Georgia Tech researchers have created a new AI model for decision-focused learning (DFL), called Diffusion-DFL. Recent tests showed it makes more accurate decisions than current approaches.
Along with optimizing industrial output, Diffusion-DFL lowers costs and reduces risk. Experiments also showed it performs across different fields.
Diffusion-DFL doesn’t just surpass current methods; it also predicts more accurately as problem sizes grow. The model requires less computing power despite these high-performance marks, making it more accessible to smaller enterprises.
Diffusion-DFL runs on diffusion models, the same technology that powers DALL-E and other AI image generators. It is the first DFL framework based on diffusion models.
“Anyone who makes high-stakes decisions under uncertainty, including supply chain managers, energy operators, and financial planners, benefits from Diffusion-DFL,” said Zihao Zhao, a Georgia Tech Ph.D. student who led the project.
“Instead of optimizing around a single forecast, the model evaluates many possible scenarios, so decisions account for real-world risk and become more robust.”
To test Diffusion-DFL, the team ran experiments based on real-world settings, including:
In each case, Diffusion-DFL made more accurate decisions than current methods. It also performed better as problems became larger and more complex. These results confirm the model’s ability to make important decisions in real-world scenarios with noisy data and uncertainty.
The experiments also show that Diffusion-DFL is practical, not just accurate. Training diffusion models is expensive, so the team developed a way to reduce memory use. This cut training costs by more than 99.7%. As a result, Diffusion-DFL can reach more researchers and practitioners.
“Our score-function estimator cuts GPU memory from over 60 gigabytes to 0.13 with almost no loss in decision quality, reducing the requirement for massive computing resources,” Zhao said. “I hope this expands Diffusion-DFL into other domains, like healthcare, where decisions must be made quickly under complex uncertainty."
Beyond decision-making applications, Diffusion-DFL marks a shift in DFL techniques and in the broader use of generative AI models.
In supply chain management, planners estimate future demand before deciding how much product to stock. In this DFL problem, engineers align ML models with predetermined decision objectives, like minimizing risk or reducing costs.
One flaw of DFL methods is that they optimize around a single, deterministic prediction in an uncertain future.
Diffusion-DFL takes a different approach. Instead of making a single guess, it determines a range of possible outcomes. This leads to decisions based on many likely scenarios, rather than on a single assumed future.
To do this, the framework uses diffusion models. These generative AI models create high-quality data from images, text, and audio.
The forward diffusion process involves adding noise to data until it becomes pure noise. Models trained via forward diffusion can reverse diffusion. This means they can start with noisy data and then produce meaningful insights from training examples.
Real-world data is often noisy and uncertain. Traditional DFL methods struggle in these conditions, but diffusion models are designed to handle them.
Because of this, Diffusion-DFL can explore many possible outcomes and choose better actions. Like image-generation AI, the model works well with complex data from different sources. This enables its use across different industries.
“Diffusion models have achieved significant success in generative AI and image synthesis, but our work shows their potential extends far beyond that,” said Kai Wang, an assistant professor in the School of Computational Science and Engineering (CSE).
“What makes Diffusion-DFL unique is that the specific downstream application guides how the model learns to handle uncertainty.
“Whether we are scheduling energy for power grids, balancing risk in financial portfolios, or developing early warning systems in healthcare, we can explicitly train these highly expressive models to navigate the unique complexities of each domain.”
Zhao and Wang collaborated with Caltech Ph.D. candidate Christopher Yeh and Harvard University postdoctoral fellow Lingkai Kong on Diffusion-DFL. Kong earned his Ph.D. in CSE from Georgia Tech in 2024.
Wang will present Diffusion-DFL on behalf of the group at the upcoming International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2026). Occurring April 23-27 in Rio de Janeiro, ICLR is one of the world’s most prestigious conferences dedicated to artificial intelligence research.
“ICLR is the perfect stage for Diffusion-DFL because it brings together the exact community that needs to see the bridge between generative modeling and high-stakes decision-making for real-world applications,” Wang said.
“Presenting Diffusion-DFL allows us to challenge the traditional training framework of diffusion models. It’s about sparking a broader conversation on how we can align the training objectives of generative AI directly with actual, downstream decision-making needs.”
]]>Georgia Tech researchers have created a new AI model for decision-focused learning (DFL), called Diffusion-DFL. Recent tests showed it makes more accurate decisions than current approaches.
Along with optimizing industrial output, Diffusion-DFL lowers costs and reduces risk. Experiments also showed it performs across different fields.
Diffusion-DFL doesn’t just surpass current methods; it also predicts more accurately as problem sizes grow. The model requires less computing power despite these high-performance marks, making it more accessible to smaller enterprises.
Diffusion-DFL runs on diffusion models, the same technology that powers DALL-E and other AI image generators. It is the first DFL framework based on diffusion models.
]]>Artificial intelligence has been touted as the most transformative technology of our time. With only a few years of mainstream use, it’s changed how we work and communicate, generated billions of dollars in investments, and sparked global debate. But according to leading neuroethics expert Karen Rommelfanger, the race isn’t over yet.
“Can you think of a more transformative technology than one that intervenes with the fundamental organ that drives your experience in the world?”
That fundamental organ is the brain.
Technologies interfacing directly with the brain have been reserved for treating severe injury or disease for decades. Now, neurotechnology is expanding into brain-responsive wearables meant to enhance, augment, and monitor everyday life. As these technologies accelerate and AI is incorporated, the question is no longer if neurotechnology will transform society, but how — and who will shape the boundaries.
These are some of the questions on which Karen Rommelfanger has built her career. Trained as a biomedical researcher and neuroscientist, Rommelfanger went on to found the Institute for Neuroethics, the world’s first think and do tank devoted entirely to neuroethics, public engagement, and policy implementation.
“The brain is special; it’s central to who we are,” says Rommelfanger, who was also an inaugural recipient of the Dana Foundation Neuroscience and Society Award. “And that means when you intervene with the brain, there are unique responsibilities. The field of neuroethics addresses things like: How do you ensure mental privacy? How do you protect free will? How do you ensure that people have the power to be narrators of their own lives and their cognitive experience?”
Now, Rommelfanger is joining Georgia Tech’s Institute for Neuroscience, Neurotechnology, and Society (INNS) as a professor of the practice, where she will work to further embed neuroethics into Georgia Tech’s research and technology development ecosystem.
“Georgia Tech is producing the next generation of neurotechnologists, and Karen’s expertise will help ensure we’re preparing them to think about societal impact as deeply as they think about the technical and scientific aspects of their work,” says Christopher Rozell, executive director of INNS. “Her leadership strengthens the Institute in exactly the way this moment in neurotechnology demands.”
“Georgia Tech has many, many ways that it leads in the technology ecosystem. But one of the powerful, unique ways it can lead is through neurotechnology,” says Rommelfanger. “I hope that the INNS, given its unique mandate for neuroscience, neurotechnology, and society, can be a lighthouse for these types of conversations.”
From institutional review boards to mandatory responsible research conduct training, ethics are a foundational part of scientific research. But designing neurotechnologies raises ethical challenges beyond the scope of typical training. What happens when discoveries leave the lab and enter people’s lives?
That question sits at the core of Rommelfanger’s work. She argues it’s a neurotechnologist’s responsibility to recognize and proactively address the need for unique safeguards for privacy, autonomy, and long-term responsibility. Her solution is to move neuroethics upstream, embedding it directly into the research, design, and deployment of neurotechnology through an approach she calls “neuroethics by design.”
“Neuroethics by design considers ethics as a core criterion where principles can drive innovation with more of a lens toward societal outcomes,” she says — an approach informed by years of advising national-level brain research initiatives and her experience at the intersection of clinical practice and ethics scholarship.
Rather than treating ethics as a compliance checklist or a post hoc review, neuroethics by design integrates ethical thinking throughout the entire innovation lifecycle, from early ideation and research questions to product requirements, governance strategies, and long-term sustainability. She has used the approach for years as an embedded partner for neurotechnology startups in her neuroethics consultancy, Ningen Co-Lab.
After decades as a traditional academic professor and then years advising companies and policymakers with this philosophy, Rommelfanger says Georgia Tech is the right place to scale this work. With its strength in neurotechnology and INNS’s rare focus on neuroscience and society, “I could not think of a better place to launch and pilot this neuroethics by design scaling effort.”
She will work with INNS to help equip researchers, students, and industry partners with practical tools for ethical decision-making. Her vision is not to create neuroethicists as a standalone profession, but to cultivate ethically engaged neurotechnologists and engineers.
Central to her plans at INNS are hands-on training programs that bring ethics out of the abstract and into practice. “I wanted to be a professor of the practice because, while the field does need more scholars, what it really needs most at this point are practitioners.”
Rommelfanger is exploring modular content that can be embedded into existing courses across disciplines, as well as immersive training — such as neuroethics boot camps and problem-solving hackathons — that bring together students, faculty, and professionals to tackle real-world challenges collaboratively.
“No one discipline can solve all the ethical challenges ahead,” says Rommelfanger. She is particularly interested in creating spaces where experts from across science and engineering, policy and law, design and the arts, and philosophy can work side by side with people with lived experience of neurological conditions. “The onus is not on scientists alone, but is a shared responsibility that benefits immensely from dialogue, accountability, and action across diverse communities.”
By situating neuroethics within Georgia Tech’s broader research ecosystem, Rommelfanger hopes INNS can help shift how the field evolves globally.
“It's really difficult to get your arms around something once it's out of the gate,” she says, citing the rapid adoption of AI without proper ethical or policy guidelines. “With neurotechnology, we still have a little bit of time, but not that much time. We are at that moment where we could change the course of global history.”
The paper examines various strategies for enhancing the flexibility of data center energy use. One approach is to use backup power systems, such as uninterruptible power supplies, to support the grid during emergencies. Another method involves rerouting computing jobs to different data centers in other locations to balance energy demand. The authors also discuss implementing smart scheduling techniques that shift workloads to off-peak hours, reducing strain on the grid. Additionally, they highlight adjusting processor speeds by lowering CPU (central processing unit) and GPU (graphics processing unit) clock rates to limit power consumption when needed. Finally, the paper suggests pre-cooling data center equipment to limit the energy required for cooling during peak demand periods. Notably, experimental evidence shows that underclocking GPUs can cut power consumption by 40% with only a 22% performance loss, suggesting technical feasibility for demand-response interventions.
Despite these technical options, the authors find that real-world cost considerations and reliability concerns limit widespread adoption. Data center operators generally do not change their behavior in response to electricity prices, as job revenue far outweighs energy costs under normal conditions. For example, a GPU rented at $2 per hour consumes only $0.04 worth of electricity at average prices, making curtailment unattractive except during extreme price spikes. Surveys indicate that operators are reluctant to compromise reliability or deploy backup systems for ancillary services. Consequently, price-based incentives alone are unlikely to drive meaningful flexibility.
Read more on the EPIcenter Webpage
Listen to a podcast on the research here
The Advanced Technology Development Center (ATDC) in Georgia Tech’s Office of Commercialization announced two of its health technology (HealthTech) portfolio companies, Nephrodite and OrthoPreserve, earned the designation.
Achieving this rare milestone underscores the caliber of founders, science, and support in ATDC’s 30-company HealthTech portfolio, the incubator’s largest focus area. It’s also a win for Georgia because it reflects the strength of the state’s health innovation ecosystem.
“This designation is one of the strongest signals the FDA gives that a technology could change the standard of care,” said Greg Jungles, HealthTech catalyst at ATDC. “For ATDC to have two in the same year is remarkable.”
The Breakthrough Device Program doesn’t waive evidence requirements, but it accelerates learning with the FDA, ATDC’s Jungles said. “That means shorter response times, more frequent meetings, and prioritized review. Teams avoid dead ends and align earlier on study designs and endpoints.”
For the founders of both startups, their technologies come one step closer to moving their innovations to market. Nephrodite’s technology improves the lives of dialysis patients. OrthoPreserve’s device addresses challenges faced by those who suffer from chronic knee pain.
Nephrodite: Advancing Continuous Artificial Kidney Technology
Dr. Nikhil Shah and Dr. Hiep Nguyen, cofounders of Nephrodite, aim to improve care for dialysis patients with end-stage kidney disease who need transplants. These patients often spend three to four hours in a dialysis clinic up to three times a week. Being tethered to stationary machines with needles drawing blood via arm grafts complicates everyday activities — from work tasks to the ability to travel.
Dialysis addresses chronic kidney disease, which means kidneys no longer work properly. The treatments filter out toxins, waste, and other fluids in the blood. Kidney disease costs Medicare $124.5 billion every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And those costs are expected to rise because of increasing rates of kidney failure and chronic kidney disease.
“Dialysis, while lifesaving when it was pioneered in 1952, is incredibly burdensome,” Shah said. Besides being a long process that keeps the patient in a fixed location, it’s physically tiring. “Taking out your blood continually many, many times over, and over the course of four hours is the equivalent of running the Boston Marathon, hitting the finish line, and then someone saying, ‘You're not done; go do it again,’ ” he said.
A surgeon by training, with expertise in transplantation and oncology, Shah is also an adjunct associate professor in Tech’s School of Interactive Computing. He worked with Nguyen to develop a continuously functioning mechanical artificial kidney, leading to Nephrodite’s formation.
The FDA’s breakthrough designation on its artificial kidney allows the company to pursue approvals to begin tests in human trials.
The company traces its beginnings to a German aerospace facility outside Munich, where Nguyen and Shah watched engineers demonstrate a pediatric artificial heart — the Berlin Heart.
“That’s how we got started,” Shah said. “Seeing an artificial heart that led us to think about doing this for kidneys — because the kidney space has been largely ignored for 70 years.”
Backed by a German federal grant, Nephrodite grew, moving from Germany to Boston, Massachusetts, then to Austin, Texas, before calling Atlanta home. The company joined ATDC and tapped into other Georgia Tech programs. This included the Center for MedTech Excellence and the Georgia Manufacturing Extension Partnership. Nephrodite also drew on student talent as the researchers quietly worked on their continuous mechanical artificial kidney.
Nephrodite began interviewing patients to find out what they wanted the artificial kidney needed to solve.
They learned patients want the ability to be mobile. Patients also desire an alternative therapy to large needles being inserted into arm grafts because the injection sites are prone to infection and the grafts can fail. In addition, the process can be painful and disfiguring. Finally, patients want a quality of life independent of machines.
“Those quality-of-life needs, especially being free and mobile, were absolutely universal,” Shah said.
Nephrodite began developing the technology to build its device — a filter surgically implanted in the pelvis area.
“We developed an implant designed to run constantly, connected to larger blood vessels in the pelvis to avoid arm graft failures, and paired with an external interface that lets patients sleep at night while the system removes toxins and excess fluid,” Shah explained.
The device also has built-in sensors, with data uploaded to the cloud, enabling medical care teams to remotely monitor their patients while freeing patients from frequent in-clinic visits.
Shah said Nephrodite’s device could restore everyday independence, while potentially lowering infection risk.
“It's like having an actual kidney, but without all the issues of an unhealthy one,” Shah said.
OrthoPreserve: Innovating a Minimally Invasive Meniscus Implant
OrthoPreserve’s technology aims to address issues from people have with their meniscus, the C‑shaped piece of cartilage in a knee joint that acts as a shock absorber between the thigh bone and shin bone.
Though patients undergo a now-routine surgery to address it, incomplete recoveries are also common. An estimated quarter of patients later experience recurring knee pain. No FDA-approved implant currently exists for this population. Now, OrthoPreserveis developing a minimally invasive, artificial meniscus implant to restore cushioning, relieve pain, and delay — or even prevent — knee replacement for some patients.
“There are a million meniscus surgeries every year, and 25% of those patients still live with recurring pain,” said Jonathan Schwartz, OrthoPreserve’s founder and CEO.
Patients can face daily pain from ordinary activities, such as prolonged standing or walking a dog. Other activities like jogging and recreational sports can trigger flares that can lead to swelling and prolonged discomfort, Schwartz said. “Those patients have no reliable options today,” he said. “We’re building a minimally invasive implant to restore cushioning and help people get back to the activities they love.”
OrhoPreserve’s durable implant restores cushioning, and it could help people return to normal activities and delay invasive knee replacement. Along with this comes potential cost and recovery benefits for the healthcare system.
Schwartz created the implant as his Georgia Tech master’s thesis in the lab of David Ku in the Lawrence P. Huang Endowed Chair for Engineering Entrepreneurship and Regents' Professor in the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering. After industry experience, Schwartz returned to further develop the technology, building on Georgia Tech’s translational expertise
OrthoPreserve has completed mechanical testing and a successful study. The company is raising a $2 million seed to complete validations and begin human trials, which Schwartz expects to start in 18 months.
“The FDA breakthrough designation validates that nothing like this technology exists, and that it has the potential to disrupt the standard of care,” Schwartz said, adding the U.S.’ market opportunity is roughly $1.5 billion. “We finally have a minimally invasive option to bridge the gap between meniscus surgery and knee replacement.”
What FDA Breakthrough Designation Means for ATDC’s HealthTech Startups
Having a faster and clearer path is a derisking milestone for investors who are evaluating capital intensive medical device technologies, Jungles said.
“This breakthrough device designation is a really big deal for medical device companies,” Jungles said, adding that startups often fear navigating the FDA approval process. “But this designation adds to the legitimacy of their technologies and the problemsthey are solving. The designation will help them get to market faster, assuming their data continues to meet expectations.”
ATDC launched its HealthTech vertical in 2018, which is now sponsored by Catalyst by Wellstar ATDC’s HealthTech portfoilo companies include medical devices, biotech, and digital health, among other segments.
ATDC’s Role in Accelerating HealthTech Innovation
Nephrodite and OrthoPreserve’s founders noted ATDC’s coaching and programming as critical in navigating fundraising and regulatory milestones. Another factor, they said, was ATDC’s connection to Georgia Tech’s labs and facilities and prototyping support and clinical advisors from across metro Atlanta.
“We meet with ATDC coaches every two to four weeks to troubleshoot and plan,” Schwartz said. “Having that level of seasoned guidance, all without consultant-level costs, has been huge.”
Jungles added that two Breakthrough device designations in the same year reflects ATDC’s selection rigor, noting he’s evaluated hundreds of technologies since the HealthTech vertical launched.
“It reflects the caliber of the companies in ATDC, specifically in the medical device space,” Jungles said. “It’s the strength of their teams, the persistence of the founders, and the collaboration of the ecosystem in Georgia and Atlanta.”
]]>
Set in the heart of Tech Square on the Georgia Tech campus, this year’s event explores how energy systems, materials, technologies, supply chains, and policy must evolve in response to AI’s accelerating impact. As digital infrastructure expands and computation intensifies, the need for reliable, resilient, and sustainable power has never been more urgent.
“Energy Day reflects Georgia Tech’s strength in connecting world-class research in materials and components with the infrastructure and partnerships needed to translate discovery into scalable energy technologies that serve industry, society, and the future economy,” said Eric Vogel, executive director of the IMS and the Hightower Professor in Materials Science and Engineering.
Energy Day 2026 also marks an important milestone with the introduction of its first group of corporate sponsors: GE Vernova, Southern Company, Georgia Power, ExxonMobil, Southwire Spark, Gems Setra, and Tektronix. Their support reflects a shared commitment to advancing energy solutions.
“Tektronix is excited to be part of Energy Day because advancing the future of energy starts with precise measurement and trusted insights,” said Christopher Bohn, president of Tektronix. “From power electronics and high voltage systems to grid scale renewables and AI driven control technologies, the breakthroughs discussed here directly align with the innovations we support through our products and solutions. Collaborating with Georgia Tech allows us to engage early with emerging research and the next generation of engineers—critical collaborators in building a cleaner, smarter, and more resilient energy ecosystem.”
The keynote address will be delivered by Vanessa Z. Chan, a nationally recognized leader at the intersection of innovation, commercialization, and emerging technologies. Chan will provide insights on accelerating technological discovery, emphasizing how AI is transforming energy and materials design. She will discuss how commercialization strategies must rapidly evolve across multidisciplinary energy domains from grid modernization to advanced batteries and clean manufacturing.
Building on the themes introduced in the keynote, the program transitions into a fireside chat with Georgia Tech EVPR Tim Lieuwen featuring Amit Kulkarni and Jim Walsh. Kulkarni is vice president of Product Management and Strategy for the Gas Power business within GE Vernova, where he oversees the world’s largest portfolio of power generation equipment. Walsh, vice president of GE Vernova’s Consulting Services, leads teams providing innovative solutions across the full spectrum of power generation, delivery, and utilization.
Next comes a policy-focused panel that will explore the surge in power demand driven by AI, how the United States is addressing today’s most urgent energy challenges, and the long-term implications of today’s decisions for a sustainable energy future. Bringing together leading voices in U.S. environmental and energy policy, the panel features Joe Aldy of Harvard University and former special assistant to the president for Energy and Environment; Al McGartland of New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity and former Environmental Protection Agency lead economist and director of the National Center for Environmental Economics; and Kevin Rennert, fellow and director of the Comprehensive Climate Strategies Program at Resources for the Future and former staff member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
The second panel focuses on critical materials — the foundation of advanced energy systems and digital technologies. As AI, data centers, and advanced energy technologies drive demand for critical materials, securing them now requires integration and coordination across the entire value chain. Panelists include Rachel Galloway, British consul general in Atlanta; Vijay Murugesan, head of Materials Intelligence and Digital Innovation at Amazon; Colin Spellmeyer, executive strategic sourcing leader at GE Vernova; Charles Sims, Tennessee Valley Authority Distinguished Professor of Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of Tennessee; and Nortey Yeboah, principal engineer at Southern Company. Together, they will offer perspectives on the policy and economic frameworks shaping the energy supply chain, from developing raw resources to manufacturing the technologies essential to future energy systems.
In the afternoon, participants can dive deeper into specialized topics through three focused technical tracks.
“Meeting the rapidly rising electricity demand driven by AI requires bold ideas, coordinated action, and research that moves at the speed of innovation,” said Yuanzhi Tang, executive director of the SEI. “Energy Day 2026 brings together the people and expertise needed to shape resilient, sustainable energy systems for the future. At Georgia Tech, we see this event as a catalyst for new partnerships, new solutions, and a shared commitment to strengthening the nation’s energy foundation.”
Energy Day 2026 is designed for researchers advancing emerging energy technologies, policymakers navigating shifting regulatory and geopolitical landscapes, industry professionals seeking insight into emerging tools and supply chains, and students preparing to enter one of the most consequential sectors of the decade. It also welcomes anyone interested in AI, sustainability, electrification, and critical materials.
Join us to explore the future of energy. To learn more and register, visit: Energy Day 2026.
]]>“Arts organizations contribute so much to the vibrancy of a community,” said Caley Landau, program manager for GAIN and marketing strategist at EI². “They help create a sense of place and provide the ‘something to do’ that small cities and towns want to offer residents, new workers, and prospective businesses. Our hope is to enhance the arts and cultural ecosystem in Middle Georgia by providing training and technical assistance to the organizations that produce art in the region.”
Perry was selected as the pilot location in part for its active downtown revitalization work and commitment to placemaking. Through the Georgia Economic Placemaking Collaborative, Perry city staff partnered with EI²’s Center for Economic Development Research to develop strategies for arts‑based community development.
“Working alongside the Georgia Tech team has been a wonderful experience,” said Alicia Hartley, downtown manager for the City of Perry. “We hope that participants walk away from the cohort inspired and empowered to activate their organizations in creative and meaningful ways.”
The program will begin with a listening session to understand participating organizations’ needs. EI² will then design tailored workshops drawing from experts at Georgia Tech and beyond. Every other month, cohort members will meet for sessions on business practices, digital tools, operational efficiency, marketing, placemaking partnerships, and other areas that support long‑term sustainability.
“They sound like great ideas — murals, pop‑up exhibits, outdoor performances — but how do you really get down to the nuts and bolts of making them happen?” Landau said. “And how do you bring the right partners to the table? That’s what we’ll explore together.”
As Georgia Tech’s economic development arm, EI² administers programs that support entrepreneurs, manufacturers, communities, and municipalities across the state and around the world.
“GAIN represents an important part of EI²’s comprehensive approach to economic development,” said David Bridges, vice president of EI². “It gives us another way to create impact in Georgia by applying our expertise to serve arts organizations that are vital to Georgia communities.”
Jason Freeman, associate vice provost for Georgia Tech Arts, noted that the pilot aligns with the Institute’s broader commitment to supporting arts, culture, and creativity statewide.
“Through GAIN, I’m excited to learn more about the arts ecosystem in Middle Georgia,” Freeman said. “The lessons we learn will inform both statewide collaborations and new initiatives emerging through our Creative Quarter innovation district on campus.”
The pilot is funded through the NEA’s Our Town program, which supports projects integrating arts, culture, and design into community development. The Georgia Council for the Arts is partnering with EI² on cohort recruitment, curriculum development, and arts‑based placemaking strategies.
Recruitment has begun. Arts nonprofits and arts‑based businesses in Middle Georgia may apply at innovate.gatech.edu/gain/.
]]>]]>
GAIN PROGRAM CONTACT
Caley Landau
caley.landau@innovate.gatech.edu
As artificial intelligence (AI) drives explosive growth in data centers, communities across the U.S. are facing rising electricity costs, new industrial development, and mounting strain on an aging power grid.
At Georgia Tech, several faculty members are approaching these sustainability challenges from different but complementary angles: examining how data center policy affects local communities, modeling how AI-driven demand reshapes regional energy systems, and building tools that help the public understand the tradeoffs embedded in grid planning. Together, their work highlights how better data, thoughtful policy, and public engagement can guide more resilient and equitable decisions in an AI-powered future.
AI’s Hidden Footprint: How Data Centers Reshape Communities
Ahmed Saeed studies the infrastructure most people never see. An assistant professor in the School of Computer Science and a Brook Byers Institute for Sustainable Systems (BBISS) Faculty Fellow, Saeed focuses on how data centers — the backbone of modern AI — are built, operated, and regulated, and what their growth means for host communities.
“Data centers are the infrastructure for our digital life, so more of them are necessary to keep doing what we’re doing,” he said.
Data center energy consumption could double or triple by 2028, accounting for up to 12% of U.S. electricity use, according to a report by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. U.S. spending on data center construction jumped nearly 70% between May 2023 and May 2024, according to the American Edge Project.
Georgia is an AI data center hub, ranked fourth globally, with $4.6 billion in AI-related venture capital invested across 368 deals, the American Edge Project reported. At a recent town hall in DeKalb County, Georgia, Saeed helped residents connect AI’s promise to its local consequences. Training large AI models can require tens of thousands of graphics processing units (GPUs) running for days or weeks, driving an unprecedented wave of data center construction. AI-focused chips, he noted, can consume 10 to 14 times more power than traditional processors.
That demand often shows up as pressure on local infrastructure. Communities are increasingly concerned about electricity and water use, grid upgrades, and who ultimately pays. In Virginia, Saeed pointed to a legal dispute in which consumer advocates warned that data centers could raise electricity bills by 5% in the short term and up to 50% over time, while utilities argued those investments were inevitable and could benefit customers in the long run.
Environmental concerns add another layer. Saeed cited controversies over water use and backup diesel generators in states, including Georgia and Tennessee, alongside a recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruling that tightened generator regulations. While diesel generators are clearly harmful, he cautioned that long-term, rigorous evidence linking data centers to regional health impacts remains limited.
Saeed’s research aims to reduce those impacts directly. By optimizing how workloads are scheduled across large server fleets, his team has demonstrated power savings of 4 – 12%, a meaningful gain if U.S. data centers approach projected levels of up to 12% of national electricity use by 2028.
For Saeed, data centers are akin to highways: essential to modern life, disruptive to nearby communities, and shaped by policy choices. The question, he argues, is not whether AI infrastructure should exist, but how transparently and fairly it is built.
Economist Probes the Energy Costs of the AI Boom
While headlines often frame AI as an energy crisis, Georgia Tech environmental and energy economist and BBISS Faculty Fellow Tony Harding is focused on measuring its real — and uneven — impacts. Harding, an assistant professor in the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy, uses economic modeling to examine how AI adoption affects energy use, emissions, and local communities.
In recent work published in Environmental Research Letters, Harding and his co-author analyzed how productivity gains from AI could influence national energy demand. Their findings suggest that, at a macro level, AI-related activity may increase annual U.S. energy use by about 0.03% and CO₂ emissions by roughly 0.02%.
“Those numbers are small in the context of the overall economy,” Harding said. “But the impacts are highly uneven.”
That unevenness is evident in where data centers are built. While Northern Virginia remains the country’s top data center hub, with 343 operational data centers, states like Georgia, which currently has 94 operational data centers, are rapidly attracting facilities due to reliable power and favorable tax policies.
Harding’s latest research focuses on local effects, asking why data centers cluster in urban areas, how they influence housing markets, what happens to electricity prices, and whether they exacerbate water stress. Early evidence suggests large facilities can increase local electricity rates, contributing to public backlash and regulatory response. In Georgia, the Public Service Commission has begun requiring new, high power draw customers (like data centers) to cover more of the costs associated with grid expansion.
Harding’s goal is to give policymakers better evidence to design incentives and guardrails. “To manage these technologies responsibly,” he said, “we need a clear picture of their intended and unintended consequences.”
Gamifying a Strained and Aging Power Grid
Daniel Molzahn is tackling another side of the problem: how to modernize an aging power grid under growing demand. Electricity demand is expected to rise about 25% by 2030, driven by data centers, electric vehicles, and broadscale electrification. At the same time, much of the U.S. electricity grid is nearing the end of its lifespan, with many transformers being decades old.
To make these challenges tangible, Molzahn, an associate professor in the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, developed a browser-based game with a group of students through Georgia Tech’s Vertically Integrated Projects program called Current Crisis. Players take on the role of a utility decision-maker, balancing reliability, wildfire risk, renewable integration, and affordability.
The game grew out of Molzahn’s National Science Foundation CAREER award and reflects his belief that complex systems are best understood experientially. Its initial focus is wildfire resilience, modeling how grid infrastructure can both spark and suffer damage from fires.
But resilience comes at a cost. Burying power lines, for example, reduces wildfire risk but dramatically increases expenses. Players must confront the same tradeoffs utilities face: improve reliability or keep rates low.
Molzahn hopes the game will help students and the public grapple with the realities of planning future power systems. “These choices aren’t abstract,” he said. “They shape affordability, resilience, and our path toward a cleaner grid.”
The project now involves nearly 40 students from across campus, supported by Sustainability NEXT funding and a collaboration with Jessica Roberts, former BBISS Faculty Fellow and director of the Technology-Integrated Learning Environments (TILES) Lab in the School of Interactive Computing.
“As a learning scientist, I look at how to engage people with science and scientific data and get people having conversations they might not otherwise have,” says Roberts, who hopes the seed grant helps the team determine first that they are going in the right direction and, second, how to broaden the impact.
One student, Stella Quinto Lima, a graduate research assistant in Human-Centered Computing, has made the game the focus of her doctoral thesis. Through the game, she wants players to notice their misconceptions about the power grid, energy use, and AI, and to use critical thinking to identify, question, and possibly undo those misconceptions.
“I hope that we can really engage adults and help them see it’s not black and white. The game is not only about power grids, but how AI affects the grid, how it affects our lives, and how it will impact our future.”
The team plans to expand the game’s features, use it in outreach programs, and analyze player decisions as a source of data to study energy-system decision-making.
“We want to change the conversation about power and power grid stability, reliability, and sustainability, Roberts said, “and find a way to get this message to a larger public.”
]]>The Georgia Institute of Technology and Augusta University have launched a collaborative effort to boost the city’s medical device innovation ecosystem.
The Augusta region is already a major hub for health and life sciences, boasting five hospitals and the Medical College of Georgia, the nation’s 13th oldest medical school and one of its largest.
Additionally, the advocacy nonprofit Georgia Life Sciences designated the region a BioReady Gold community. This ratings system recognizes its existing bioscience assets and its commitment to expanding infrastructure and commercialization, marking Augusta as a desired choice for biotech companies looking for suitable sites to expand.
Leading the work at Georgia Tech are the Georgia Manufacturing Extension Partnership (GaMEP) and Advanced Technology Development Center (ATDC).
GaMEP is a program of the Enterprise Innovation Institute, Tech’s chief economic development arm. It brings a dedicated team with the unique skills required to help innovators clearly understand the requirements needed to bring medical devices to market.
“When entrepreneurs gain insight into the regulatory and quality requirements early in development, they can make informed, strategic decisions that can significantly reduce both time and cost,” said Sarah Jo Tucker, industry manager for GaMEP’s medical device group. “We partner closely with innovators throughout the process and bring deep expertise in the regulatory requirements while they bring expertise in their technology. Together, we can move products efficiently and confidently from concept to commercialization.”
ADTC, part of Georgia Tech’s Office of Commercialization, is the state’s premier technology incubator and the oldest university-based incubator in the country. ATDC provides guidance and resources for entrepreneurs and founders to successfully launch and scale their technology companies.
Since its founding in 1980, ATDC’s startup graduates have attracted more than $6.2 billion in investment and generated over $14 billion in revenue in Georgia. Through the partnership with Augusta University, ATDC uses its expertise to serve entrepreneurs in the medical device field.
"Medical innovation across the state of Georgia is critical for our health tech industries to thrive,” said Chris Dickson, ATDC’s startup catalyst in the Augusta region. “We identify investment-ready medical technology startups and provide the support needed while they are scaling their businesses.”
A major hub for the life sciences, Augusta University is home to a wealth of researchers in the biomedical and related fields. This makes the institution ideally situated to help facilitate medical device commercialization.
Guido Verbeck understands this dynamic firsthand. A professor of chemistry and biochemistry at Augusta University, he is also an entrepreneur and medical device innovator.
“Academia is a fantastic platform for launching ideas, but there must be an understanding of how to bring a device to market,” said Verbeck. “Physicians and practitioners who are also academics are solving problems in real time, but they often lack the resources and support to get their ideas to production and commercialization.”
Lynsey Steinberg, director of innovation for Augusta University’s strategic partnerships and economic development team, summed up collaboration’s goal.
“When we tap our depth of talent, innovation, and community collaboration, this region has what it takes to become a launchpad for medical device startups — a place where bold ideas find the purpose they need to succeed to solve real-world problems,” she said.
The half-day event is being presented in partnership with the Advanced Technology Development Center, Augusta University, the Augusta Economic Development Authority, and the Georgia Cyber Innovation and Training Center.
To learn more and register, click here.
]]>The interactive dashboard compiles and visualizes data gathered by Matisoff, along with Program and Operations Manager Michael Morley, offering a comprehensive view of SAF production, feedstock availability, and policy trends.
EPIcenter Research Associate Yang You has designed the dashboard to translate complex datasets into policy-relevant insights for decision-makers. By organizing key metrics into interactive visuals, the dashboard helps stakeholders assess market readiness and identify regulatory actions that could accelerate SAF adoption.
Emphasizing the importance of data-driven insights, Matisoff said, “The Department of Energy has a Grand Challenge to produce 3 billion gallons a year of Sustainable Aviation Fuel by 2030, and 35 billion gallons a year by 2050. By compiling and visualizing SAF data, we can help policymakers and researchers understand progress towards these goals, where the key opportunities and bottlenecks are – and how to move forward effectively”.
Why SAF Matters
While aviation only accounts for about 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, it is a rapidly growing share, and decarbonizing this sector is considered one of the most challenging aspects of the energy transition. Produced from renewable feedstocks, sustainable aviation fuel offers a pathway to reduce lifecycle emissions from air travel without requiring major changes to aircraft or infrastructure. However, SAF production and deployment face hurdles related to cost, supply chain development, and policy support.
EPIcenter’s Director Laura Taylor highlighted the dashboard’s role in addressing these challenges:
“Sustainable aviation fuel is a cornerstone of decarbonizing air travel, but the market is complex and rapidly evolving. The dashboard provides clarity by organizing the relevant data in a way that’s accessible and actionable for decision-makers.”
“This tool is meant to bridge analysis and action,” said You. “By visualizing SAF production, capacity, and offtake dynamics, the dashboard allows policymakers and stakeholders to see where the market is moving, where gaps remain, and how targeted infrastructure investments or supportive policies could unlock scale.”
The EPIcenter SAF Dashboard is intended as a resource for industry leaders, policymakers, and researchers working to accelerate SAF adoption. By providing transparent, data-driven insights, Georgia Tech aims to support informed decisions that advance innovation and sustainability in aviation.
To explore the dashboard and learn more about Georgia Tech’s work on sustainable aviation fuel, visit EPIcenter’s SAF page.
]]>ASU 2023-08, the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB) newly enacted rule, aims to bring clarity and consistency to crypto asset reporting with the mandate for fair value reporting. Moon’s research, which examined a comprehensive set of companies from 2013 to 2022, looks at the exponential rise in corporate crypto investments and the diverse, and often inconsistent, ways firms have reported them.
In “Accounting for Cryptocurrencies,” Moon and his co-authors work to better understand this pivotal point in financial reporting with research that dives into why firms hold crypto – whether for mining, payment acceptance, or investment – and how reporting practices have evolved to meet this current moment.
Keep reading to learn more about Moon’s research and why it matters right now.
Why do companies hold cryptocurrencies, and how has this changed over time?
Companies hold cryptocurrency for three main reasons: they mine it, they accept it as payment, or they consider it an investment. Early on, most businesses kept crypto because customers used it to pay for goods and services. Around 2017, that trend declined, and more companies began mining crypto themselves. Today, mining accounts for about half of corporate crypto holdings, while payment acceptance and investment make up the rest.
What were the main challenges companies face when trying to report cryptocurrency holdings in their financial statements?
Until the end of 2023, there were no official rules on how companies should report cryptocurrency on their financial statements. Back in 2018, the Big Four accounting firms (Deloitte, PwC, EY, and KPMG) stepped in with guidance, suggesting that crypto be treated like intangible assets, similar to things like patents or trademarks. This is known as the impairment model.
What is the difference between the “fair value model” and the “impairment model” for accounting crypto assets, and why does it matter?
The two accounting methods differ in how they handle changes in crypto value. The fair value model updates the value of a company’s crypto to match current market prices every reporting period. If the price goes up or down, the change shows up on the company’s income statement as a gain or loss.
The impairment model only lets companies record losses when the value drops below what they paid. If the price goes up, they can’t record the increase.
The difference in the two approaches can best be seen when crypto prices rise. Under the impairment model, companies’ balance sheets understate the true value of the crypto since the gains cannot be recorded. The fair value model allows companies to adjust the balance sheet value of crypto as market prices change.
What factors led ASU 2023-08 to favor fair value reporting?
When the FASB was trying to decide if they should add crypto accounting to their standard setting agenda, they reached out to the public for feedback. The response was overwhelming and most practitioners and firms called for the use of the fair value model.
How do big accounting firms, like Deloitte or PwC, influence how companies report their crypto holdings?
When there aren’t official rules for complex issues like crypto accounting, the Big Four firms often step in to guide companies. In 2018, they recommended using the impairment model, which they viewed as most appropriate based on existing standards. After that, most companies switched from fair value reporting to the impairment approach.
Their guidance in 2018 was based on what was allowed under the standards at that time. With the new rule in place, the firms will likely help clients manage the transition.
Does using fair value accounting for crypto make a company’s stock price more volatile or its earnings reports more useful to investors?
The primary downside of using a fair value model for a risky asset like crypto is how volatility affects earnings. Moon’s research suggests that stock price volatility increases for firms using the fair value model, and it doesn’t appear the model makes earnings more useful for investors. That said, the results should be viewed cautiously because the study’s sample largely consisted of smaller companies.
Why does this research matter right now?
This research matters because more companies are investing in cryptocurrency. That trend is only expected to grow. This research looks at how businesses handled crypto before official rules came out in 2023, showing that many treated it like traditional investments. This provides a baseline against which future research can evaluate the new rule. The research also warns that the fair value approach could make stock prices more volatile without necessarily making earnings reports more useful for investors.
Read More: Accounting for Cryptocurrencies
kristin.lowe@scheller.gatech.edu
]]>