The industry has lost a record $6.9 billion in investment this year as companies navigate an "unstable policy environment," according to a new analysis.

The influential lobbying group for CEOs argued that the shareholder resolution process has been "co-opted" by environmental activists.

President Donald Trump’s tariff war has left investors struggling to navigate a fire hose of headlines from the White House, most of which have added to the uncertainty gripping markets.

Elliott Investment Management has made clear it wants BP to return to its core oil and gas business.

A “certain major country” is keen on unilateralism and protectionism and has caused “serious impacts” on international rules and order, Chinese President Xi Jinping said.

Companies like BYD, Great Wall, Geely and Chery Automobile are reaching outward as they build the scale they need to survive cut-throat competition in their home market.

The federal government is using social media surveillance to target student visa holders living in the United States for online speech the Trump administration disfavors. This new program, called “Catch and Revoke,” is an effort to revoke visas and appears to be a cross-agency collaboration between the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the Department of Justice. It includes a dedicated task force and the use of AI and other data analytic tools to review the public social media accounts of tens of thousands of student visa holders. Though the full scope remains unclear, current reports indicate that the administration is surveilling for “pro-Hamas” sentiment, “antisemitic activity,” or even just “conduct that bears a hostile attitude toward U.S. citizens or U.S. culture.” At the time of publishing of this blog post, the federal government has already revoked over 1600 student visas for a variety of reasons.

This social media surveillance program is an alarming attack on freedom of speech and privacy—for both visa holders here in the United States and their American associates.

A Dangerous Erosion of Free Speech

While there is some nuance in the interplay between freedom of speech and immigration law, one principle remains evident: foreign nationals who currently reside in the U.S.—including student visa holders—are protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court stated in Bridges v. Wixon (1945) that “[f]reedom of speech and of press is accorded aliens residing in this country.”

First Amendment-Protected Political Speech

The Trump administration’s efforts to revoke student visas based, in part, on what students have said publicly on social media is especially constitutionally problematic given that the government is targeting core First Amendment-protected political speech. As the Supreme Court stated in Mills v. Alabama (1966), a central purpose of the First Amendment is to “protect the free discussion of governmental affairs,” whether on political issues, public officials, or how the government should operate.

The administration is targeting non-citizen students for “pro-Hamas,” antisemitic, and even just pro-Palestinian speech. Yet what falls under these categories is vague and not clearly defined. For example, the administration detained a Georgetown University researcher due to social media posts that are critical of Israel, but do not express support for Hamas.

More importantly, even controversial or offensive speech falls within the protections of the First Amendment. There are several categories of speech that do not enjoy First Amendment protection, including true threats of violence, inciting imminent violence, and providing material support for terrorism. However, short of rising to that level, the student speech targeted by the administration is protected by the First Amendment. Worse still, the administration is broadly going after students who simply appear to be “social activists” or are engaged in speech that is generically “anti-American.”

Such an overbroad social media surveillance and visa revocation program—one that sweeps in wholly lawful speech—strikes at the heart of what the First Amendment was intended to protect against.

Chilling Effect

Social media surveillance motivated by the government’s desire to punish political speech will chill (and surely has already chilled) student visa holders from speaking out online.

The Supreme Court stated in Lamont v. Postmaster General (1965) that a government policy that causes individuals “to feel some inhibition” in freely expressing themselves “is at war with the ‘uninhibited, robust, and wide-open’ debate and discussion that are contemplated by the First Amendment.” More recently, Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor expressed in a concurring opinion that “[a]wareness that the Government may be watching chills associational and expressive freedoms” guaranteed by the First Amendment.

That is, student visa holders are more likely to engage in self-censorship and refrain from expressing dissenting or controversial political views. Or they may choose to disengage from social media entirely, to avoid the risk that even seemingly benign posts will affect their visa status and their ability to continue their education in the United States.

Student visa holders may also limit whom they connect with on social media, particularly if they fear those connections will have political views the current administration doesn’t like. The administration has not expressly stated that it will limit its surveillance only to the social media posts of student visa holders, which means it may also look at posts made by those in the students’ networks. This, too, undermines the First Amendment. The freedom to associate and express political views as a group—“particularly controversial ones”—is a fundamental aspect of freedom of speech, as the Supreme Court stated in its landmark NAACP v. Alabama (1958) decision.

American Citizens Impacted

Because student visa holders’ social networks undoubtedly include U.S. citizens, those citizens may also be subject to social media scrutiny, and therefore will also be chilled from freely speaking or associating online. Government agents have previously held visa holders responsible for the activity of their social media connections. Knowing this, a U.S. citizen who has a non-citizen friend or family member in the U.S. on a student visa might hesitate to post criticisms of the government—even if fully protected by the First Amendment—fearing the posts could negatively impact their loved one. A general climate of government surveillance may also lead U.S. citizens to self-censor on social media, even without any foreign national friends or family.

A Threat to Digital Privacy

Social media surveillance, even of publicly available profiles and especially with automated tools, can invade personal privacy. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the government’s collection and aggregation of publicly available personal information—particularly when enhanced by technology—can implicate privacy interests. The government can obtain personal information it otherwise would not have access to or that would usually be difficult to find across disparate locations.

Social media aggregates personal information in one place, including some of the most intimate details of our lives, such as our health information, likes and dislikes, political views and religious beliefs, and people with whom we associate. And automated tools can easily search for and help find this information. Even people who choose not to post much personal information on social media might still be exposed by comments and tags made by other users.

Constitutional Harms are Exacerbated by Automated Tools

The Trump administration is reportedly deploying artificial intelligence and other automated tools to assist in its review of student visa holders’ social media posts. While facts are still coming to light, any form of automation is likely to amplify speech and privacy harms to student visa holders.

By the government’s own assessment in another context—evaluating the admissibility of visa applicants (discussed below)—social media surveillance has not proven effective at assessing security threats.

Human review of public social media posts is itself prone to problems. Social media posts are highly context-specific, and government officials often have trouble differentiating between sarcasm, parody, and exaggeration from unlawful support for controversial causes. This leads to mistakes and misinterpretations. For example, in 2012 an Irish citizen was turned back at the border because DHS agents misinterpreted two of his Twitter posts: one, that he was going to “destroy America” – slang for partying – and two, that he was going to “dig up Marilyn Monroe’s grave” – a joke. These mistakes are even more likely when the posts are not in English or when they contain cultural references .

Human review augmented by automated tools is just as bad. Automated tools also have difficulty understanding the nuances of language, as well as the broader context in which a statement was made. These algorithms are also designed to replicate patterns in existing datasets, but if the data is biased, the technology simply reinforces those biases. As such, automated tools are similarly prone to mistakes and misinterpretations. Yet people often defer to automated outputs thinking they are correct or fair simply because a computer was used to produce them. And in some cases, decision-makers may even use these tools to justify or cover their own biases.

Most concerning would be if automated systems were permitted to make final visa revocation decisions without any human review. As EFF has repeatedly stated, automated tools should never get the final say on whether a person should be policed, arrested, denied freedom, or, in this case, stripped of a student visa and forcibly barred from completing their education.

Government Social Media Surveillance is Not New—and is Expanding

That the Trump administration is using social media surveillance on student visa holders residing in the United States is a disturbing apparent escalation of a longstanding trend.

EFF has long sounded the alarm on the civil liberty harms of government social media surveillance. In particular, since 2019, visa applicants have been required to disclose all social media accounts they have used in the last five years to the U.S. government. That policy is the subject of an ongoing lawsuit, Doc Society v. Pompeo, in which EFF filed an amicus brief.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently upped the ante by ordering officials to deny visas to new or returning student applicants if their social media broadly demonstrates “a hostile attitude toward U.S. citizens or U.S. culture (including government, institutions, or founding principles).” Notably, Rubio indicated this standard could also apply to current student visa holders. The State Department also announced it will review the social media of any visa applicant who has been to Gaza since 2007.

The Trump administration has also proposed dramatically expanding social media scrutiny by requiring non-citizens already legally residing in the U.S. to disclose social media accounts on a variety of forms related to immigration benefits, such as people seeking lawful permanent residency or naturalization. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a component of DHS, also announced it would look for “antisemitic activity” on social media to deny immigration benefits to individuals currently in the country.

Protecting Your Accounts

There are general steps you can take to better protect your social media accounts from surveillance. Understand, however, that the landscape is shifting rapidly and not all protections are foolproof. Law enforcement may be able to get a warrant for your private information and messages if a judge is convinced there is preliminary evidence supporting probable cause of criminal activity. And non-governmental individuals and groups have recently used other forms of technology like face recognition to identify and report student activists for potential deportation. You should conduct your own individualized risk assessment to determine what online activity is safe for you.

Still, it never hurts to better secure your online privacy. For your current social media accounts, consider locking them down:

• Make public accounts private and ensure only approved connections can see your content. Note that if your past public posts have already been copied and saved by an outside party, making your account private will not undo this. It will, however, better protect your future posts.
• Some platforms make certain information publicly viewable, even if you’ve made your account private. Other information may be public by default, but can be made private. Review each platform’s privacy settings to limit what information is shared publicly, including friend lists, contact information, and location information.
• You should also review your friends or followers list to ensure you know every person you’ve approved, especially when making a once-public account private.

If you create a new social media account:

• Query whether you want to attach your legal name to it. Many platforms allow you to have a pseudonymous account.
• When setting up the account, don’t provide more personal information than is necessary.

EFF’s Surveillance Self-Defense guide provides additional information on protecting your social media accounts from a variety of actors. If you're not sure what information is publicly available about you on social networks or other sites, consider doing some research to see what, if anything, others would find.

By targeting international students for broad categories of online speech, this administration is fostering a climate of fear, making students anxious that a single post or errant “like” could cost them their U.S. visa or even lead to detention and deportation. This will, ultimately, stifle political debate and silence dissent–for non-citizens and citizens alike–undermining the open dialogue crucial to democracy.

Researchers from the Critical Analytics for Manufacturing Personalized-Medicine (CAMP) interdisciplinary research group of the Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology (SMART), MIT’s research enterprise in Singapore, in collaboration with MIT, A*STAR Skin Research Labs, and the National University of Singapore, have developed a novel method that can quickly and automatically detect and monitor microbial contamination in cell therapy products (CTPs) early on during the manufacturing process. By measuring ultraviolet light absorbance of cell culture fluids and using machine learning to recognize light absorption patterns associated with microbial contamination, this preliminary testing method aims to reduce the overall time taken for sterility testing and, subsequently, the time patients need to wait for CTP doses. This is especially crucial where timely administration of treatments can be life-saving for terminally ill patients. Cell therapy represents a promising new frontier in medicine, especially in treating diseases such as cancers, inflammatory diseases, and chronic degenerative disorders by manipulating or replacing cells to restore function or fight disease. However, a major challenge in CTP manufacturing is quickly and effectively ensuring that cells are free from contamination before being administered to patients. Existing sterility testing methods, based on microbiological methods,  are labor-intensive and require up to 14 days to detect contamination, which could adversely affect critically ill patients who need immediate treatment. While advanced techniques such as rapid microbiological methods (RMMs) can reduce the testing period to seven days, they still require complex processes such as cell extraction and growth enrichment mediums, and they are highly dependent on skilled workers for procedures such as sample extraction, measurement, and analysis. This creates an urgent need for new methods that offer quicker outcomes without compromising the quality of CTPs, meet the patient-use timeline, and use a simple workflow that does not require additional preparation. In a paper titled “Machine learning aided UV absorbance spectroscopy for microbial contamination in cell therapy products,” published in the journal Scientific Reports, SMART CAMP researchers described how they combined UV absorbance spectroscopy to develop a machine learning-aided method for label-free, noninvasive, and real-time detection of cell contamination during the early stages of manufacturing. This method offers significant advantages over both traditional sterility tests and RMMs, as it eliminates the need for staining of cells to identify labelled organisms, avoids the invasive process of cell extraction, and delivers results in under half-an-hour. It provides an intuitive, rapid “yes/no” contamination assessment, facilitating automation of cell culture sampling with a simple workflow. Furthermore, the developed method does not require specialized equipment, resulting in lower costs. “This rapid, label-free method is designed to be a preliminary step in the CTP manufacturing process as a form of continuous safety testing, which allows users to detect contamination early and implement timely corrective actions, including the use of RMMs only when possible contamination is detected. This approach saves costs, optimizes resource allocation, and ultimately accelerates the overall manufacturing timeline,” says Shruthi Pandi Chelvam, senior research engineer at SMART CAMP and first author of the paper. “Traditionally, cell therapy manufacturing is labor-intensive and subject to operator variability. By introducing automation and machine learning, we hope to streamline cell therapy manufacturing and reduce the risk of contamination. Specifically, our method supports automated cell culture sampling at designated intervals to check for contamination, which reduces manual tasks such as sample extraction, measurement, and analysis. This enables cell cultures to be monitored continuously and contamination to be detected at early stages,” says Rajeev Ram, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at MIT, a principal investigator at SMART CAMP, and the corresponding author of the paper. Moving forward, future research will focus on broadening the application of the method to encompass a wider range of microbial contaminants, specifically those representative of current good manufacturing practices environments and previously identified CTP contaminants. Additionally, the model’s robustness can be tested across more cell types apart from MSCs. Beyond cell therapy manufacturing, this method can also be applied to the food and beverage industry as part of microbial quality control testing to ensure food products meet safety standards.

Text “SQUID” to 1-833-SCI-TEXT for daily squid facts. The website has merch.

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

In an unprecedented move, the U.S. Department of Treasury and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently reached an agreement allowing the IRS to share with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) taxpayer information of certain immigrants. The redacted 15-page memorandum of understanding (MOU) was exposed in a court case, Centro de Trabajadores Unidos v. Bessent, which seeks to prevent the IRS from unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer information for immigration enforcement purposes. Weaponizing government data vital to the functioning and funding of public goods and services by repurposing it for law enforcement and surveillance is an affront to a democratic society. In addition to the human rights abuses this data-sharing agreement empowers, this move threatens to erode trust in public institutions in ways that could bear consequences for decades. 

Specifically, the government justifies the MOU by citing Executive Order 14161, which was issued on January 20, 2025. The Executive Order directs the heads of several agencies, including DHS, to identify and remove individuals unlawfully present in the country. Making several leaps, the MOU states that DHS has identified “numerous” individuals who are unlawfully present and have final orders of removal, and that each of these individuals is “under criminal investigation” for violation of federal law—namely, “failure to depart” the country under 8 U.S.C. § 1253(a)(1). The MOU uses this basis for the IRS disclosing to ICE taxpayer information that is otherwise confidential under the tax code.  

In practice, this new data-sharing process works like this: ICE makes a request for an individual’s name and address, taxable periods for which the return information pertains, the federal criminal statute being investigated, and reasons why disclosure of this information is relevant to the criminal investigation. Once the IRS receives this request from ICE, the agency reviews it to determine whether it falls under an exception to the statutory authority requiring confidentiality and provides an explanation if the request cannot be processed. 

But there are two big reasons why this MOU fails to pass muster. 

First, as the NYU Tax Law Center identified:

“While the MOU references criminal investigations, DHS recently reportedly told IRS officials that ‘they would hope to use tax information to help deport as many as seven million people.’ That is far more people than the government could plausibly investigate, or who are plausibly subject to criminal immigration penalties, and suggests DHS’s actual reason for pursuing the tax data is to locate people for civil deportation, making any ‘criminal investigation’ a false pretext to get around the law.” 

Second, it’s unclear how the IRS would verify the accuracy of ICE’s requests. Recent events have demonstrated that ICE’s deportation mandate trumps all else—with ICE obfuscating, ignoring, or outright lying about how they conduct their operations and who they target. While ICE has fueled narratives about deporting “criminals” to a notorious El Salvador prison, reports have repeatedly shown that most of those deported had no criminal histories. ICE has even arrested U.S. citizens based on erroneous information and blatant racial profiling. But ICE’s lack of accuracy isn’t new—in fact, a recent settlement in the case Gonzalez v. ICE bars ICE from relying on its network of erroneous databases to issue detainer requests. In that case, EFF filed an amicus brief identifying the dizzying array of ICE’s interconnected databases, many of which were out of date and incomplete and yet were still relied upon to deprive people of their liberty. 

In the wake of the MOU’s signing, several top IRS officials have resigned. For decades, the agency expressed interest in only collecting tax revenue and promised to keep that information confidential. Undocumented immigrants were encouraged to file taxes, despite being unable to reap benefits like Social Security because of their status. Many did, often because any promise of a future pathway to legalizing their immigration status hinged on having fulfilled their tax obligations. Others did because as part of mixed-status families, they were able to claim certain tax benefits for their U.S. citizen children. The MOU weaponizes that trust and puts immigrants in an impossible situation—either fail to comply with tax law or risk facing deportation if their tax data ends up in ICE’s clutches. 

This MOU is also sure to have a financial impact. In 2023, it was estimated that undocumented immigrants contributed $66 billion in federal and payroll taxes alone. Experts anticipate that due to the data-sharing agreement, fewer undocumented immigrants will file taxes, resulting in over $313 billion in lost tax revenue over 10 years. 

This move by the federal government not only betrays taxpayers and erodes vital trust in necessary civic institutions—it also reminds us of how little we have learned from U.S. history. After all, it was a piece of legislation passed in a time of emergency, the Second War Powers Act, that included the provision that allowed once-protected census data to assist in the incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II. As the White House wrote in a report on big data in 2014, “At its core, public-sector use of big data heightens concerns about the balance of power between government and the individual. Once information about citizens is compiled for a defined purpose, the temptation to use it for other purposes can be considerable.” Rather than heeding this caution, this data-sharing agreement seeks to exploit it. This is yet another attempt by the current administration to sweep up and disclose large amounts of sensitive and confidential data. Courts must put a stop to these efforts to destroy data privacy, especially for vulnerable groups.

Senior Madison Wang, a double major in creative writing and chemistry, developed her passion for writing in middle school. Her interest in chemistry fit nicely alongside her commitment to producing engaging narratives. 

Wang believes that world-building in stories supported by science and research can make for a more immersive reader experience.

“In science and in writing, you have to tell an effective story,” she says. “People respond well to stories.”  

A native of Buffalo, New York, Wang applied early action for admission to MIT and learned quickly that the Institute was where she wanted to be. “It was a really good fit,” she says. “There was positive energy and vibes, and I had a great feeling overall.”

The power of science and good storytelling

“Chemistry is practical, complex, and interesting,” says Wang. “It’s about quantifying natural laws and understanding how reality works.”

Chemistry and writing both help us “see the world’s irregularity,” she continues. Together, they can erase the artificial and arbitrary line separating one from the other and work in concert to tell a more complete story about the world, the ways in which we participate in building it, and how people and objects exist in and move through it. 

“Understanding magnetism, material properties, and believing in the power of magic in a good story … these are why we’re drawn to explore,” she says. “Chemistry describes why things are the way they are, and I use it for world-building in my creative writing.”

Wang lauds MIT’s creative writing program and cites a course she took with Comparative Media Studies/Writing Professor and Pulitzer Prize winner Junot Díaz as an affirmation of her choice. Seeing and understanding the world through the eyes of a scientist — its building blocks, the ways the pieces fit and function together — help explain her passion for chemistry, especially inorganic and physical chemistry.

Wang cites the work of authors like Sam Kean and Knight Science Journalism Program Director Deborah Blum as part of her inspiration to study science. The books “The Disappearing Spoon” by Kean and “The Poisoner’s Handbook” by Blum “both present historical perspectives, opting for a story style to discuss the events and people involved,” she says. “They each put a lot of work into bridging the gap between what can sometimes be sterile science and an effective narrative that gets people to care about why the science matters.”

Genres like fantasy and science fiction are complementary, according to Wang. “Constructing an effective world means ensuring readers understand characters’ motivations — the ‘why’ — and ensuring it makes sense,” she says. “It’s also important to show how actions and their consequences influence and motivate characters.” 

As she explores the world’s building blocks inside and outside the classroom, Wang works to navigate multiple genres in her writing, as with her studies in chemistry. “I like romance and horror, too,” she says. “I have gripes with committing to a single genre, so I just take whatever I like from each and put them in my stories.”

In chemistry, Wang favors an environment in which scientists can regularly test their ideas. “It’s important to ground chemistry in the real world to create connections for students,” she argues. Advancements in the field have occurred, she notes, because scientists could exit the realm of theory and apply ideas practically.

“Fritz Haber’s work on ammonia synthesis revolutionized approaches to food supply chains,” she says, referring to the German chemist and Nobel laureate. “Converting nitrogen and hydrogen gas to ammonia for fertilizer marked a dramatic shift in how farming could work.” This kind of work could only result from the consistent, controlled, practical application of the theories scientists consider in laboratory environments.

A future built on collaboration and cooperation

Watching the world change dramatically and seeing humanity struggle to grapple with the implications of phenomena like climate change, political unrest, and shifting alliances, Wang emphasizes the importance of deconstructing silos in academia and the workplace. Technology can be a tool for harm, she notes, so inviting more people inside previously segregated spaces helps everyone.

Criticism in both chemistry and writing, Wang believes, are valuable tools for continuous improvement. Effective communication, explaining complex concepts, and partnering to develop long-term solutions are invaluable when working at the intersection of history, art, and science. In writing, Wang says, criticism can help define areas to improve writers’ stories and shape interesting ideas.

“We’ve seen the positive results that can occur with effective science writing, which requires rigor and fact-checking,” she says. “MIT’s cross-disciplinary approach to our studies, alongside feedback from teachers and peers, is a great set of tools to carry with us regardless of where we are.”

Wang explores connections between science and stories in her leisure time, too. “I’m a member of MIT’s Anime Club and I enjoy participating in MIT’s Sport Taekwondo Club,” she says. The competitive aspect in tae kwon do allows for her to feed her competitive drive and gets her out of her head. Her participation in DAAMIT (Digital Art and Animation at MIT) creates connections with different groups of people and gives her ideas she can use to tell better stories. “It’s fascinating exploring others’ minds,” she says.

Wang argues that there’s a false divide between science and the humanities and wants the work she does after graduation to bridge that divide. “Writing and learning about science can help,” she asserts. “Fields like conservation and history allow for continued exploration of that intersection.”

Ultimately, Wang believes it’s important to examine narratives carefully and to question notions of science’s inherent superiority over humanities fields. “The humanities and science have equal value,” she says.

Every day, hundreds of chat messages flow between pilots, crew, and controllers of the Air Mobility Command's 618th Air Operations Center (AOC). These controllers direct a thousand-wide fleet of aircraft, juggling variables to determine which routes to fly, how much time fueling or loading supplies will take, or who can fly those missions. Their mission planning allows the U.S. Air Force to quickly respond to national security needs around the globe.

"It takes a lot of work to get a missile defense system across the world, for example, and this coordination used to be done through phone and email. Now, we are using chat, which creates opportunities for artificial intelligence to enhance our workflows," says Colonel Joseph Monaco, the director of strategy at the 618th AOC, which is the Department of Defense's largest air operations center.

The 618th AOC is sponsoring Lincoln Laboratory to develop these artificial intelligence tools, through a project called Conversational AI Technology for Transition (CAITT).

During a visit to Lincoln Laboratory from the 618th AOC's headquarters at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois, Colonel Monaco, Lieutenant Colonel Tim Heaton, and Captain Laura Quitiquit met with laboratory researchers to discuss CAITT. CAITT is a part of a broader effort to transition AI technology into a major Air Force modernization initiative, called the Next Generation Information Technology for Mobility Readiness Enhancement (NITMRE).

The type of AI being used in this project is natural language processing (NLP), which allows models to read and process human language. "We are utilizing NLP to map major trends in chat conversations, retrieve and cite specific information, and identify and contextualize critical decision points," says Courtland VanDam, a researcher in Lincoln Laboratory's AI Technology and Systems Group, which is leading the project. CAITT encompasses a suite of tools leveraging NLP.

One of the most mature tools, topic summarization, extracts trending topics from chat messages and formats those topics in a user-friendly display highlighting critical conversations and emerging issues. For example, a trending topic might read, "Crew members missing Congo visas, potential for delay." The entry shows the number of chats related to the topic and summarizes in bullet points the main points of conversations, linking back to specific chat exchanges.

"Our missions are very time-dependent, so we have to synthesize a lot of information quickly. This feature can really cue us as to where our efforts should be focused," says Monaco.

Another tool in production is semantic search. This tool improves upon the chat service's search engine, which currently returns empty results if chat messages do not contain every word in the query. Using the new tool, users can ask questions in a natural language format, such as why a specific aircraft is delayed, and receive intelligent results. "It incorporates a search model based on neural networks that can understand the user intent of the query and go beyond term matching," says VanDam.

Other tools under development aim to automatically add users to chat conversations deemed relevant to their expertise, predict the amount of ground time needed to unload specific types of cargo from aircraft, and summarize key processes from regulatory documents as a guide to operators as they develop mission plans.

The CAITT project grew out of the DAF–MIT AI Accelerator, a three-pronged effort between MIT, Lincoln Laboratory, and the Department of the Air Force (DAF) to develop and transition AI algorithms and systems to advance both the DAF and society. "Through our involvement in the AI Accelerator via the NITMRE project, we realized we could do something innovative with all of the unstructured chat information in the 618th AOC," says Heaton.

As laboratory researchers advance their prototypes of CAITT tools, they have begun to transition them to the 402nd Software Engineering Group, a software provider for the Department of Defense. That group will implement the tools into the operational software environment in use by the 618th AOC. 

Long story of a $250 million cryptocurrency theft that, in a complicated chain events, resulted in a pretty brutal kidnapping.

Earth might be on track to warm more rapidly than expected, some scientists warn.

State lawmakers, including many Republicans, want to make it harder for insurers to raise prices as disasters drive up premiums.

The industry appeal comes as President Donald Trump is trying to scrap state carbon market laws.

The United States is the world’s largest oil and gas producer, but other countries have several times the “proved reserves.”

The State Department's Office of Global Change was notified Thursday that it would be shuttered.

In the weeks before his death, Francis repeated a decade-old plea for a break from both Trumpian greed and the left’s economic rationalism.

Some Democrats argue the state's rooftop and community solar programs are an inefficient way to cut emissions.