In partnership withMicrosoft and NVIDIA For decades, manufacturers have pursued automation to drive efficiency, reduce costs, and stabilize operations. That approach delivered meaningful gains, but it is no longer enough. Today’s manufacturing leaders face a different challenge: how to grow amid labor constraints, rising complexity, and increasing pressure to innovate faster without sacrificing safety, quality, or trust. The next phase of transformation will not be defined by isolated AI tools or individual robots, but by intelligence that can operate reliably in the physical world. This is where physical AI—intelligence that can sense, reason, and act in the real world—marks a decisive shift. And it is why Microsoft and NVIDIA are working together to help manufacturers move from experimentation to production at industrial scale. The industrial frontier: Intelligence and trust, not just automation Most early AI adoption focused on narrow optimization: automating tasks, improving utilization, and cutting costs. While valuable, that phase often created new friction, including skills gaps, governance concerns, and uncertainty about long‑term impact. Furthermore, the use cases were plentiful but not as strategic.
The industrial frontier represents a different approach. Rather than asking how much work machines can replace, frontier manufacturers ask how AI can expand human capability, accelerate innovation, and unlock new forms of value while remaining trustworthy and controllable. Across industries, companies that successfully move into this frontier phase share two non‑negotiables:
Intelligence: AI systems must understand how the business actually handles its data, workflows, and institutional knowledge. Trust: As AI begins to act in high‑stakes environments, organizations must retain security, governance, and observability at every layer. Without intelligence, AI becomes generic. Without trust, adoption stalls. Why manufacturing is the proving ground for physical AI Manufacturing is uniquely positioned at the center of this shift. AI is no longer confined to planning or analytics. It is moving into physical execution: coordinating machines, adapting to real‑world variability, and working alongside people on the factory floor. Robotics, autonomous systems, and AI agents must now perceive, reason, and act in dynamic environments. This transition exposes a critical gap. Traditional automation excels at repetition but struggles with adaptability. Human workers bring judgment and context but are constrained by scale. Physical AI closes that gap by enabling human‑led, AI‑operated systems, where people set intent and intelligent systems execute, learn, and improve over time. Humans are essential for scaled success. Microsoft and NVIDIA: Accelerating physical AI at scale Physical AI cannot be delivered through point solutions. It requires agentic-driven, enterprise-grade development, deployment, and operations toolchains and workflows that connect simulation, data, AI models, robotics, and governance into a coherent system. NVIDIA is building the AI infrastructure that makes physical AI possible, including accelerated computing, open models, simulation libraries, and robotics frameworks and blueprints that enable the ecosystem to build autonomous robotics systems that can perceive, reason, plan, and take action in the physical world. Microsoft complements this with a cloud and data platform designed to operate physical AI securely, at scale, and across the enterprise. Together, Microsoft and NVIDIA are enabling manufacturers to move beyond pilots toward production‑ready physical AI systems that can be developed, tested, deployed, and continuously improved across heterogeneous environments spanning the product lifecycle, factory operations, and supply chain. From intelligence to action: Human-agent teams in the factory At the industrial frontier, AI is not a standalone system, but a digital teammate.

When AI agents are grounded in the proper operational data, embedded in human workflows, and governed end to end, they can assist with tasks such as: Optimizing production lines in real time Coordinating maintenance and quality decisions Adapting operations to supply or demand disruptions Accelerating engineering and product lifecycle decisions For example, manufacturers are beginning to use simulation‑grounded AI agents to evaluate production changes virtually before deploying them on the factory floor, reducing risk while accelerating decision‑making. Crucially, frontier manufacturers design these systems so humans remain in control. AI executes, monitors, and recommends, while people provide intent, oversight, and judgment. This balance allows organizations to move faster without losing confidence or control. The role of trust in scaling physical AI As physical AI systems scale, trust becomes the limiting factor. Manufacturers must ensure that AI systems are secure, observable, and operating within policy, especially when they influence safety‑critical or mission‑critical processes. Governance cannot be an afterthought; It must be engineered into the platform itself. This is why frontier manufacturers treat trust as a first‑class requirement, pairing innovation with visibility, compliance, and accountability. Only then can physical AI move from promising demonstrations to enterprise‑wide deployment. Why this moment matters—and what’s next The convergence of AI agents, robotics, simulation, and real‑time data marks an inflection point for manufacturing. What was once experimental is becoming operational. What was once siloed is becoming connected. At NVIDIA GTC 2026, Microsoft and NVIDIA will demonstrate how this collaboration supports physical AI systems that manufacturers can deploy today and scale responsibly tomorrow. From simulation‑driven development to real‑world execution, the focus is on helping manufacturers cross the industrial frontier with confidence.
For manufacturing leaders, the question is no longer whether physical AI will reshape operations, but how quickly they can adopt it responsibly, at scale, and with trust built in from the start. Discover more with Microsoft at NVIDIA GTC 2026. This content was produced by Microsoft. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff.

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. Defense official reveals how AI chatbots could be used for targeting decisions  The US military might use generative AI systems to rank targets and recommend which to strike first, according to a Defense Department official.  A list of possible targets could first be fed into a generative AI system that the Pentagon is fielding for classified settings. Humans might then ask the system to analyze the information and prioritize the targets. They would then be responsible for checking and evaluating the results and recommendations.  OpenAI’s ChatGPT and xAI’s Grok could soon be at the center of exactly these sorts of high-stakes military decisions. Read the full story. 
—James O’Donnell  The must-reads 
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.  1 The Pentagon’s CTO claims Claude would “pollute” the defense supply chain He blamed a “policy preference” that’s baked into the model. (CNBC) + Anthropic is reeling from OpenAI’s “compromise” with the DoD. (MIT Technology Review)  2 An ex-DOGE staffer has been accused of stealing social security data Then taking the information to his new job in the IT division of a government contractor. (Wired) + He allegedly used a thumb drive to steal the data. (Washington Post)  3 Ukraine is offering its battlefield data for AI training Allies can access the data to train drones and other UAVs. (Reuters)  + Europe has a drone-filled vision for the future of war. (MIT Technology Review)   4 Meta has postponed its latest AI launch over performance issues It fell short of rival models from Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic. (NYT $) + The company’s former AI chief is betting against LLMs. (MIT Technology Review).  5 X could be breaching sanctions on Iran An account for Iran’s new supreme leader may break US rules. (Engadget) + Hacker group Handala has become the face of Iranian cyberwarfare. (Wired) + AI is turning the conflict into theater. (MIT Technology Review)   6 A landmark social media addiction trial is wrapping up It’ll decide whether the platforms are liable for harms caused to children. (The Guardian)  + AI companions are the next stage of digital addiction. (MIT Technology Review)  7 Western AI models have “failed spectacularly” on agriculture in the Global South The biggest problem? They’re not trained on local data. (Rest of World) 

8 Internet outages in Moscow are sparking surging sales of pagers The disruptions have been blamed on new tests of web controls. (Bloomberg $)  9 Why is China obsessed with OpenClaw? Lobster-mania is spreading to the general public. (SCMP) + Tech-savvy “tinkerers” are cashing in on the craze. (MIT Technology Review)  10 Hollywood has soured on Silicon Valley Movies and TV shows have swapped eccentric founders for megalomaniac moguls. (NYT $)  Quote of the day  “We see a future where intelligence is a utility, like electricity or water, and people buy it from us on a meter.”  —OpenAI CEO Sam Altman makes a new pitch to investors at a BlackRock event, Gizmodo reports.  One More Thing  How the Ukraine-Russia war is reshaping the tech sector in Eastern Europe  Latvia’s annual national defense exercises took place in September and October, as the Ukraine-Russia war nears its third anniversary.GATIS INDRēVICS/ LATVIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENSE When Latvian startup Global Wolf Motors first pitched the idea of a military scooter, it was met with skepticism—and a wall of bureaucracy. Then Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and everything changed.   Suddenly, Ukrainian combat units wanted any equipment they could get their hands on, and they were willing to try out ideas that might not have made the cut in peacetime. 
Within weeks, the scooters were on the front line—and even behind it, being used on daring reconnaissance missions. It signaled that a new product category for companies along Ukraine’s borders had opened: civilian technologies repurposed for military needs. Read the full story.  —Peter Guest 
We can still have nice things  A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)  + A new mini magnet could slash the costs of MRIs and nuclear fusion.  + This interactive map of Earth offers new routes to facts about our planet. + Escape the news cycle with this deep dive into the power of fantasy and nature. (Big thanks to reader and MIT alum Vicki for the find!) + Reports of reading’s death are greatly exaggerated. 

Human-made glass is thousands of years old. But it’s now poised to find its way into the AI chips used in the world’s newest and largest data centers. This year, a South Korean company called Absolics is planning to start commercial production of special glass panels designed to make next-generation computing hardware more powerful and energy efficient. Other companies, including Intel, are also pushing forward in this area. If all goes well, such glass technology could reduce the energy demands of the sorts of high-performance computing chips used in AI data centers—and it could eventually do the same for consumer laptops and mobile devices if production costs fall. The idea is to use glass as the substrate, or layer, on which multiple silicon chips are connected. This form of “packaging” is an increasingly popular way to build computing hardware, because it lets engineers combine specialized chips designed for specific functions into a single system. But it presents challenges, including the fact that hardworking chips can run so hot they physically warp the substrate they’re built on. This can lead to misaligned components and may reduce how efficiently the chips can be cooled, leading to damage or premature failure.  “As AI workloads surge and package sizes expand, the industry is confronting very real mechanical constraints that impact the trajectory of high-performance computing,” says Deepak Kulkarni, a senior fellow at the chip design company Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). “One of the most fundamental is warpage.” That’s where glass comes in. It can handle the added heat better than existing substrates, and it will let engineers keep shrinking chip packages—which will make them faster and more energy efficient. It “unlocks the ability to keep scaling package footprints without hitting a mechanical wall,” says Kulkarni. 
Momentum is building behind the shift. Absolics has finished building a factory in the US that is dedicated to producing glass substrates for advanced chips and expects to begin commercial manufacturing this year. The US semiconductor manufacturer Intel is working toward incorporating glass in its next-generation chip packages, and its research has spurred other companies in the chip packaging supply chain to invest in it as well. South Korean and Chinese companies are among the early adopters. “Historically, this is not the first attempt to adopt glass in semiconductor packaging,” says Bilal Hachemi, senior technology and market analyst at the market research firm Yole Group. “But this time, the ecosystem is more solid and wider; the need for glass-based [technology] is sharper.”  Fragile but mighty
Chip packaging has relied on organic substrates such as fiberglass-reinforced epoxy since the 1990s, says Rahul Manepalli, vice president of advanced packaging at Intel. But electrochemical complications limit how closely designers can place drilled holes to create copper-coated signal and power connections between the chips and the rest of the system. Chip designers must also account for the unpredictable shrinkage and distortion that organic substrates undergo as chips heat up and cool down. “We realized about a decade ago that we are going to have some limitations with organic substrates,” says Manepalli. These glass substrate test units were photographed at an Intel facility in Chandler, Arizona, in 2023.INTEL CORPORATION Glass may help overcome a lot of these limitations. Its thermal stability could allow engineers to create 10 times more connections per millimeter than organic substrates, says Manepalli. With denser connections, Intel’s designers can then stuff 50% more silicon chips into the same package area, improving computational capability. The denser connections also enable more efficient routing for the copper wires that deliver power to the chip. And the fact that glass dissipates heat more efficiently allows for chip designs that reduce overall power consumption.  “The benefits of glass core substrates are undeniable,” says Manepalli. “It’s clear that the benefits will drive the industry to make this happen sooner rather than later, and we want to be one of the first ones who do it.”  However, working with glass creates its own challenges. For one thing, it’s fragile. Glass substrates for data center chip packages are made from panels that are only about 700 micrometers to 1.4 millimeters thick, which leaves them susceptible to cracking or even shattering, says Manepalli. Researchers at Intel and other organizations have spent years figuring out how to use other materials and special tools to integrate the glass panels safely into semiconductor manufacturing processes.  Now, Manepalli says, Intel’s research and development teams are reliably fabricating glass panels and churning out test chip packages that incorporate glass—and in early 2025 they demonstrated that a functional device with a glass core substrate could boot up the Windows operating system. It’s a significant improvement from the early testing days, when hundreds of glass panels got cracked every couple of days, he says. Semiconductor manufacturers already use glass for more limited purposes, such as temporary support structures for silicon wafers. But the independent market research firm IDTechEx estimates there’s a big market for glass substrates, one that could boost the semiconductor market for glass from $1 billion in 2025 to as much as $4.4 billion by 2036.  The material could have additional benefits if it takes off. Glass can be made astoundingly smooth—5,000 times smoother than organic substrates. This would eliminate defects that can arise as metal gets layered onto semiconductors, says Xiaoxi He, a research analyst at IDTechEx. Defects in these layers can worsen chips’ performance or even render them unusable.   Glass could also help speed the movement of data. The material can guide light, which means chip designers could use it to build high-speed signal pathways directly into the substrate. Glass “holds enormous potential for the future of energy-efficient AI compute,” says Kulkarni at AMD, because a light-based system could move signals around with far less energy than the “power-hungry” copper pathways that are currently used to carry signals between chips in a package.

A panel pivot Early research on glass packaging started at the 3D Systems Packaging Research Center at the Georgia Institute of Technology in 2009. The university eventually partnered with Absolics, a subsidiary of SKC, a South Korean company that produces chemicals and advanced materials. SKC constructed a semiconductor facility for manufacturing glass substrates in Covington, Georgia, in 2024, and the glass substrate partnership between Absolics and Georgia Tech was eventually awarded two grants in the same year—worth a combined $175 million—throughthe US government’s CHIPS for America program, established under the administration of President Joe Biden. An Absolics employee monitors production of an early version of the company’s glass substrate.COURTESY OF ABSOLICS INC Now Absolics is moving toward commercialization; it plans to start manufacturing small quantities of glass substrates for customers this year. The company has led the way in commercializing glass substrates, says Yongwon Lee, a research engineer at Georgia Tech who is not directly involved in the commercial partnership with Absolics. Absolics says its facility can currently produce a maximum of 12,000 square meters of glass panels a year. That’s enough, Lee estimates, to provide glass substrates for between 2 million and 3 million chip packages the size of Nvidia’s H100 GPU. But the company isn’t alone. Lee says that multiple large manufacturers, including Samsung Electronics, Samsung Electro-Mechanics, and LG Innotek, have “significantly accelerated” their research and pilot production efforts in glass packaging over the past year. “This trend suggests that the glass substrate ecosystem is evolving from a single early mover to a broader industrial race,” he says. Other companies are pivoting to play more specialized roles in the glass substrate supply chain. In 2025, JNTC, a company that makes electrical connectors and tempered glass for electronics, established a facility in South Korea that’s capable of producing 10,000 semi-finished glass panels per month. Such panels include drilled holes for vertical electrical connections and thin metal layers coating the glass, but they require additional manufacturing work for installation in chip packages.  Last year, that South Korean facility began taking orders to supply semi-finished glass to both specialized substrate companies and semiconductor manufacturers. The company plans to expand the facility’s production in 2026 and open an additional manufacturing line in Vietnam in 2027.  Such industry actions show how quickly glass substrate technology is moving from prototype to commercialization—and how many tech players are betting that glass could be a surprisingly strong foundation for the future of computing and AI.

The US military might use generative AI systems to rank lists of targets and make recommendations—which would be vetted by humans—about which to strike first, according to a Defense Department official with knowledge of the matter. The disclosure about how the military may use AI chatbots comes as the Pentagon faces scrutiny over a strike on an Iranian school, which it is still investigating.   A list of possible targets might be fed into a generative AI system that the Pentagon is fielding for classified settings. Then, said the official, who requested to speak on background with MIT Technology Review to discuss sensitive topics, humans might ask the system to analyze the information and prioritize the targets while accounting for factors like where aircraft are currently located. Humans would then be responsible for checking and evaluating the results and recommendations. OpenAI’s ChatGPT and xAI’s Grok could, in theory, be the models used for this type of scenario in the future, as both companies recently reached agreements for their models to be used by the Pentagon in classified settings. The official described this as an example of how things might work but would not confirm or deny whether it represents how AI systems are currently being used. Other outlets have reported that Anthropic’s Claude has been integrated into existing military AI systems and used in operations in Iran and Venezuela, but the official’s comments add insight into the specific role chatbots may play, particularly in accelerating the search for targets. They also shed light on the way the military is deploying two different AI technologies, each with distinct limitations.
Since at least 2017, the US military has been working on a “big data” initiative called Maven. It uses older types of AI, particularly computer vision, to analyze the oceans of data and imagery collected by the Pentagon. Maven might take thousands of hours of aerial drone footage, for example, and algorithmically identify targets. A 2024 report from Georgetown University showed soldiers using the system to select targets and vet them, which sped up the process to get approval for these targets. Soldiers interacted with Maven through an interface with a battlefield map and dashboard, which might highlight potential targets in one color and friendly forces in another. The official’s comments suggest that generative AI is now being added as a conversational chatbot layer—one the military may use to find and analyze data more quickly as it makes decisions like which targets to prioritize. 
Generative AI systems, like those that underpin ChatGPT, Claude, and Grok, are a fundamentally different technology from the AI that has primarily powered Maven. Built on large language models, they are much less battle-tested. And while Maven’s interface forced users to directly inspect and interpret data on the map, the outputs produced by generative AI models are easier to access but harder to verify.  The use of generative AI for such decisions is reducing the time required in the targeting process, added the official, who did not provide details when asked how much additional speed is possible if humans are required to spend time double-checking a model’s outputs. The use of military AI systems is under increased public scrutiny following the recent strike on a girls’ school in Iran in which more than 100 children died. Multiple news outlets have reported that the strike was from a US missile, though the Pentagon has said it is still under investigation. And while the Washington Post has reported that Claude and Maven have been involved in targeting decisions in Iran, there is no evidence yet to explain what role generative AI systems played, if any. The New York Times reported on Wednesday that a preliminary investigation found outdated targeting data to be partly responsible for the strike.  The Pentagon has been ramping up its use of AI across operations in recent months. It started offering nonclassified use of generative AI models, for tasks like analyzing contracts or writing presentations, to millions of service members back in December through an effort called GenAI.mil. But only a few generative AI models have been approved by the Pentagon for classified use.  The first was Anthropic’s Claude, which in addition to its use in Iran was reportedly used in the operations to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro in January. But following recent disagreements between the Pentagon and Anthropic over whether Anthropic could restrict the military’s use of its AI, the Defense Department designated the company a supply chain risk and President Trump demanded on social media that the government stop using its AI products within six months. Anthropic is fighting the designation in court.  OpenAI announced an agreement on February 28 for the military to use its technologies in classified settings. Elon Musk’s company xAI has also reached a deal for the Pentagon to use its model Grok in such settings. OpenAI has said its agreement with the Pentagon came with limitations, though the practical effectiveness of those limitations is not clear.  If you have information about the military’s use of AI, you can share it securely via Signal (username jamesodonnell.22).

In partnership withSAP In the race to adopt and show value from AI, enterprises are moving faster than ever to deploy agentic AI as copilots, assistants, and autonomous task-runners. In late 2025, nearly two-thirds of companies were experimenting with AI agents, while 88% were using AI in at least one business function, up from 78% in 2024, according to McKinsey’s annual AI report. Yet, while early pilots often succeed, only one in 10 companies actually scaled their AI agents. One major issue: AI agents are only as effective as the data foundation supporting them. Experts argue that most companies are seeing delays in implementing AI, not because of shortcomings in the models, but because they lack data architectures that deliver business context to be reliably used by humans and agents. Companies need to be ready with the right data architecture, and the next few months — years, at most — will be critical, says Irfan Khan, president and chief product officer of SAP Data & Analytics. “The only prediction anybody can reliably make is that we don’t know what’s going to happen in the years, months — or even weeks — ahead with AI,” he says. “To be able to get quick wins right now, you need to adopt an AI mindset and … ground your AI models with reliable data.”
While data has always been important for business, it will be even more so in the age of AI. The capabilities of agentic AI will be set more by the soundness of enterprise data architecture and governance, and less by the evolution of the models. To scale the technology, businesses need to adopt a modern data infrastructure that delivers context along with the data. More business context, not necessarily more data Traditional views often conflate structured data with high value, and unstructured data with less value. However, AI complicates that distinction. High-value data for agents is defined less by format and more by business context. Data for critical business functions — such as supply-chain operations and financial planning — is context dependent. While fine-grained, high-volume data, such as IoT, logs, and telemetry, can yield value, but only when delivered with business context.
For that reason, the real risk for agentic AI is not lack of data, but lack of grounding, says Khan. “Anything that is business contextual will, by definition, give you greater value and greater levels of reliability of the business outcome,” he says. “It’s not as simple as saying high-value data is structured data and low-value data is where you have lots of repetition — both can have huge value in the right hands, and that’s what’s different about AI.” Context can be derived through integration with software, on-site analysis and enrichment, or through the governance pipeline. Data lacking those qualities will likely be untrusted — one reason why two-thirds of business leaders do not fully trust their data, according to the Institute for Data and Enterprise AI (IDEA). The resulting “trust debt” has held back businesses in their quest for AI readiness. Overcoming that lack of trust requires shared definitions, semantic consistency, and reliable operational context to align data with business meaning. Data sprawl demands a semantic, business-aware layer Over the past decade, the most important shift in enterprise data architecture has been the separation of compute and storage, cloud-scale flexibility, says Khan. Yet, that separation and move to cloud also created sprawl, with data housed in multiple clouds, data lakes, warehouses, and a multitude of SaaS applications. As companies move to AI, that sprawl does not go away. In fact, the problem is growing with more than two-thirds of companies citing data siloes as a top challenge in adopting AI, with more than half of enterprises struggling with 1,000 data sources or more. While the last era was about laying the foundation on which to build software-as-a-service — separating compute and storage and building lakes — the next era is about delivering the right data to autonomous AI agents tasked with various business functions. “Probably the biggest innovation that occurred in data management was the separation of compute and store,” Khan says. “But what’s really making a distinction now is the way that we harmonize the data and harvest the value of the data across multiple sources of content.” To do that requires a semantic or knowledge layer that supports multiple platforms, encodes business rules and relationships, provides a business-contextual and governed view of data, and allows humans and agents to access the data in the appropriate ways. But legacy data architectures cannot power the autonomous AI systems of the future, consultancy Deloitte stated in its State of AI in the Enterprise report. Only four in 10 companies believe their data management process is ready for AI, and that’s down from 43% the previous year, suggesting that as companies explore AI deployment, they are realizing their infrastructure’s shortcomings. Agentic AI does not replace SaaS Some investors and technologists speculate that AI agents will make SaaS applications obsolete. Khan strongly disagrees. Over the past 15 years, value has steadily moved up the stack, from on-premises infrastructure to infrastructure as a service (IaaS) to platform as a service (PaaS) to SaaS. Agentic AI is simply the next layer. Agentic AI will have its own layer to access the data and interact with the business logic. The value rises up the stack, but nothing below disappears, he says.

“SaaS doesn’t go away,” he says. “It just means SaaS and these agents will cooperate with one another. Companies are not going to throw away their entire general ledger and replace it with an agent. What’s the agent going to do? It doesn’t know anything without business context and business processing.” In this emerging model, the software stack is being reshaped so that applications and data provide governed context within which AI can act effectively. SaaS applications remain the systems of record, while the semantic layer becomes the business-context source of truth. AI agents become a new engagement layer, orchestrating across systems, and both humans and agents become “first-class citizens” in how they access business logic, he says. Critically, agents cannot directly connect to every operational system. “If we’re saying agents are going to take over the world … you can’t have an agent talking to every operational backend system,” Khan warns. “It just doesn’t work that way.” This further elevates the importance of a semantic or business-fabric layer. Where to start Most enterprises need to begin where their data already lives — in platforms like Snowflake, Databricks, Google BigQuery, or an existing SAP environment. Khan says that’s normal, but warns against rebuilding old patterns of vendor lock-in. He suggests that companies prioritize the data that matters most by focusing on preserving and providing business context to operational and application data. Companies should also invest early in governance and semantics by defining shared policies, access rules, and semantic models before scaling pilots. Finally, businesses should prioritize openness and fabric-style interoperability rather than forcing all data into one stack. Khan cautions against aiming for full automation too early. “There is a new brave opportunity to really engage in the agentic and AI world,” Khan says, “Fully automating [critical business processes] is maybe a stretch, because there’s going to be a lot of extra oversight necessary.” Early wins will likely come from less-critical processes and from agents that work off fresh, stateful data rather than stale dashboards, he adds. As AI begins to deliver value and adoption increases, leaders must decide how to reinvest those gains to drive top-line efficiency or enter new markets. This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff. It was researched, designed, and written by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.

In partnership withL&T Technology Services The impact of artificial intelligence extends far beyond the digital world and into our everyday lives, across the cars we drive, the appliances in our homes, and medical devices that keep people alive. More and more, product engineers are turning to AI to enhance, validate, and streamline the design of the items that furnish our worlds. The use of AI in product engineering follows a disciplined and pragmatic trajectory. A significant majority of engineering organizations are increasing their AI investment, according to our survey, but they are doing so in a measured way. This approach reflects the priorities typical of product engineers. Errors have concrete consequences beyond abstract fears, ranging from structural failures to safety recalls and even potentially putting lives at risk. The central challenge is realizing AI’s value without compromising product integrity. Drawing on data from a survey of 300 respondents and in-depth interviews with senior technology executives and other experts, this report examines how product engineering teams are scaling AI, what is limiting broader adoption, and which specific capabilities are shaping adoption today and, in the future, with actual or potential measurable outcomes. Key findings from the research include:
Verification, governance, and explicit human accountability are mandatory in an environment where the outputs are physical—and the risk high. Where product engineers are using AI to directly inform physical designs, embedded systems, and manufacturing decisions that are fixed at release, product failures can lead to real-world risks that cannot be rolled back. Product engineers are therefore adopting layered AI systems with distinct trust thresholds instead of general-purpose deployments. Predictive analytics and AI-powered simulation and validation are the top near-term investment priorities for product engineering leaders. These capabilities—selected by a majority of survey respondents—offer clear feedback loops, allowing companies to audit performance, attain regulatory approval, and prove return on investment (ROI). Building gradual trust in AI tools is imperative.
Nine in ten product engineering leaders plan to increase investment in AI in the next one to two years, but the growth is modest. The highest proportion of respondents (45%) plan to increase investment by up to 25%, while nearly a third favor a 26% to 50% boost. And just 15% plan a bigger step change—between 51% and 100%. The focus for product engineers is on optimization over innovation, with scalable proof points and near-term ROI the dominant approach to AI adoption, as opposed to multi-year transformation. Sustainability and product quality are top measurable outcomes for AI in product engineering. These outcomes, visible to customers, regulators, and investors, are prioritized over competitive metrics like time to-market and innovation—rated of medium importance—and internal operational gains like cost reduction and workforce satisfaction, at the bottom. What matters most are real-world signals like defect rates and emissions profiles rather than internal engineering dashboards. Download the report. This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff. It was researched, designed, and written by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.