Arctic activity. The Fiscal Year 2027 Administration R&D Budget Priorities and Cross-Cutting Actions calls for agencies to "prioritize research and associated research infrastructure investments that enhance America's ability to observe, understand, and predict the physical, biological, geologic, and socioeconomic processes and interacting systems of the Arctic to protect and advance American interests and ensure prosperity of America's Arctic residents," and to "invest in R&D that assures America's uncontested navigation and strategic utilization of the Arctic."

Weather woes

Evans and David Whelihan have been trekking to OIC since 2022, advancing their vision to distribute a set of low-cost sensors across the Arctic for continuous monitoring. Hosted by the Navy's Arctic Submarine Laboratory (ASL) every two years, OIC is a three-week event during which U.S. and allied military forces conduct operational readiness exercises. The temporary infrastructure ASL sets up for OIC — a drifting sheet of Arctic sea ice, atop which sits a runway and insulated tents for lodging and command and control — simultaneously enables researchers to test prototype equipment and conduct experiments in an environment otherwise inhospitable to humans. This opportunity is particularly valuable as Arctic monitoring systems are developed in support of U.S. Department of War priorities.

This year proved especially challenging, with back-to-back blizzards creating whiteout conditions. Temperatures persistently plunged to minus 25 degrees Fahrenheit, and winds blew at 25 to 30 miles per hour with 40 mph gusts. Although the team, which also included Ella Wawrzynek and Ryan Saenger, had intended on completing two stints on the ice — one to deploy the sensors and the other to retrieve them after a few weeks — the weather had other plans. Their initial trip to camp was delayed by a week as windblown snow halted all inbound and outbound flights.

While they waited in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, for the weather to clear, Whelihan was readying another technology they planned to test at OIC: a modem from industry partner Havguard, a Norwegian defense technology startup, that can communicate through ice using magnetic fields (instead of radio-frequency signals, which are rapidly diminished by seawater). However, harsh conditions inside and outside in Prudhoe Bay led to some system failures, and he flew back to the laboratory to fix them. "De-risking and operationalizing critical technology for the warfighter is an important part of what we do," Whelihan says.

After Evans, Wawrzynek, and Saenger arrived at camp on March 7, not a single flight came or left for the next five days. During a "normal" mobilization at OIC, six to nine flights per day are typical. "At times, we couldn't see participating countries' flags on poles roughly 100 feet away from the command tent," Evans says. "We had to put on hats and sometimes goggles just to go between tents, whereas at previous OIC events we walked around with long johns and pants."

The day after their arrival, they loaded their sensors onto a sled, and a field party leader (an expert in Arctic survival) driving a 4x4 vehicle with tracks towed them outside the main camp area. After deploying a quarter of the sensors they had planned, their leader received a call from camp command instructing them to return. The windblown snow was picking up, and they soon wouldn't be able to retrace their tracks back to camp.

A week later, the team had a clear day to retrieve their sensors and fly out of camp. "We laughed, because we could very easily see camp from where we had deployed the sensors," Evans adds.

Magnetic communication

As Whelihan returned to Prudhoe Bay with the fixed communications modem, another blizzard hit. Because the laboratory team had already been to camp once and other research teams needed an opportunity to go onto the ice during the next clear-weather window, the laboratory contracted with UIC Science to conduct the modem experiment. A business unit of the Ukpeaġvik Iñupiat Corp., UIC Science provides logistical and technical support for Arctic research based in Utqiaġvik (Barrow), Alaska, the northernmost U.S. city. Unlike the drifting ice in the open ocean, the ice in Utqiaġvik is primarily landfast, meaning it's fastened, or anchored, to the shoreline or seafloor.

Through UIC Science, Whelihan and Wawrzynek learned how to ride snowmobiles and then drove onto a big lagoon, where they drilled a 2x3-foot hole through 3.6 feet of ice to deploy a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) carrying the Havguard communications modem. The modem is based on a magneto-inductive transmitter (positioned below the ice) and receiver (sitting atop the ice), which are housed within polycarbonate domes to protect the sensitive electronics. The duo had met with Havguard in Norway in fall 2025 to discuss plans for testing the modem in the Arctic, and Havguard in turn built a version to testing specifications. Prior to OIC, Havguard and the laboratory team deployed the modem on a large reservoir in Vermont. While not representative of Arctic sea ice over salt water, this environment allowed them to test their procedures and capabilities.

"Under the Arctic lagoon ice, we placed the ROV, which was also equipped with a Doppler velocity logger, a four-beam sonar system that measures the vehicle's speed and direction," Whelihan says. "We used those measurements as the ROV drove under the ice, plus aerial drone images, to superimpose a picture of the ROV on the site so we could track it and calculate the modem's rate of test-data transfer. We achieved through-ice communication at about 1.2 kilobytes per second on an alpha prototype system that had traveled from Boston to Alaska three times. This result is very encouraging, and the system warrants further development."

In future iterations of this setup, the data could then be relayed out of the Arctic through drones or satellites.

Community connections

While in Utqiaġvik for a week in mid-April, they participated over the weekend in the Piuraaġiaqta annual spring festival, watching a harpoon-throwing contest and proctoring a kids' snowmobile race. And with eighth graders at the local middle school, they discussed their Arctic R&D and engaged them in a game teaching sonar concepts.

"When you embrace this culture of community, you meet lots of interesting people and doors open up," Whelihan says.  

"Connecting with the Arctic community is an important aspect of our work," Evans adds. "Every time we come here, we cross paths with someone we don't expect to, learn about their work, and think about how we may be able to collaborate." For example, at OIC 2024, the laboratory team had met a professor from the University of Maryland at College Park with extensive experience collecting and analyzing cryoseismological data; they now hope to work with him to apply machine learning to discriminate between icequakes and marine mammal vocalizations.

In the lead-up to OIC 2028, the team plans to design, prototype, and test air-droppable versions of some of their sensors while continuing to partner with Havguard on the through-ice communications modem. Their next step is to optimize the modem's packaging to facilitate deployability in the Arctic and integration with the laboratory's sensor suite.

"The through-line in all this work is minimizing boots on the ice," Whelihan says. "Especially this year, we learned that the weather is in charge of our access to the Arctic. We need ways to easily get sensors where we want them and to retrieve the data they collect, even in these extremely challenging conditions."

This work is funded through the laboratory's internally administered R&D portfolio in mission-critical technology (integrated systems area) and the laboratory's Advanced Concept Committee, which funds high-risk, high-reward early-stage research addressing critical gaps in national security technology.