iGNITIATE

Wednesday, 31 December 2025

Responsible Ai = IP Integrated Ai ? Yes.

If a ( new Ai discovered material ) tree falls in the ( lab ) woods and no one hears it, does it make an ( IP ) sound ? Of course it does.

With the ever increasing space that Ai systems, autonomous agents and integrated Ai code are expanding into, and as recently discussed in MIT Technology Review Ai Materials Discovery Now Needs To Move Into The Real World we are seeing ever increasing situations where Ai is not only validating and extending scientific principals but also where for the 1st time in history, we are seeing situations where specific new breakthroughs are taking place directly due to the output from automated Ai discovery, materials science robotic based experimentation and of course self generative coding systems. The question then is, at the speed and ferocity that these new Ai systems are able to create, and even artistically, build new physical experiments ( in the case of new materials R&D ) having these experiments running in labs is where the value to those that move R&D to production the fastest greater than or less than the patentability of said new breakthroughs?

When automated Ai materials science labs start pumping out scientifically validated materials never seen before and then automatically or with minimal human assistance submitting these efforts for patenting this then begs the question that Ai is automatically or mechanically becoming responsible for the IP protection that goes along with the discovery of new materials ( which may and can be used in enormous quantities ) and this is of enormous value to the firms that are not only using these new materials but also the labs that are producing said Ai augmented if not fully autonomously efforts.

Where we see more and more corporate, government, and large organization groups turning away from Ai as purely a generative and summary engine and onto to a system for unbiased scientific analysis, we see the further exploitation of a method for creating breakthroughs and as directly connected to the triumvirate of innovation: design + R&D + engineering generating IP ( which is protected via legal means ) and then offered to clients of said organization as a defensible part of business operations against external competitors. In modern parlance this is often referred to as the " moat " model of NPD and engineering efforts and as further examined in Evaluating Large Language Models in Scientific Discovery we see the exact value of such a system and process can create for legacy innovation organizations.

Where this then becomes a further power is in the consistent efforts to create and deliver industrial and consumer breakthroughs where the full ( or even partial ) integration of Ai systems into the international IP ecosystem of organizations such as the World Intellectual Property Office - WIPO, the European Union Intellectual Property Office - EUIPO and other such organizations on each of the world's continents takes place. Examples of this are in the power of Ai to limit international trademark trolling, patent infringement, and counterfeit goods similar to the integration of web based, mobile based and block-chain based technologies had similar effects in past technological adoption curves.

View all of iGNITIATE's Design, iNNOVATION and iNSIGHTS here

###

...........................................................

#iGNITIATE #Design #DesignThinking #DesignInnovation #IndustrialDesign #iGNITEconvergence #iGNITEprogram #DesignLeadership #LawrenceLivermoreNationalLabs #NSF #USNavy #EcoleDesPonts #Topiade #LouisVuitton #WorldRetailCongress #REUTPALA #WorldRetailCongress #OM #Fujitsu #Sharing #Swarovski #321-Contact #Bausch&Lomb #M.ONDE #SunStar #USPTO #EUIPO #WIPO

Sunday, 30 November 2025

Agentic Innovation Means IP Independence ? Here's how

When guiding how Ai delivers exact expertise in innovation efforts, there are ways to not only bring out the best in unexpected path investigations but also ways to use the unexpected to see around corners not previously imagined. But how ?

With Agentic innovation, and via constraint-based brainstorming, there are way to achiev IP independence by producing non-obvious outputs free from prior art and as detailed Out-Of-The-Box Thinking For Sustainability
with such systems as "must use magic" or "created by a six-year-old" to force divergent thinking beyond established frames of reference and Ai analysis and in that generating protectable concepts without reliance on licensed IP. More even in the idea of " protective concepts " as guidelines for types of thinking and directions that can be and will be embedded in Third Self or agentic functional systems.

This is even more interesting within the use of Ai in " Fanciful constraints " to or even patent searches, enabling de-novo IP and where interdisciplinary teams can surfacing core themes like empathy and honesty, untainted by existing methods or Agentic systems where R&D units may begin to build sovereignty assets or classes of expertise that emerges from the analysis of existing person based experience data sets. When this mixing and remixing emerges as new directions for not only R&D investigations but for alternative use cases of existing R&D then true innovations have a way of unfolding in an Agentic investigation and experimentation environment.

Implement this for government and even military R&D we see constrained sessions to derive independent tech breakthroughs may be extendable to classing innovation models and divergent thinking exercises and where again Tight constraints could yield clean, defensible IP rapidly but where extensive use case evaluation needs to take place and not just in the chance situations where many academic and research based Ai systems that can analyze and even synthesize new output in tone and styles similar to the input data set but which still cannot fully ( and based on limited inputs ) create full novelty ( and even more scientifically usable ) directions. It is not as if Agentic Innovation is a fully and likely path to Means IP Independence and especially when these systems could be at some point self referential - the worry of any " thinking new " system that can only explore a certain data set no matter how big or small.

View all of iGNITIATE's Design, iNNOVATION and iNSIGHTS here

###

...........................................................

Thursday, 30 October 2025

Innovation Sustainability: R&D 300 ≠250 Ai

Innovation Sustainability is almost an oxymoron as whether it's Ai Vector databases, catalogued MetaData, or RAG pipelines, etc., today, 250 training repetitions can ≠ 300 Spartans at Thermopylae as R&D is still front and center for NPD success. How? Here’s How.

When the underlying foundation of R&D, science, engineering and experimentation based analysis is the consistent convergence of large sample size and affiliated scientific verification ( and not only detailed in Persistent Pre-Training of LLMs but in Large Language Models Using Semantic Entropy and many more ) we see how any number of industry standard Ai training sets ( and even with the emergence of real-time Ai system " last straw effect " 250 data point inputs ( and from any location, and in data format on the internet ) means persistence across any inputs can cause butterfly effects in final Ai outputs. More, it's where these inputs can not only radically alter the ability of Ai systems to produce output that is not directly effected by " last minute " modalities ( like the last mile problem in logistics systems ) we also see how with a 300 ≠250 footprint, the length of the journey to the last inches can have severely unintended effects. Last second edge constraint changes are not conducive to sustained scientific, data driven artifacts in Ai systems. Where any number of minute changes and especially in last mile data scenarios can change whole gradient descent Ai system outputs even when unconstrained mathematical optimization models in first-order iterative algorithms used to minimize differentiable multivariate functions occur in any number of iterative methods for optimization be it search engines or Ai video or image output efforts, this is in fact happening in some of today's Ai system architecture. 250 is 300 but not for long.

When companies, organizations, group and even individuals move beyond the expected norms of scientific validation of empirical evidence the question becomes at what point do Ai systems begin to alter their output regardless of expert and industry validated guidance and more when sentiment and meta data a bearing that it should not. It is in these cases, and as expertly described in Medical Multi-Agent Systems we see how even in the most high " accurate " Ai systems alone are not a sufficient measure of clinical accuracy and when it comes to effected accuracy, and there is none of higher importance than medical next steps suggestion systems.

Further detailed in Semantic and Generalized Entropy Loss Functions for Semi-Supervised Deep Learning we see how not only are the medical areas of discipline some of the 1st bastions of 300 ≠250 but also areas such as geological systems, nano-materials, optical chip fabrication, and environmental prediction systems ( areas with extremely high signal to noise ratio sensitivity ) and where Ai systems where interference from outside untested influences means edge constraints have larger chances of directly and negatively effecting tested and operational capabilities, this is the area for the largest concern. And, this is where specific new Ai system architectures are evolving to adjust for such discrepancies before output intended for next step actions is utilized and made available as usable and actionable.

View all of iGNITIATE's Design, iNNOVATION and iNSIGHTS here

###

...........................................................

Tuesday, 30 September 2025

When Systems Thinking Means A Thinking System Then What ?

With the proliferation of seemingly thinking ( Ai ) systems how far can Ai system thinking + design go ? Far !

Past the discovery of of transformer models, CNN's, Hybrid Neuro-Symbolic Systems ( LLMs + Symbolic Solvers ) used in reasoning in critical thinking applications, and onto Modular Multi-Modal + RAG designs, is where not only are specialized functional capabilities being stitched together in specific Ai models and to be able to seamlessly allow for intra-speciality spontaneity to emerge, it is also where evolutionary ( system design ) artifacts may emerge from exactly the same Ai systems. Is this recursive learning ? Does this mean systems that design themselves? Not in the way that is traditionally thought.

Where now, when Ai mavericks seemingly place " simple " processing ( as contrasted with say Ai drug discovery architectures to task ) what we see is, as an example in augmenting 3D design and modeling typologies with Ai, 3D tools like object multipliers, surface cloning, etc,. can even be cross purposed with standard innovation models of TRIZ and SCAMPER used for new product development efforts. It's then where almost real time design, training and testing environments allow the mapping of unrelated functional tools. And, where this is no better described in Design Creativity in A

When substitution, combination, adaptation, modification, repurposing, elimination, reversal; etc., efforts enhance ideation the amount of human validation necessary to move through the process of full say Ai system design, training and usage, dynamically, is slowly coming into an almost real-time environment. An Ai Vibe Architecture Interface.

This seemingly almost flies in the face of an evaluating criteria for " value " from investigations and where not only are there many such evaluating criteria for assessing creativity and alternative use cases, according to the López-Forniés system where Novelty, Usefulness, and Technical Feasibility may enumerate output, what are the ramifications of say using ( for example ) completely non visible spectrum analysis in say, auditory analysis is not something that can be quickly be created, tested and deployed in a rapid manner unless dynamic Ai system architectures can be used. And they are.

View all of iGNITIATE's Design, iNNOVATION and iNSIGHTS here

###

...........................................................

Sunday, 31 August 2025

AI Design Means Collaboration Convergence

When Ai design tools for physical and digital objects focus on the right phase of R&D&D - Research, Design and Development is where Ai gives it's greatest boost but how? Here's how.

In areas of investigating the influence of the design process in the shaping of not only initial conditions but edge constraints used in a new product development initiative, we see how there are specific Implications for Human-AI Design Collaboration that show more valuable and specific artifacts coming from certain phases in the design and new product development process especially when the widening of the lens takes place via the widening of the definition of the NPD ( New Product Development ) parameters to something many firms now embrace which is a NP&PD ( New Product & Process Development ) system where Ai shows considerable promise.

In the case of quickly being able to execute on code base deployment for rapid application development initiatives ( and where this is increasing in some cases means jumping to fully working incredibly complex code repositories in real time ) where AI Design Means Collaboration Convergence scenarios, we see internal to a NP&PD situation the cycle time of experimentation directly effected and again considerably cut and even when these environments are physical goods oriented and the multitude of additional complexities such undertakings entail.

More specifically is where we see that in cases of engineering design and it's convergent solution methodologies when combined with designers with design problem outlook exploration as divergent possibilities can be bridged by Ai systems that are translating the differences in language between the two groups and their basic archetypal underpinnings allowing for a stronger exchange of interpretations as to what are within bounds extrapolations of the initial data sets that are presented in Ai design and development systems. This also assumes that any and all collaborative efforts will require that Ai systems in each of the distinct NP&PN processes has access to the same data sets so that when further questions, experimentation, suggestions, etc., are queried by the Ai design system in this example, means that all quantitative data that is used is part of all future branches from the initial design and development start.

But when clients teams are everywhere, when time zones and check-ins are all over the map, when an originally 8hr work cycles meant ( possibly ) two shifts in global NP&PD efforts, now in moving to a 3 phase model of 3 shifts of 8hrs and thus 24 hour NP&PD efforts, even more, we see that the strongest part of the Ai assisted design and development cycle is in the engineering areas but where the further develop of Ai Discover and Define sections of the process require the highest sense of divergent thinking that when further along in the development process previously could not have occurred as far down the process as now with Ai allowing for redefining and in some cases re-sequencing previously almost as permanent parameters in a design, means more flexibility up until the last moments of production. In that, the further creativity needed to wrangle last minute challenges that in pre Ai-Design and Development environments might have been the death nail to projects.

In that explicit way, Ai NP&PD enhanced environments ( and even before and within the design and prototyping phases of said efforts ) is as the possibility might become, allow for long hierarchical divergent development paths to take place and all where one change to specific directional changes allows for all aspects of the chain to take place and specifically in a visual way further cultivating not yet explored design directions that can lead to specific NP&PD ( New Product & Process Development ) further embedding R&D&D ( Research & Design & Development ) Ai tools as primary protagonists between the 7 distinct phases of experimental efforts R&D&D = NP&PD where the axis of influence ( and explicitly within the development portion ) is ' D ' or development activities.

View all of iGNITIATE's Design, iNNOVATION and iNSIGHTS here

###

...........................................................