Tag Archives: Stanford

Cases

Three personal insights from Stanford’s AI Index report

Leave a comment

I recently attended the 2025 AI Index report seminar hosted by Stanford’s HAI (Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence). Nestor Maslej, the report’s research manager, presented key findings that offered a look at how AI is reshaping our world. I came away three new insights: one technical, one economic, and one social.

First, AI is now outperforming humans in most complex tasks. From image classification to scientific reasoning and multimodal benchmarks, there are fewer tests left that can challenge AI systems. Maslej noted that the real challenge now is designing problems that are difficult enough to measure AI’s limits.

Second, AI adoption in business is accelerating rapidly. In 2024, 78% of companies reported using AI. This is a jump from 55% in 2023. This is because AI helps non-expert workers perform better, narrows skill gaps within teams, and boots overall productivity.

Third, global perceptions of AI differ widely. In countries like China (83%) and South Korea (66%), most people view AI as more beneficial than harmful. In contrast, optimism is lower in the U.S. (39%) and Canada (40%).

AI’s rise feels inevitable, but how we repspond to it will matter as well.

***

Reference

2025 AI Index Report – Full report.pdf
2025 AI Index Report – Full video

Introduction to the AI Index Report 2025

Welcome to the eighth edition of the AI Index report. The 2025 Index is our most comprehensive to date and arrives at an important moment, as AI’s influence across society, the economy, and global governance continues to intensify. New in this year’s report are in-depth analyses of the evolving landscape of AI hardware, novel estimates of inference costs, and new analyses of AI publication and patenting trends. We also introduce fresh data on corporate adoption of responsible AI practices, along with expanded coverage of AI’s growing role in science and medicine.

Since its founding in 2017 as an offshoot of the One Hundred Year Study of Artificial Intelligence, the AI Index has been committed to equipping policymakers, journalists, executives, researchers, and the public with accurate, rigorously validated, and globally sourced data. Our mission has always been to help these stakeholders make better-informed decisions about the development and deployment of AI. In a world where AI is discussed everywhere—from boardrooms to kitchen tables—this mission has never been more essential.

The AI Index continues to lead in tracking and interpreting the most critical trends shaping the field—from the shifting geopolitical landscape and the rapid evolution of underlying technologies, to AI’s expanding role in business, policymaking, and public life. Longitudinal tracking remains at the heart of our mission. In a domain advancing at breakneck speed, the Index provides essential context—helping us understand where AI stands today, how it got here, and where it may be headed next.

Recognized globally as one of the most authoritative resources on artificial intelligence, the AI Index has been cited in major media outlets such as The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Guardian; referenced in hundreds of academic papers; and used by policymakers and government agencies around the world. We have briefed companies like Accenture, IBM, Wells Fargo, and Fidelity on the state of AI, and we continue to serve as an independent source of insights for the global AI ecosystem

Cases

How urinal heights in California made me kinder

Leave a comment

Men’s restrooms in California are interesting. Among multiple urinals, one is almost always placed significantly lower than the others.

At Stanford University’s Y2E2 building, the engineering department’s restroom features a lowered urinal.

D.School, home to Stanford’s designers and creativity thinkers, also incorporates this principle.

In the Mountain View Public Library, the pattern continues.

Even at the Santa Cruz amusement park, this feature can be observed.

Interestingly, California’s attention to height differences goes beyond urinals.

At the Stanford Redwood City’s gym, drinking fountains are installed at two different heights.

Similarly, two hand dryers vary their heights in the Mountain View Public Library.

The Santa Cruz amusement park includes one sink with a footstep among a row of basins.

These height variations comply with accessibility codes to accommodate a broader range of users, including children and individuals with disabilities. They are specified in the California Building Code (CBC), Chapter 11B.

According to Section 11B-605.2 of the CBC, urinals must be either stall-type or wall-hung, with the rim positioned no higher than 17 inches (432 mm) above the finished floor. Additionally, urinals are required to have a minimum depth of 13½ inches (343 mm), measured from the outer face of the urinal rim to the back of the fixture.

In all the cities I have visited including Toronto, Seoul, and Copenhagen, I have never encountered men’s restrooms with urinals at varying heights. It was only after being exposed to this design in California that I became aware of how some individuals might struggle with standard urinals.

Certainly, ideal height for urinals is arguable. However, regardless of the practical effectiveness of the height variations, California’s effort to accommodating different people is psychologically effective. This enforced inclusivity encourages me to be more considerate of others including children or individuals in wheelchairs. Design can reveal aspects of the world we overlook.

***

Reference

Patrick, V. M., & Hollenbeck, C. R. (2021). Designing for all: Consumer response to inclusive design. Journal of consumer psychology, 31(2), 360-381.

Inclusive design considers the needs and capabilities of the whole population to decrease the actual or perceived mismatch between the user and the design object. We review the inclusive design literature across multiple disciplines to conceptualize inclusive design, identify who should be included in the inclusive design process, present an overview of the evolution of design approaches, and summarize best practices on how organizations can facilitate inclusive design. We posit three levels of inclusive design based on the diminishing degree of mismatch between the user and the design object: providing accessibility (Level 1), engaging participation by creating equitable experiences (Level 2), and facilitating empowered success via flow experiences (Level 3). We introduce our Design, Appraisal, Response, Experience (DARE) framework to explain the complex cognitive appraisals and emotional responses that each of these three levels of inclusive design elicits and underscores the notion that inclusive design works best when it’s not intended for a specific need, but rather benefits anyone who uses it. We conclude with a call for future research in this rich and important domain of investigation that seeks both to understand consumer response to inclusive design and to incorporate inclusive design into brand strategy, practice, and policy.

Cases

How Stanford’s AI seminars ignite curiosity

Leave a comment

At Stanford University, the number of seminars available on campus is stunning. I chose to attend a few, and I noticed that many of them focus on artificial intelligence. From engineering to economics, finance, and supply chain management, AI is a topic of discussion across different fields.

For instance, at the engineering school, seminars explore technical advancements in AI, such as the priorities of organizations like OpenAI. In economics, the focus shifts to how to measure the economic impact of AI, while finance seminars investigate whether adopting AI contributes to a firm’s financial value. In the area of supply chain management, discussions highlight how AI transforms global manufacturing processes. These seminars offer insights into how each discipline approaches AI uniquely.

Repeated exposure to the AI-focused discussions has sparked my curiosity about technology. As a psychological experiment demonstrated long ago, repeated exposure to unknown stimuli such as Chinese characters leads to more positive attitudes toward them. As I continue to attend these seminars, my interest in AI and emerging technologies-hallmarks of Silicon Valley-continues to grow.

Likewise, Stanford students, surrounded by ongoing discussions, are likely to develop greater interest and a more positive attitude toward AI and technologies. The campus environment fosters enthusiasm for a transformative field.

***

Reference

Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of personality and social psychology, 9(2p2), 1-27.

The hypothesis is offered that mere repeated exposure of the individual to a stimulus object enhances his attitude toward it. By “mere” exposure is meant a condition making the stimulus accessible to the individual’s perception. Support for the hypothesis consists of 4 types of evidence, presented and reviewed: (a) the correlation between affective connotation of words and word frequency; (b) the effect of experimentally manipulated frequency of exposure upon the affective connotation of nonsense words and symbols; (c) the correlation between word frequency and the attitude to their referents; (d) the effects of experimentally manipulated frequency of exposure on attitude. The relevance for the exposure-attitude hypothesis of the exploration theory and of the semantic satiation findings were examined.

Cases

Voting at Stanford: A glimpse into the democracy day

Leave a comment

It is Election Day, and these photos capture an intriguing scene for those who may wonder how American students engage in voting. Here, a line of students stretches out the door, each person waiting patiently to cast their vote—a sight that demonstrates just how seriously these young adults take their role in shaping the future.

Yet, some students saw the long queue ahead questioned: “Does my vote really matter?” and “Do I really make a difference?” These sentiments resonate with many, reflecting the common struggle between civic duty and individual doubt.

Ultimately, these snapshots remind me that, despite geographical and cultural differences, the act of voting holds a universal significance. Whether here in Stanford or in Korea, each vote really matters, which is why it is essential to inspire people to visit the voting centers and participate in the electoral process.

***

Reference

Bond, Robert M., Christopher J. Fariss, Jason J. Jones, Adam D. I. Kramer, Cameron Marlow, Jaime E. Settle, and James H. Fowler (2012), “A 61-Million-Person Experiment in Social Influence and Politicial Mobilization,” Nature, 489, 295-298.

Human behaviour is thought to spread through face-to-face social networks, but it is difficult to identify social influence effects in observational studies, and it is unknown whether online social networks operate in the same way. Here we report results from a randomized controlled trial of political mobilization messages delivered to 61 million Facebook users during the 2010 US congressional elections. The results show that the messages directly influenced political self-expression, information seeking and real-world voting behaviour of millions of people. Furthermore, the messages not only influenced the users who received them but also the users’ friends, and friends of friends. The effect of social transmission on real-world voting was greater than the direct effect of the messages themselves, and nearly all the transmission occurred between ‘close friends’ who were more likely to have a face-to-face relationship. These results suggest that strong ties are instrumental for spreading both online and real-world behaviour in human social networks.