artificial intelligence in our daily life research paper

The present and future of AI

Finale doshi-velez on how ai is shaping our lives and how we can shape ai.

Finale Doshi-Velez, the John L. Loeb Professor of Engineering and Applied Sciences. (Photo courtesy of Eliza Grinnell/Harvard SEAS)

How has artificial intelligence changed and shaped our world over the last five years? How will AI continue to impact our lives in the coming years? Those were the questions addressed in the most recent report from the One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence (AI100), an ongoing project hosted at Stanford University, that will study the status of AI technology and its impacts on the world over the next 100 years.

The 2021 report is the second in a series that will be released every five years until 2116. Titled “Gathering Strength, Gathering Storms,” the report explores the various ways AI is  increasingly touching people’s lives in settings that range from  movie recommendations  and  voice assistants  to  autonomous driving  and  automated medical diagnoses .

Barbara Grosz , the Higgins Research Professor of Natural Sciences at the Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) is a member of the standing committee overseeing the AI100 project and Finale Doshi-Velez , Gordon McKay Professor of Computer Science, is part of the panel of interdisciplinary researchers who wrote this year’s report. 

We spoke with Doshi-Velez about the report, what it says about the role AI is currently playing in our lives, and how it will change in the future.  

Q: Let's start with a snapshot: What is the current state of AI and its potential?

Doshi-Velez: Some of the biggest changes in the last five years have been how well AIs now perform in large data regimes on specific types of tasks.  We've seen [DeepMind’s] AlphaZero become the best Go player entirely through self-play, and everyday uses of AI such as grammar checks and autocomplete, automatic personal photo organization and search, and speech recognition become commonplace for large numbers of people.  

In terms of potential, I'm most excited about AIs that might augment and assist people.  They can be used to drive insights in drug discovery, help with decision making such as identifying a menu of likely treatment options for patients, and provide basic assistance, such as lane keeping while driving or text-to-speech based on images from a phone for the visually impaired.  In many situations, people and AIs have complementary strengths. I think we're getting closer to unlocking the potential of people and AI teams.

There's a much greater recognition that we should not be waiting for AI tools to become mainstream before making sure they are ethical.

Q: Over the course of 100 years, these reports will tell the story of AI and its evolving role in society. Even though there have only been two reports, what's the story so far?

There's actually a lot of change even in five years.  The first report is fairly rosy.  For example, it mentions how algorithmic risk assessments may mitigate the human biases of judges.  The second has a much more mixed view.  I think this comes from the fact that as AI tools have come into the mainstream — both in higher stakes and everyday settings — we are appropriately much less willing to tolerate flaws, especially discriminatory ones. There's also been questions of information and disinformation control as people get their news, social media, and entertainment via searches and rankings personalized to them. So, there's a much greater recognition that we should not be waiting for AI tools to become mainstream before making sure they are ethical.

Q: What is the responsibility of institutes of higher education in preparing students and the next generation of computer scientists for the future of AI and its impact on society?

First, I'll say that the need to understand the basics of AI and data science starts much earlier than higher education!  Children are being exposed to AIs as soon as they click on videos on YouTube or browse photo albums. They need to understand aspects of AI such as how their actions affect future recommendations.

But for computer science students in college, I think a key thing that future engineers need to realize is when to demand input and how to talk across disciplinary boundaries to get at often difficult-to-quantify notions of safety, equity, fairness, etc.  I'm really excited that Harvard has the Embedded EthiCS program to provide some of this education.  Of course, this is an addition to standard good engineering practices like building robust models, validating them, and so forth, which is all a bit harder with AI.

I think a key thing that future engineers need to realize is when to demand input and how to talk across disciplinary boundaries to get at often difficult-to-quantify notions of safety, equity, fairness, etc. 

Q: Your work focuses on machine learning with applications to healthcare, which is also an area of focus of this report. What is the state of AI in healthcare? 

A lot of AI in healthcare has been on the business end, used for optimizing billing, scheduling surgeries, that sort of thing.  When it comes to AI for better patient care, which is what we usually think about, there are few legal, regulatory, and financial incentives to do so, and many disincentives. Still, there's been slow but steady integration of AI-based tools, often in the form of risk scoring and alert systems.

In the near future, two applications that I'm really excited about are triage in low-resource settings — having AIs do initial reads of pathology slides, for example, if there are not enough pathologists, or get an initial check of whether a mole looks suspicious — and ways in which AIs can help identify promising treatment options for discussion with a clinician team and patient.

Q: Any predictions for the next report?

I'll be keen to see where currently nascent AI regulation initiatives have gotten to. Accountability is such a difficult question in AI,  it's tricky to nurture both innovation and basic protections.  Perhaps the most important innovation will be in approaches for AI accountability.

Topics: AI / Machine Learning , Computer Science

Cutting-edge science delivered direct to your inbox.

Join the Harvard SEAS mailing list.

Scientist Profiles

Finale Doshi-Velez

Herchel Smith Professor of Computer Science

Press Contact

Leah Burrows | 617-496-1351 | [email protected]

Related News

SEAS at CHI

SEAS teams win Best Paper, honorable mentions at international conference on Human-Computer Interaction

AI / Machine Learning , Computer Science

AI for more caring institutions

Improving AI-based decision-making tools for public services

Coming out to a chatbot?

Researchers explore the limitations of mental health chatbots in LGBTQ+ communities

Artificial Intelligence in Daily Life

• © 2020
• Raymond S. T. Lee   ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2487-1914 0

Division of Science and Technology, Beijing Normal University-Hong Kong Baptist University United International College, Zhuhai, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

• Offers an introduction to basic Artificial Intelligence concepts for readers from various fields
• Reviews major AI technologies and applications that are reshaping our daily lives
• Investigates the future development of AI and critical issues, including AI ethics, privacy, the development of a conscious mind, and autonomous robots

46k Accesses

36 Citations

1 Altmetric

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

About this book

Given the exponential growth of Artificial Intelligence (AI) over the past few decades, AI and its related applications have become part of daily life in ways that we could never have dreamt of only a century ago. Our routines have been changed beyond measure by robotics and AI, which are now used in a vast array of services. Though AI is still in its infancy, we have already benefited immensely. This book introduces readers to basic Artificial Intelligence concepts, and helps them understand the relationship between AI and daily life.

In the interest of clarity, the content is divided into four major parts. Part I (AI Concepts) presents fundamental concepts of and information on AI; while Part II (AI Technology) introduces readers to the five core AI Technologies that provide the building blocks for various AI applications, namely: Machine Learning (ML), Data Mining (DM), Computer Vision (CV), Natural Languages Processing (NLP), and Ontology-based Search Engine (OSE). In turn, Part III (AI Applications) reviews major contemporary applications that are impacting our ways of life, working styles and environment, ranging from intelligent agents and robotics to smart campus and smart city projects. Lastly, Part IV (Beyond AI) addresses related topics that are vital to the future development of AI. It also discusses a number of critical issues, such as AI ethics and privacy, the development of a conscious mind, and autonomous robotics in our daily lives.                    

Similar content being viewed by others

AI and Big Data in Tourism

Recent Applications of Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable Development in Smart Cities

Quo vadis artificial intelligence?

• Artificial Intelligence

Machine Learning

• Neural Networks
• Fuzzy Logics
• Intelligence Campus
• Intelligence City

Table of contents (15 chapters)

Front matter, ai concepts, a brief journey of human intelligence.

Raymond S. T. Lee

AI Fundamentals

Ai technology, data mining, computer vision, natural language processing, ontological-based search engine, ai applications, intelligent agents and software robots, intelligent transportation, smart health, smart education, ai and self-consciousness, ai ethics, security and privacy, what’s next, authors and affiliations, about the author.

Dr. Raymond Lee is the founder of Quantum Finance Forecast System QFFC, and currently an Associate Professor and IT Director at United International College (UIC). With more than 20 years of experience in IT consultancy and research into AI, Chaotic Neural Networks, Intelligent Fintech Systems, Quantum Finance, and Intelligent E-Commerce Systems, he has published over 100 publications and seven textbooks and research monographs on chaotic neural networks, AI-based fintech systems, intelligent agent technologies, chaotic cryptosystems, ontological agents, neural oscillators, biometrics, and weather simulation and forecasting systems. Dr. Lee’s latest book, Quantum Finance: Intelligent Forecast and Trading Systems, published by Springer in Nov 2019, serves as a textbook for a new course on Quantum Finance at the UIC. He has successfully commercialized his AI fintech inventions in the business sectors in China and Hong Kong.      

From 2012 to 2017, Dr. Leeserved as Group CTO/Chief Analyst at Leanda Investment Group, China, where he applied his AI fintech invention - the Quantum Finance Forecast System - to major commodities in China for 1000+ investors. In Mar 2017, he set up the Quantum Finance Forecast Center (QFFC, http://qffc.org), a non-profit, AI fintech R&D and worldwide financial forecast center where traders and individual investors around the globe can access (free of charge) 129 financial forecasts based on the latest AI, chaotic neural network and quantum field theory technologies. QFFC currently has over 10,000 registered members, which include professional traders, quants, and independent investors from major funding houses and financial institutions.

Bibliographic Information

Book Title : Artificial Intelligence in Daily Life

Authors : Raymond S. T. Lee

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7695-9

Publisher : Springer Singapore

eBook Packages : Computer Science , Computer Science (R0)

Copyright Information : The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Hardcover ISBN : 978-981-15-7694-2 Published: 22 August 2020

Softcover ISBN : 978-981-15-7697-3 Published: 22 August 2021

eBook ISBN : 978-981-15-7695-9 Published: 22 August 2020

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : XXVIII, 394

Number of Illustrations : 39 b/w illustrations, 195 illustrations in colour

Topics : Artificial Intelligence , Technology and Digital Education , Engineering/Technology Education , Computer Applications , Popular Computer Science

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

How artificial intelligence is transforming the world

Subscribe to the center for technology innovation newsletter, darrell m. west and darrell m. west senior fellow - center for technology innovation , douglas dillon chair in governmental studies john r. allen john r. allen.

April 24, 2018

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a wide-ranging tool that enables people to rethink how we integrate information, analyze data, and use the resulting insights to improve decision making—and already it is transforming every walk of life. In this report, Darrell West and John Allen discuss AI’s application across a variety of sectors, address issues in its development, and offer recommendations for getting the most out of AI while still protecting important human values.

Table of Contents I. Qualities of artificial intelligence II. Applications in diverse sectors III. Policy, regulatory, and ethical issues IV. Recommendations V. Conclusion

• 49 min read

Most people are not very familiar with the concept of artificial intelligence (AI). As an illustration, when 1,500 senior business leaders in the United States in 2017 were asked about AI, only 17 percent said they were familiar with it. 1 A number of them were not sure what it was or how it would affect their particular companies. They understood there was considerable potential for altering business processes, but were not clear how AI could be deployed within their own organizations.

Despite its widespread lack of familiarity, AI is a technology that is transforming every walk of life. It is a wide-ranging tool that enables people to rethink how we integrate information, analyze data, and use the resulting insights to improve decisionmaking. Our hope through this comprehensive overview is to explain AI to an audience of policymakers, opinion leaders, and interested observers, and demonstrate how AI already is altering the world and raising important questions for society, the economy, and governance.

In this paper, we discuss novel applications in finance, national security, health care, criminal justice, transportation, and smart cities, and address issues such as data access problems, algorithmic bias, AI ethics and transparency, and legal liability for AI decisions. We contrast the regulatory approaches of the U.S. and European Union, and close by making a number of recommendations for getting the most out of AI while still protecting important human values. 2

In order to maximize AI benefits, we recommend nine steps for going forward:

• Encourage greater data access for researchers without compromising users’ personal privacy,
• invest more government funding in unclassified AI research,
• promote new models of digital education and AI workforce development so employees have the skills needed in the 21 st -century economy,
• create a federal AI advisory committee to make policy recommendations,
• engage with state and local officials so they enact effective policies,
• regulate broad AI principles rather than specific algorithms,
• take bias complaints seriously so AI does not replicate historic injustice, unfairness, or discrimination in data or algorithms,
• maintain mechanisms for human oversight and control, and
• penalize malicious AI behavior and promote cybersecurity.

Qualities of artificial intelligence

Although there is no uniformly agreed upon definition, AI generally is thought to refer to “machines that respond to stimulation consistent with traditional responses from humans, given the human capacity for contemplation, judgment and intention.” 3  According to researchers Shubhendu and Vijay, these software systems “make decisions which normally require [a] human level of expertise” and help people anticipate problems or deal with issues as they come up. 4 As such, they operate in an intentional, intelligent, and adaptive manner.

Intentionality

Artificial intelligence algorithms are designed to make decisions, often using real-time data. They are unlike passive machines that are capable only of mechanical or predetermined responses. Using sensors, digital data, or remote inputs, they combine information from a variety of different sources, analyze the material instantly, and act on the insights derived from those data. With massive improvements in storage systems, processing speeds, and analytic techniques, they are capable of tremendous sophistication in analysis and decisionmaking.

Artificial intelligence is already altering the world and raising important questions for society, the economy, and governance.

Intelligence

AI generally is undertaken in conjunction with machine learning and data analytics. 5 Machine learning takes data and looks for underlying trends. If it spots something that is relevant for a practical problem, software designers can take that knowledge and use it to analyze specific issues. All that is required are data that are sufficiently robust that algorithms can discern useful patterns. Data can come in the form of digital information, satellite imagery, visual information, text, or unstructured data.

Adaptability

AI systems have the ability to learn and adapt as they make decisions. In the transportation area, for example, semi-autonomous vehicles have tools that let drivers and vehicles know about upcoming congestion, potholes, highway construction, or other possible traffic impediments. Vehicles can take advantage of the experience of other vehicles on the road, without human involvement, and the entire corpus of their achieved “experience” is immediately and fully transferable to other similarly configured vehicles. Their advanced algorithms, sensors, and cameras incorporate experience in current operations, and use dashboards and visual displays to present information in real time so human drivers are able to make sense of ongoing traffic and vehicular conditions. And in the case of fully autonomous vehicles, advanced systems can completely control the car or truck, and make all the navigational decisions.

Related Content

Jack Karsten, Darrell M. West

October 26, 2015

Makada Henry-Nickie

November 16, 2017

Sunil Johal, Daniel Araya

February 28, 2017

Applications in diverse sectors

AI is not a futuristic vision, but rather something that is here today and being integrated with and deployed into a variety of sectors. This includes fields such as finance, national security, health care, criminal justice, transportation, and smart cities. There are numerous examples where AI already is making an impact on the world and augmenting human capabilities in significant ways. 6

One of the reasons for the growing role of AI is the tremendous opportunities for economic development that it presents. A project undertaken by PriceWaterhouseCoopers estimated that “artificial intelligence technologies could increase global GDP by $15.7 trillion, a full 14%, by 2030.” 7 That includes advances of $7 trillion in China, $3.7 trillion in North America, $1.8 trillion in Northern Europe, $1.2 trillion for Africa and Oceania, $0.9 trillion in the rest of Asia outside of China, $0.7 trillion in Southern Europe, and $0.5 trillion in Latin America. China is making rapid strides because it has set a national goal of investing $150 billion in AI and becoming the global leader in this area by 2030.

Meanwhile, a McKinsey Global Institute study of China found that “AI-led automation can give the Chinese economy a productivity injection that would add 0.8 to 1.4 percentage points to GDP growth annually, depending on the speed of adoption.” 8 Although its authors found that China currently lags the United States and the United Kingdom in AI deployment, the sheer size of its AI market gives that country tremendous opportunities for pilot testing and future development.

Investments in financial AI in the United States tripled between 2013 and 2014 to a total of $12.2 billion. 9 According to observers in that sector, “Decisions about loans are now being made by software that can take into account a variety of finely parsed data about a borrower, rather than just a credit score and a background check.” 10 In addition, there are so-called robo-advisers that “create personalized investment portfolios, obviating the need for stockbrokers and financial advisers.” 11 These advances are designed to take the emotion out of investing and undertake decisions based on analytical considerations, and make these choices in a matter of minutes.

A prominent example of this is taking place in stock exchanges, where high-frequency trading by machines has replaced much of human decisionmaking. People submit buy and sell orders, and computers match them in the blink of an eye without human intervention. Machines can spot trading inefficiencies or market differentials on a very small scale and execute trades that make money according to investor instructions. 12 Powered in some places by advanced computing, these tools have much greater capacities for storing information because of their emphasis not on a zero or a one, but on “quantum bits” that can store multiple values in each location. 13 That dramatically increases storage capacity and decreases processing times.

Fraud detection represents another way AI is helpful in financial systems. It sometimes is difficult to discern fraudulent activities in large organizations, but AI can identify abnormalities, outliers, or deviant cases requiring additional investigation. That helps managers find problems early in the cycle, before they reach dangerous levels. 14

National security

AI plays a substantial role in national defense. Through its Project Maven, the American military is deploying AI “to sift through the massive troves of data and video captured by surveillance and then alert human analysts of patterns or when there is abnormal or suspicious activity.” 15 According to Deputy Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan, the goal of emerging technologies in this area is “to meet our warfighters’ needs and to increase [the] speed and agility [of] technology development and procurement.” 16

Artificial intelligence will accelerate the traditional process of warfare so rapidly that a new term has been coined: hyperwar.

The big data analytics associated with AI will profoundly affect intelligence analysis, as massive amounts of data are sifted in near real time—if not eventually in real time—thereby providing commanders and their staffs a level of intelligence analysis and productivity heretofore unseen. Command and control will similarly be affected as human commanders delegate certain routine, and in special circumstances, key decisions to AI platforms, reducing dramatically the time associated with the decision and subsequent action. In the end, warfare is a time competitive process, where the side able to decide the fastest and move most quickly to execution will generally prevail. Indeed, artificially intelligent intelligence systems, tied to AI-assisted command and control systems, can move decision support and decisionmaking to a speed vastly superior to the speeds of the traditional means of waging war. So fast will be this process, especially if coupled to automatic decisions to launch artificially intelligent autonomous weapons systems capable of lethal outcomes, that a new term has been coined specifically to embrace the speed at which war will be waged: hyperwar.

While the ethical and legal debate is raging over whether America will ever wage war with artificially intelligent autonomous lethal systems, the Chinese and Russians are not nearly so mired in this debate, and we should anticipate our need to defend against these systems operating at hyperwar speeds. The challenge in the West of where to position “humans in the loop” in a hyperwar scenario will ultimately dictate the West’s capacity to be competitive in this new form of conflict. 17

Just as AI will profoundly affect the speed of warfare, the proliferation of zero day or zero second cyber threats as well as polymorphic malware will challenge even the most sophisticated signature-based cyber protection. This forces significant improvement to existing cyber defenses. Increasingly, vulnerable systems are migrating, and will need to shift to a layered approach to cybersecurity with cloud-based, cognitive AI platforms. This approach moves the community toward a “thinking” defensive capability that can defend networks through constant training on known threats. This capability includes DNA-level analysis of heretofore unknown code, with the possibility of recognizing and stopping inbound malicious code by recognizing a string component of the file. This is how certain key U.S.-based systems stopped the debilitating “WannaCry” and “Petya” viruses.

Preparing for hyperwar and defending critical cyber networks must become a high priority because China, Russia, North Korea, and other countries are putting substantial resources into AI. In 2017, China’s State Council issued a plan for the country to “build a domestic industry worth almost $150 billion” by 2030. 18 As an example of the possibilities, the Chinese search firm Baidu has pioneered a facial recognition application that finds missing people. In addition, cities such as Shenzhen are providing up to $1 million to support AI labs. That country hopes AI will provide security, combat terrorism, and improve speech recognition programs. 19 The dual-use nature of many AI algorithms will mean AI research focused on one sector of society can be rapidly modified for use in the security sector as well. 20

Health care

AI tools are helping designers improve computational sophistication in health care. For example, Merantix is a German company that applies deep learning to medical issues. It has an application in medical imaging that “detects lymph nodes in the human body in Computer Tomography (CT) images.” 21 According to its developers, the key is labeling the nodes and identifying small lesions or growths that could be problematic. Humans can do this, but radiologists charge $100 per hour and may be able to carefully read only four images an hour. If there were 10,000 images, the cost of this process would be $250,000, which is prohibitively expensive if done by humans.

What deep learning can do in this situation is train computers on data sets to learn what a normal-looking versus an irregular-appearing lymph node is. After doing that through imaging exercises and honing the accuracy of the labeling, radiological imaging specialists can apply this knowledge to actual patients and determine the extent to which someone is at risk of cancerous lymph nodes. Since only a few are likely to test positive, it is a matter of identifying the unhealthy versus healthy node.

AI has been applied to congestive heart failure as well, an illness that afflicts 10 percent of senior citizens and costs $35 billion each year in the United States. AI tools are helpful because they “predict in advance potential challenges ahead and allocate resources to patient education, sensing, and proactive interventions that keep patients out of the hospital.” 22

Criminal justice

AI is being deployed in the criminal justice area. The city of Chicago has developed an AI-driven “Strategic Subject List” that analyzes people who have been arrested for their risk of becoming future perpetrators. It ranks 400,000 people on a scale of 0 to 500, using items such as age, criminal activity, victimization, drug arrest records, and gang affiliation. In looking at the data, analysts found that youth is a strong predictor of violence, being a shooting victim is associated with becoming a future perpetrator, gang affiliation has little predictive value, and drug arrests are not significantly associated with future criminal activity. 23

Judicial experts claim AI programs reduce human bias in law enforcement and leads to a fairer sentencing system. R Street Institute Associate Caleb Watney writes:

Empirically grounded questions of predictive risk analysis play to the strengths of machine learning, automated reasoning and other forms of AI. One machine-learning policy simulation concluded that such programs could be used to cut crime up to 24.8 percent with no change in jailing rates, or reduce jail populations by up to 42 percent with no increase in crime rates. 24

However, critics worry that AI algorithms represent “a secret system to punish citizens for crimes they haven’t yet committed. The risk scores have been used numerous times to guide large-scale roundups.” 25 The fear is that such tools target people of color unfairly and have not helped Chicago reduce the murder wave that has plagued it in recent years.

Despite these concerns, other countries are moving ahead with rapid deployment in this area. In China, for example, companies already have “considerable resources and access to voices, faces and other biometric data in vast quantities, which would help them develop their technologies.” 26 New technologies make it possible to match images and voices with other types of information, and to use AI on these combined data sets to improve law enforcement and national security. Through its “Sharp Eyes” program, Chinese law enforcement is matching video images, social media activity, online purchases, travel records, and personal identity into a “police cloud.” This integrated database enables authorities to keep track of criminals, potential law-breakers, and terrorists. 27 Put differently, China has become the world’s leading AI-powered surveillance state.

Transportation

Transportation represents an area where AI and machine learning are producing major innovations. Research by Cameron Kerry and Jack Karsten of the Brookings Institution has found that over $80 billion was invested in autonomous vehicle technology between August 2014 and June 2017. Those investments include applications both for autonomous driving and the core technologies vital to that sector. 28

Autonomous vehicles—cars, trucks, buses, and drone delivery systems—use advanced technological capabilities. Those features include automated vehicle guidance and braking, lane-changing systems, the use of cameras and sensors for collision avoidance, the use of AI to analyze information in real time, and the use of high-performance computing and deep learning systems to adapt to new circumstances through detailed maps. 29

Light detection and ranging systems (LIDARs) and AI are key to navigation and collision avoidance. LIDAR systems combine light and radar instruments. They are mounted on the top of vehicles that use imaging in a 360-degree environment from a radar and light beams to measure the speed and distance of surrounding objects. Along with sensors placed on the front, sides, and back of the vehicle, these instruments provide information that keeps fast-moving cars and trucks in their own lane, helps them avoid other vehicles, applies brakes and steering when needed, and does so instantly so as to avoid accidents.

Advanced software enables cars to learn from the experiences of other vehicles on the road and adjust their guidance systems as weather, driving, or road conditions change. This means that software is the key—not the physical car or truck itself.

Since these cameras and sensors compile a huge amount of information and need to process it instantly to avoid the car in the next lane, autonomous vehicles require high-performance computing, advanced algorithms, and deep learning systems to adapt to new scenarios. This means that software is the key, not the physical car or truck itself. 30 Advanced software enables cars to learn from the experiences of other vehicles on the road and adjust their guidance systems as weather, driving, or road conditions change. 31

Ride-sharing companies are very interested in autonomous vehicles. They see advantages in terms of customer service and labor productivity. All of the major ride-sharing companies are exploring driverless cars. The surge of car-sharing and taxi services—such as Uber and Lyft in the United States, Daimler’s Mytaxi and Hailo service in Great Britain, and Didi Chuxing in China—demonstrate the opportunities of this transportation option. Uber recently signed an agreement to purchase 24,000 autonomous cars from Volvo for its ride-sharing service. 32

However, the ride-sharing firm suffered a setback in March 2018 when one of its autonomous vehicles in Arizona hit and killed a pedestrian. Uber and several auto manufacturers immediately suspended testing and launched investigations into what went wrong and how the fatality could have occurred. 33 Both industry and consumers want reassurance that the technology is safe and able to deliver on its stated promises. Unless there are persuasive answers, this accident could slow AI advancements in the transportation sector.

Smart cities

Metropolitan governments are using AI to improve urban service delivery. For example, according to Kevin Desouza, Rashmi Krishnamurthy, and Gregory Dawson:

The Cincinnati Fire Department is using data analytics to optimize medical emergency responses. The new analytics system recommends to the dispatcher an appropriate response to a medical emergency call—whether a patient can be treated on-site or needs to be taken to the hospital—by taking into account several factors, such as the type of call, location, weather, and similar calls. 34

Since it fields 80,000 requests each year, Cincinnati officials are deploying this technology to prioritize responses and determine the best ways to handle emergencies. They see AI as a way to deal with large volumes of data and figure out efficient ways of responding to public requests. Rather than address service issues in an ad hoc manner, authorities are trying to be proactive in how they provide urban services.

Cincinnati is not alone. A number of metropolitan areas are adopting smart city applications that use AI to improve service delivery, environmental planning, resource management, energy utilization, and crime prevention, among other things. For its smart cities index, the magazine Fast Company ranked American locales and found Seattle, Boston, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., and New York City as the top adopters. Seattle, for example, has embraced sustainability and is using AI to manage energy usage and resource management. Boston has launched a “City Hall To Go” that makes sure underserved communities receive needed public services. It also has deployed “cameras and inductive loops to manage traffic and acoustic sensors to identify gun shots.” San Francisco has certified 203 buildings as meeting LEED sustainability standards. 35

Through these and other means, metropolitan areas are leading the country in the deployment of AI solutions. Indeed, according to a National League of Cities report, 66 percent of American cities are investing in smart city technology. Among the top applications noted in the report are “smart meters for utilities, intelligent traffic signals, e-governance applications, Wi-Fi kiosks, and radio frequency identification sensors in pavement.” 36

Policy, regulatory, and ethical issues

These examples from a variety of sectors demonstrate how AI is transforming many walks of human existence. The increasing penetration of AI and autonomous devices into many aspects of life is altering basic operations and decisionmaking within organizations, and improving efficiency and response times.

At the same time, though, these developments raise important policy, regulatory, and ethical issues. For example, how should we promote data access? How do we guard against biased or unfair data used in algorithms? What types of ethical principles are introduced through software programming, and how transparent should designers be about their choices? What about questions of legal liability in cases where algorithms cause harm? 37

The increasing penetration of AI into many aspects of life is altering decisionmaking within organizations and improving efficiency. At the same time, though, these developments raise important policy, regulatory, and ethical issues.

Data access problems

The key to getting the most out of AI is having a “data-friendly ecosystem with unified standards and cross-platform sharing.” AI depends on data that can be analyzed in real time and brought to bear on concrete problems. Having data that are “accessible for exploration” in the research community is a prerequisite for successful AI development. 38

According to a McKinsey Global Institute study, nations that promote open data sources and data sharing are the ones most likely to see AI advances. In this regard, the United States has a substantial advantage over China. Global ratings on data openness show that U.S. ranks eighth overall in the world, compared to 93 for China. 39

But right now, the United States does not have a coherent national data strategy. There are few protocols for promoting research access or platforms that make it possible to gain new insights from proprietary data. It is not always clear who owns data or how much belongs in the public sphere. These uncertainties limit the innovation economy and act as a drag on academic research. In the following section, we outline ways to improve data access for researchers.

Biases in data and algorithms

In some instances, certain AI systems are thought to have enabled discriminatory or biased practices. 40 For example, Airbnb has been accused of having homeowners on its platform who discriminate against racial minorities. A research project undertaken by the Harvard Business School found that “Airbnb users with distinctly African American names were roughly 16 percent less likely to be accepted as guests than those with distinctly white names.” 41

Racial issues also come up with facial recognition software. Most such systems operate by comparing a person’s face to a range of faces in a large database. As pointed out by Joy Buolamwini of the Algorithmic Justice League, “If your facial recognition data contains mostly Caucasian faces, that’s what your program will learn to recognize.” 42 Unless the databases have access to diverse data, these programs perform poorly when attempting to recognize African-American or Asian-American features.

Many historical data sets reflect traditional values, which may or may not represent the preferences wanted in a current system. As Buolamwini notes, such an approach risks repeating inequities of the past:

The rise of automation and the increased reliance on algorithms for high-stakes decisions such as whether someone get insurance or not, your likelihood to default on a loan or somebody’s risk of recidivism means this is something that needs to be addressed. Even admissions decisions are increasingly automated—what school our children go to and what opportunities they have. We don’t have to bring the structural inequalities of the past into the future we create. 43

AI ethics and transparency

Algorithms embed ethical considerations and value choices into program decisions. As such, these systems raise questions concerning the criteria used in automated decisionmaking. Some people want to have a better understanding of how algorithms function and what choices are being made. 44

In the United States, many urban schools use algorithms for enrollment decisions based on a variety of considerations, such as parent preferences, neighborhood qualities, income level, and demographic background. According to Brookings researcher Jon Valant, the New Orleans–based Bricolage Academy “gives priority to economically disadvantaged applicants for up to 33 percent of available seats. In practice, though, most cities have opted for categories that prioritize siblings of current students, children of school employees, and families that live in school’s broad geographic area.” 45 Enrollment choices can be expected to be very different when considerations of this sort come into play.

Depending on how AI systems are set up, they can facilitate the redlining of mortgage applications, help people discriminate against individuals they don’t like, or help screen or build rosters of individuals based on unfair criteria. The types of considerations that go into programming decisions matter a lot in terms of how the systems operate and how they affect customers. 46

For these reasons, the EU is implementing the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in May 2018. The rules specify that people have “the right to opt out of personally tailored ads” and “can contest ‘legal or similarly significant’ decisions made by algorithms and appeal for human intervention” in the form of an explanation of how the algorithm generated a particular outcome. Each guideline is designed to ensure the protection of personal data and provide individuals with information on how the “black box” operates. 47

Legal liability

There are questions concerning the legal liability of AI systems. If there are harms or infractions (or fatalities in the case of driverless cars), the operators of the algorithm likely will fall under product liability rules. A body of case law has shown that the situation’s facts and circumstances determine liability and influence the kind of penalties that are imposed. Those can range from civil fines to imprisonment for major harms. 48 The Uber-related fatality in Arizona will be an important test case for legal liability. The state actively recruited Uber to test its autonomous vehicles and gave the company considerable latitude in terms of road testing. It remains to be seen if there will be lawsuits in this case and who is sued: the human backup driver, the state of Arizona, the Phoenix suburb where the accident took place, Uber, software developers, or the auto manufacturer. Given the multiple people and organizations involved in the road testing, there are many legal questions to be resolved.

In non-transportation areas, digital platforms often have limited liability for what happens on their sites. For example, in the case of Airbnb, the firm “requires that people agree to waive their right to sue, or to join in any class-action lawsuit or class-action arbitration, to use the service.” By demanding that its users sacrifice basic rights, the company limits consumer protections and therefore curtails the ability of people to fight discrimination arising from unfair algorithms. 49 But whether the principle of neutral networks holds up in many sectors is yet to be determined on a widespread basis.

Recommendations

In order to balance innovation with basic human values, we propose a number of recommendations for moving forward with AI. This includes improving data access, increasing government investment in AI, promoting AI workforce development, creating a federal advisory committee, engaging with state and local officials to ensure they enact effective policies, regulating broad objectives as opposed to specific algorithms, taking bias seriously as an AI issue, maintaining mechanisms for human control and oversight, and penalizing malicious behavior and promoting cybersecurity.

Improving data access

The United States should develop a data strategy that promotes innovation and consumer protection. Right now, there are no uniform standards in terms of data access, data sharing, or data protection. Almost all the data are proprietary in nature and not shared very broadly with the research community, and this limits innovation and system design. AI requires data to test and improve its learning capacity. 50 Without structured and unstructured data sets, it will be nearly impossible to gain the full benefits of artificial intelligence.

In general, the research community needs better access to government and business data, although with appropriate safeguards to make sure researchers do not misuse data in the way Cambridge Analytica did with Facebook information. There is a variety of ways researchers could gain data access. One is through voluntary agreements with companies holding proprietary data. Facebook, for example, recently announced a partnership with Stanford economist Raj Chetty to use its social media data to explore inequality. 51 As part of the arrangement, researchers were required to undergo background checks and could only access data from secured sites in order to protect user privacy and security.

In the U.S., there are no uniform standards in terms of data access, data sharing, or data protection. Almost all the data are proprietary in nature and not shared very broadly with the research community, and this limits innovation and system design.

Google long has made available search results in aggregated form for researchers and the general public. Through its “Trends” site, scholars can analyze topics such as interest in Trump, views about democracy, and perspectives on the overall economy. 52 That helps people track movements in public interest and identify topics that galvanize the general public.

Twitter makes much of its tweets available to researchers through application programming interfaces, commonly referred to as APIs. These tools help people outside the company build application software and make use of data from its social media platform. They can study patterns of social media communications and see how people are commenting on or reacting to current events.

In some sectors where there is a discernible public benefit, governments can facilitate collaboration by building infrastructure that shares data. For example, the National Cancer Institute has pioneered a data-sharing protocol where certified researchers can query health data it has using de-identified information drawn from clinical data, claims information, and drug therapies. That enables researchers to evaluate efficacy and effectiveness, and make recommendations regarding the best medical approaches, without compromising the privacy of individual patients.

There could be public-private data partnerships that combine government and business data sets to improve system performance. For example, cities could integrate information from ride-sharing services with its own material on social service locations, bus lines, mass transit, and highway congestion to improve transportation. That would help metropolitan areas deal with traffic tie-ups and assist in highway and mass transit planning.

Some combination of these approaches would improve data access for researchers, the government, and the business community, without impinging on personal privacy. As noted by Ian Buck, the vice president of NVIDIA, “Data is the fuel that drives the AI engine. The federal government has access to vast sources of information. Opening access to that data will help us get insights that will transform the U.S. economy.” 53 Through its Data.gov portal, the federal government already has put over 230,000 data sets into the public domain, and this has propelled innovation and aided improvements in AI and data analytic technologies. 54 The private sector also needs to facilitate research data access so that society can achieve the full benefits of artificial intelligence.

Increase government investment in AI

According to Greg Brockman, the co-founder of OpenAI, the U.S. federal government invests only $1.1 billion in non-classified AI technology. 55 That is far lower than the amount being spent by China or other leading nations in this area of research. That shortfall is noteworthy because the economic payoffs of AI are substantial. In order to boost economic development and social innovation, federal officials need to increase investment in artificial intelligence and data analytics. Higher investment is likely to pay for itself many times over in economic and social benefits. 56

Promote digital education and workforce development

As AI applications accelerate across many sectors, it is vital that we reimagine our educational institutions for a world where AI will be ubiquitous and students need a different kind of training than they currently receive. Right now, many students do not receive instruction in the kinds of skills that will be needed in an AI-dominated landscape. For example, there currently are shortages of data scientists, computer scientists, engineers, coders, and platform developers. These are skills that are in short supply; unless our educational system generates more people with these capabilities, it will limit AI development.

For these reasons, both state and federal governments have been investing in AI human capital. For example, in 2017, the National Science Foundation funded over 6,500 graduate students in computer-related fields and has launched several new initiatives designed to encourage data and computer science at all levels from pre-K to higher and continuing education. 57 The goal is to build a larger pipeline of AI and data analytic personnel so that the United States can reap the full advantages of the knowledge revolution.

But there also needs to be substantial changes in the process of learning itself. It is not just technical skills that are needed in an AI world but skills of critical reasoning, collaboration, design, visual display of information, and independent thinking, among others. AI will reconfigure how society and the economy operate, and there needs to be “big picture” thinking on what this will mean for ethics, governance, and societal impact. People will need the ability to think broadly about many questions and integrate knowledge from a number of different areas.

One example of new ways to prepare students for a digital future is IBM’s Teacher Advisor program, utilizing Watson’s free online tools to help teachers bring the latest knowledge into the classroom. They enable instructors to develop new lesson plans in STEM and non-STEM fields, find relevant instructional videos, and help students get the most out of the classroom. 58 As such, they are precursors of new educational environments that need to be created.

Create a federal AI advisory committee

Federal officials need to think about how they deal with artificial intelligence. As noted previously, there are many issues ranging from the need for improved data access to addressing issues of bias and discrimination. It is vital that these and other concerns be considered so we gain the full benefits of this emerging technology.

In order to move forward in this area, several members of Congress have introduced the “Future of Artificial Intelligence Act,” a bill designed to establish broad policy and legal principles for AI. It proposes the secretary of commerce create a federal advisory committee on the development and implementation of artificial intelligence. The legislation provides a mechanism for the federal government to get advice on ways to promote a “climate of investment and innovation to ensure the global competitiveness of the United States,” “optimize the development of artificial intelligence to address the potential growth, restructuring, or other changes in the United States workforce,” “support the unbiased development and application of artificial intelligence,” and “protect the privacy rights of individuals.” 59

Among the specific questions the committee is asked to address include the following: competitiveness, workforce impact, education, ethics training, data sharing, international cooperation, accountability, machine learning bias, rural impact, government efficiency, investment climate, job impact, bias, and consumer impact. The committee is directed to submit a report to Congress and the administration 540 days after enactment regarding any legislative or administrative action needed on AI.

This legislation is a step in the right direction, although the field is moving so rapidly that we would recommend shortening the reporting timeline from 540 days to 180 days. Waiting nearly two years for a committee report will certainly result in missed opportunities and a lack of action on important issues. Given rapid advances in the field, having a much quicker turnaround time on the committee analysis would be quite beneficial.

Engage with state and local officials

States and localities also are taking action on AI. For example, the New York City Council unanimously passed a bill that directed the mayor to form a taskforce that would “monitor the fairness and validity of algorithms used by municipal agencies.” 60 The city employs algorithms to “determine if a lower bail will be assigned to an indigent defendant, where firehouses are established, student placement for public schools, assessing teacher performance, identifying Medicaid fraud and determine where crime will happen next.” 61

According to the legislation’s developers, city officials want to know how these algorithms work and make sure there is sufficient AI transparency and accountability. In addition, there is concern regarding the fairness and biases of AI algorithms, so the taskforce has been directed to analyze these issues and make recommendations regarding future usage. It is scheduled to report back to the mayor on a range of AI policy, legal, and regulatory issues by late 2019.

Some observers already are worrying that the taskforce won’t go far enough in holding algorithms accountable. For example, Julia Powles of Cornell Tech and New York University argues that the bill originally required companies to make the AI source code available to the public for inspection, and that there be simulations of its decisionmaking using actual data. After criticism of those provisions, however, former Councilman James Vacca dropped the requirements in favor of a task force studying these issues. He and other city officials were concerned that publication of proprietary information on algorithms would slow innovation and make it difficult to find AI vendors who would work with the city. 62 It remains to be seen how this local task force will balance issues of innovation, privacy, and transparency.

Regulate broad objectives more than specific algorithms

The European Union has taken a restrictive stance on these issues of data collection and analysis. 63 It has rules limiting the ability of companies from collecting data on road conditions and mapping street views. Because many of these countries worry that people’s personal information in unencrypted Wi-Fi networks are swept up in overall data collection, the EU has fined technology firms, demanded copies of data, and placed limits on the material collected. 64 This has made it more difficult for technology companies operating there to develop the high-definition maps required for autonomous vehicles.

The GDPR being implemented in Europe place severe restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning. According to published guidelines, “Regulations prohibit any automated decision that ‘significantly affects’ EU citizens. This includes techniques that evaluates a person’s ‘performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements.’” 65 In addition, these new rules give citizens the right to review how digital services made specific algorithmic choices affecting people.

By taking a restrictive stance on issues of data collection and analysis, the European Union is putting its manufacturers and software designers at a significant disadvantage to the rest of the world.

If interpreted stringently, these rules will make it difficult for European software designers (and American designers who work with European counterparts) to incorporate artificial intelligence and high-definition mapping in autonomous vehicles. Central to navigation in these cars and trucks is tracking location and movements. Without high-definition maps containing geo-coded data and the deep learning that makes use of this information, fully autonomous driving will stagnate in Europe. Through this and other data protection actions, the European Union is putting its manufacturers and software designers at a significant disadvantage to the rest of the world.

It makes more sense to think about the broad objectives desired in AI and enact policies that advance them, as opposed to governments trying to crack open the “black boxes” and see exactly how specific algorithms operate. Regulating individual algorithms will limit innovation and make it difficult for companies to make use of artificial intelligence.

Take biases seriously

Bias and discrimination are serious issues for AI. There already have been a number of cases of unfair treatment linked to historic data, and steps need to be undertaken to make sure that does not become prevalent in artificial intelligence. Existing statutes governing discrimination in the physical economy need to be extended to digital platforms. That will help protect consumers and build confidence in these systems as a whole.

For these advances to be widely adopted, more transparency is needed in how AI systems operate. Andrew Burt of Immuta argues, “The key problem confronting predictive analytics is really transparency. We’re in a world where data science operations are taking on increasingly important tasks, and the only thing holding them back is going to be how well the data scientists who train the models can explain what it is their models are doing.” 66

Maintaining mechanisms for human oversight and control

Some individuals have argued that there needs to be avenues for humans to exercise oversight and control of AI systems. For example, Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence CEO Oren Etzioni argues there should be rules for regulating these systems. First, he says, AI must be governed by all the laws that already have been developed for human behavior, including regulations concerning “cyberbullying, stock manipulation or terrorist threats,” as well as “entrap[ping] people into committing crimes.” Second, he believes that these systems should disclose they are automated systems and not human beings. Third, he states, “An A.I. system cannot retain or disclose confidential information without explicit approval from the source of that information.” 67 His rationale is that these tools store so much data that people have to be cognizant of the privacy risks posed by AI.

In the same vein, the IEEE Global Initiative has ethical guidelines for AI and autonomous systems. Its experts suggest that these models be programmed with consideration for widely accepted human norms and rules for behavior. AI algorithms need to take into effect the importance of these norms, how norm conflict can be resolved, and ways these systems can be transparent about norm resolution. Software designs should be programmed for “nondeception” and “honesty,” according to ethics experts. When failures occur, there must be mitigation mechanisms to deal with the consequences. In particular, AI must be sensitive to problems such as bias, discrimination, and fairness. 68

A group of machine learning experts claim it is possible to automate ethical decisionmaking. Using the trolley problem as a moral dilemma, they ask the following question: If an autonomous car goes out of control, should it be programmed to kill its own passengers or the pedestrians who are crossing the street? They devised a “voting-based system” that asked 1.3 million people to assess alternative scenarios, summarized the overall choices, and applied the overall perspective of these individuals to a range of vehicular possibilities. That allowed them to automate ethical decisionmaking in AI algorithms, taking public preferences into account. 69 This procedure, of course, does not reduce the tragedy involved in any kind of fatality, such as seen in the Uber case, but it provides a mechanism to help AI developers incorporate ethical considerations in their planning.

Penalize malicious behavior and promote cybersecurity

As with any emerging technology, it is important to discourage malicious treatment designed to trick software or use it for undesirable ends. 70 This is especially important given the dual-use aspects of AI, where the same tool can be used for beneficial or malicious purposes. The malevolent use of AI exposes individuals and organizations to unnecessary risks and undermines the virtues of the emerging technology. This includes behaviors such as hacking, manipulating algorithms, compromising privacy and confidentiality, or stealing identities. Efforts to hijack AI in order to solicit confidential information should be seriously penalized as a way to deter such actions. 71

In a rapidly changing world with many entities having advanced computing capabilities, there needs to be serious attention devoted to cybersecurity. Countries have to be careful to safeguard their own systems and keep other nations from damaging their security. 72 According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, a major American bank receives around 11 million calls a week at its service center. In order to protect its telephony from denial of service attacks, it uses a “machine learning-based policy engine [that] blocks more than 120,000 calls per month based on voice firewall policies including harassing callers, robocalls and potential fraudulent calls.” 73 This represents a way in which machine learning can help defend technology systems from malevolent attacks.

To summarize, the world is on the cusp of revolutionizing many sectors through artificial intelligence and data analytics. There already are significant deployments in finance, national security, health care, criminal justice, transportation, and smart cities that have altered decisionmaking, business models, risk mitigation, and system performance. These developments are generating substantial economic and social benefits.

The world is on the cusp of revolutionizing many sectors through artificial intelligence, but the way AI systems are developed need to be better understood due to the major implications these technologies will have for society as a whole.

Yet the manner in which AI systems unfold has major implications for society as a whole. It matters how policy issues are addressed, ethical conflicts are reconciled, legal realities are resolved, and how much transparency is required in AI and data analytic solutions. 74 Human choices about software development affect the way in which decisions are made and the manner in which they are integrated into organizational routines. Exactly how these processes are executed need to be better understood because they will have substantial impact on the general public soon, and for the foreseeable future. AI may well be a revolution in human affairs, and become the single most influential human innovation in history.

Note: We appreciate the research assistance of Grace Gilberg, Jack Karsten, Hillary Schaub, and Kristjan Tomasson on this project.

The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and policy solutions. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its management, or its other scholars.

Support for this publication was generously provided by Amazon. Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its absolute commitment to quality, independence, and impact. Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment. 

John R. Allen is a member of the Board of Advisors of Amida Technology and on the Board of Directors of Spark Cognition. Both companies work in fields discussed in this piece.

• Thomas Davenport, Jeff Loucks, and David Schatsky, “Bullish on the Business Value of Cognitive” (Deloitte, 2017), p. 3 (www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/deloitte-analytics/articles/cognitive-technology-adoption-survey.html).
• Luke Dormehl, Thinking Machines: The Quest for Artificial Intelligence—and Where It’s Taking Us Next (New York: Penguin–TarcherPerigee, 2017).
• Shubhendu and Vijay, “Applicability of Artificial Intelligence in Different Fields of Life.”
• Andrew McAfee and Erik Brynjolfsson, Machine Platform Crowd: Harnessing Our Digital Future (New York: Norton, 2017).
• Portions of this paper draw on Darrell M. West, The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation , Brookings Institution Press, 2018.
• PriceWaterhouseCoopers, “Sizing the Prize: What’s the Real Value of AI for Your Business and How Can You Capitalise?” 2017.
• Dominic Barton, Jonathan Woetzel, Jeongmin Seong, and Qinzheng Tian, “Artificial Intelligence: Implications for China” (New York: McKinsey Global Institute, April 2017), p. 1.
• Nathaniel Popper, “Stocks and Bots,” New York Times Magazine , February 28, 2016.
• Michael Lewis, Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt (New York: Norton, 2015).
• Cade Metz, “In Quantum Computing Race, Yale Professors Battle Tech Giants,” New York Times , November 14, 2017, p. B3.
• Executive Office of the President, “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy,” December 2016, pp. 27-28.
• Christian Davenport, “Future Wars May Depend as Much on Algorithms as on Ammunition, Report Says,” Washington Post , December 3, 2017.
• John R. Allen and Amir Husain, “On Hyperwar,” Naval Institute Proceedings , July 17, 2017, pp. 30-36.
• Paul Mozur, “China Sets Goal to Lead in Artificial Intelligence,” New York Times , July 21, 2017, p. B1.
• Paul Mozur and John Markoff, “Is China Outsmarting American Artificial Intelligence?” New York Times , May 28, 2017.
• Economist , “America v China: The Battle for Digital Supremacy,” March 15, 2018.
• Rasmus Rothe, “Applying Deep Learning to Real-World Problems,” Medium , May 23, 2017.
• Eric Horvitz, “Reflections on the Status and Future of Artificial Intelligence,” Testimony before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, November 30, 2016, p. 5.
• Jeff Asher and Rob Arthur, “Inside the Algorithm That Tries to Predict Gun Violence in Chicago,” New York Times Upshot , June 13, 2017.
• Caleb Watney, “It’s Time for our Justice System to Embrace Artificial Intelligence,” TechTank (blog), Brookings Institution, July 20, 2017.
• Asher and Arthur, “Inside the Algorithm That Tries to Predict Gun Violence in Chicago.”
• Paul Mozur and Keith Bradsher, “China’s A.I. Advances Help Its Tech Industry, and State Security,” New York Times , December 3, 2017.
• Simon Denyer, “China’s Watchful Eye,” Washington Post , January 7, 2018.
• Cameron Kerry and Jack Karsten, “Gauging Investment in Self-Driving Cars,” Brookings Institution, October 16, 2017.
• Portions of this section are drawn from Darrell M. West, “Driverless Cars in China, Europe, Japan, Korea, and the United States,” Brookings Institution, September 2016.
• Yuming Ge, Xiaoman Liu, Libo Tang, and Darrell M. West, “Smart Transportation in China and the United States,” Center for Technology Innovation, Brookings Institution, December 2017.
• Peter Holley, “Uber Signs Deal to Buy 24,000 Autonomous Vehicles from Volvo,” Washington Post , November 20, 2017.
• Daisuke Wakabayashi, “Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Pedestrian in Arizona, Where Robots Roam,” New York Times , March 19, 2018.
• Kevin Desouza, Rashmi Krishnamurthy, and Gregory Dawson, “Learning from Public Sector Experimentation with Artificial Intelligence,” TechTank (blog), Brookings Institution, June 23, 2017.
• Boyd Cohen, “The 10 Smartest Cities in North America,” Fast Company , November 14, 2013.
• Teena Maddox, “66% of US Cities Are Investing in Smart City Technology,” TechRepublic , November 6, 2017.
• Osonde Osoba and William Welser IV, “The Risks of Artificial Intelligence to Security and the Future of Work” (Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corp., December 2017) (www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE237.html).
• Ibid., p. 7.
• Dominic Barton, Jonathan Woetzel, Jeongmin Seong, and Qinzheng Tian, “Artificial Intelligence: Implications for China” (New York: McKinsey Global Institute, April 2017), p. 7.
• Executive Office of the President, “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence,” October 2016, pp. 30-31.
• Elaine Glusac, “As Airbnb Grows, So Do Claims of Discrimination,” New York Times , June 21, 2016.
• “Joy Buolamwini,” Bloomberg Businessweek , July 3, 2017, p. 80.
• Mark Purdy and Paul Daugherty, “Why Artificial Intelligence is the Future of Growth,” Accenture, 2016.
• Jon Valant, “Integrating Charter Schools and Choice-Based Education Systems,” Brown Center Chalkboard blog, Brookings Institution, June 23, 2017.
• Tucker, “‘A White Mask Worked Better.’”
• Cliff Kuang, “Can A.I. Be Taught to Explain Itself?” New York Times Magazine , November 21, 2017.
• Yale Law School Information Society Project, “Governing Machine Learning,” September 2017.
• Katie Benner, “Airbnb Vows to Fight Racism, But Its Users Can’t Sue to Prompt Fairness,” New York Times , June 19, 2016.
• Executive Office of the President, “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy” and “Preparing for the Future of Artificial Intelligence.”
• Nancy Scolar, “Facebook’s Next Project: American Inequality,” Politico , February 19, 2018.
• Darrell M. West, “What Internet Search Data Reveals about Donald Trump’s First Year in Office,” Brookings Institution policy report, January 17, 2018.
• Ian Buck, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” February 14, 2018.
• Keith Nakasone, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” March 7, 2018.
• Greg Brockman, “The Dawn of Artificial Intelligence,” Testimony before U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Space, Science, and Competitiveness, November 30, 2016.
• Amir Khosrowshahi, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” February 14, 2018.
• James Kurose, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” March 7, 2018.
• Stephen Noonoo, “Teachers Can Now Use IBM’s Watson to Search for Free Lesson Plans,” EdSurge , September 13, 2017.
• Congress.gov, “H.R. 4625 FUTURE of Artificial Intelligence Act of 2017,” December 12, 2017.
• Elizabeth Zima, “Could New York City’s AI Transparency Bill Be a Model for the Country?” Government Technology , January 4, 2018.
• Julia Powles, “New York City’s Bold, Flawed Attempt to Make Algorithms Accountable,” New Yorker , December 20, 2017.
• Sheera Frenkel, “Tech Giants Brace for Europe’s New Data Privacy Rules,” New York Times , January 28, 2018.
• Claire Miller and Kevin O’Brien, “Germany’s Complicated Relationship with Google Street View,” New York Times , April 23, 2013.
• Cade Metz, “Artificial Intelligence is Setting Up the Internet for a Huge Clash with Europe,” Wired , July 11, 2016.
• Eric Siegel, “Predictive Analytics Interview Series: Andrew Burt,” Predictive Analytics Times , June 14, 2017.
• Oren Etzioni, “How to Regulate Artificial Intelligence,” New York Times , September 1, 2017.
• “Ethical Considerations in Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems,” unpublished paper. IEEE Global Initiative, 2018.
• Ritesh Noothigattu, Snehalkumar Gaikwad, Edmond Awad, Sohan Dsouza, Iyad Rahwan, Pradeep Ravikumar, and Ariel Procaccia, “A Voting-Based System for Ethical Decision Making,” Computers and Society , September 20, 2017 (www.media.mit.edu/publications/a-voting-based-system-for-ethical-decision-making/).
• Miles Brundage, et al., “The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence,” University of Oxford unpublished paper, February 2018.
• John Markoff, “As Artificial Intelligence Evolves, So Does Its Criminal Potential,” New York Times, October 24, 2016, p. B3.
• Economist , “The Challenger: Technopolitics,” March 17, 2018.
• Douglas Maughan, “Testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Technology,” March 7, 2018.
• Levi Tillemann and Colin McCormick, “Roadmapping a U.S.-German Agenda for Artificial Intelligence Policy,” New American Foundation, March 2017.

Artificial Intelligence

Governance Studies

Center for Technology Innovation

Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technology Initiative

Jacob Taylor

May 20, 2024

Mark Schoeman

May 16, 2024

Charles Asiegbu, Chinasa T. Okolo

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Public Awareness of Artificial Intelligence in Everyday Activities

Limited enthusiasm in U.S. over AI’s growing influence in daily life

Table of contents.

• Acknowledgments
• Measurement properties of the awareness of artificial intelligence in daily life scale
• Appendix: Additional charts and tables

Pew Research Center conducted this study to understand how aware Americans are of artificial intelligence in their daily lives. For this analysis, we surveyed 11,004 U.S. adults from Dec. 12-18, 2022.

Everyone who took part in the survey is a member of the Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way, nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. Read more about the ATP’s methodology .

Here are the questions used for this report, along with responses, and its methodology .

Artificial intelligence is fast becoming a regular part of daily life, shaping the way Americans work, play and receive essential services from food deliveries to financial services to health care .

A new Pew Research Center survey finds that many Americans are aware of common ways they might encounter artificial intelligence (AI) in daily life, such as customer service chatbots and product recommendations based on previous purchases. At the same time, only three-in-ten U.S. adults are able to correctly identify all six uses of AI asked about in the survey, underscoring the developing nature of public understanding.

Awareness of common uses of artificial intelligence is a first step toward broader public engagement with debates about the appropriate role – and boundaries – for AI. Experts have raised a host of moral, ethical and legal questions about the expanding capabilities of AI. And the ethical and responsible use of AI is a growing focus of research within the field.

The Pew Research Center survey of 11,004 U.S. adults, conducted Dec. 12-18, 2022, finds that 27% of Americans say they interact with AI at least several times a day, while another 28% think they interact with it about once a day or several times a week. On this self-reported measure, 44% think they do not regularly interact with AI.

More broadly, the public remains cautious about the impact artificial intelligence is having on American life: Just 15% say they are more excited than concerned about the increasing use of AI in daily life, compared with 38% who are more concerned than excited; 46% express an equal mix of concern and excitement. These views are about the same as they were in a November 2021 Center survey .

On a set of six questions designed to measure awareness of specific uses of AI in daily life, 68% of Americans correctly identified artificial intelligence at work in wearable fitness trackers that analyze exercise and sleeping patterns; the remainder of the public said they weren’t sure or selected one of three incorrect options that do not rely on AI (thermometers, at-home COVID-19 tests and pulse oximeters).

When it comes to an example of artificial intelligence in online shopping, 64% of U.S. adults correctly identified custom product recommendations based on previous purchases as using AI. Majorities were also aware that AI is at work in customer service chatbots (65%), security cameras that recognize faces (62%) and customized music playlist recommendations (57%).

The most challenging question for the public was identifying that email services categorizing messages as spam uses AI: 51% of Americans got this question right, while 49% chose an incorrect option, said they weren’t sure or did not answer. These six questions represent some common ways people could use AI in their lives but are not designed to be an exhaustive list of all the ways people could encounter AI. Each question had four possible responses and an explicit fifth option, “not sure.”

Taken together, 30% of Americans correctly answered all six questions about awareness of AI in everyday life (defined as a high level of awareness), 38% got three to five questions right (medium awareness) and 31% got two or fewer questions correct (low awareness). The mean number of correct answers was 3.7 out of 6.

Those with higher levels of education show greater awareness of AI

U.S. adults with higher levels of education and income are more aware of examples of AI in daily life than other adults. For example, 53% of Americans with a postgraduate degree correctly identified uses of artificial intelligence across all six multiple-choice questions. By contrast, just 14% of those with a high school diploma or less education answered all six questions correctly; 51% of this group had low awareness of AI, answering no more than two questions correctly.

Those with higher family incomes are also more aware of the uses of AI than those with lower incomes. About half of upper-income Americans had high awareness of AI (52%), compared with just 15% of lower-income adults.

Younger Americans are more aware of AI applications in daily life than older Americans. This pattern is especially pronounced when it comes to correctly identifying AI at play in customer service chatbots (75% of adults ages 18 to 29 said this vs. 45% of those 65 and older) and music playlist recommendations (65% vs. 39%).

Men scored higher on the scale than women. About four-in-ten men (38%) got all six questions right, compared with 23% of women. (Women are more likely than men to respond “not sure” to each of the six questions, consistent with previous research on both science and political knowledge .)

Partisan affiliation is not a major factor when it comes to awareness of AI: There are no meaningful differences between Republicans and Democrats on the AI awareness scale.

Frequent internet use is tied to higher awareness of artificial intelligence

Online applications and websites are places where Americans may frequently encounter artificial intelligence through examples such as customer service chatbots and product recommendations based on their purchasing behavior.

Adults who are frequent internet users score higher on the AI awareness scale than less frequent users.

Among Americans who say they are on the internet “almost constantly,” 38% got all six questions correct, as did 31% of those who say they use the internet several times a day. By comparison, just 6% of infrequent internet users (those who go online about once a day or less) correctly answered all six questions on the survey.

Not surprisingly, those who say they have heard more about artificial intelligence generally score higher on the AI awareness scale than do those who say they’ve heard less about this topic.

Majority of Americans think they interact with AI at least several times a week

About a quarter (27%) of Americans say they interact with artificial intelligence almost constantly or several times a day. Another 28% say they interact with AI about once a day or several times a week. On this self-reported measure, 44% of Americans estimate that they interact with AI less often.

Those with higher levels of education and family income are more likely than those with less education and income to say they interact with AI at least daily.

In addition, those who score high on a six-item scale of AI awareness are more likely to say they frequently interact with AI. For instance, 44% of those who have a high level of awareness of AI say they interact with AI almost constantly or several times a day. By comparison, just 12% of those who scored low on the scale say they interact with AI multiple times each day.

Many Americans have some level of concern about use of AI generally

The rapid development of artificial intelligence technologies has been accompanied by debate about ethics in AI and appropriate limits on its use.

Amid these ongoing discussions, the public strikes a cautious tone toward the overall impact of AI in society today.

On balance, a greater share of Americans say they are more concerned than excited about the increased use of artificial intelligence in daily life (38%) than say they are more excited than concerned (15%). Many express ambivalent views: 46% say they are equally concerned and excited.

There has been little change in these attitudes since last year .

Across all levels of awareness of AI, larger shares express greater concern than excitement about the impact of artificial intelligence in daily life. For example, among those who scored high in awareness of AI in daily life, 31% say they are more concerned than excited about the impact of AI, compared with 21% who say they are more excited than concerned. Those with medium or low AI awareness express greater concern than excitement by even wider margins.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Artificial Intelligence
• Science Knowledge

A quarter of U.S. teachers say AI tools do more harm than good in K-12 education

Many americans think generative ai programs should credit the sources they rely on, americans’ use of chatgpt is ticking up, but few trust its election information, q&a: how we used large language models to identify guests on popular podcasts, striking findings from 2023, most popular, report materials.

• Quiz: Test your awareness of artificial intelligence in everyday life

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Artificial intelligence and its impact on everyday life

In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has woven itself into our daily lives in ways we may not even be aware of. It has become so pervasive that many remain unaware of both its impact and our reliance upon it. 

From morning to night, going about our everyday routines, AI technology drives much of what we do. When we wake, many of us reach for our mobile phone or laptop to start our day. Doing so has become automatic, and integral to how we function in terms of our decision-making, planning and information-seeking.

Once we’ve switched on our devices, we instantly plug into AI functionality such as:

• face ID and image recognition
• social media
• Google search
• digital voice assistants like Apple’s Siri and Amazon’s Alexa
• online banking
• driving aids – route mapping, traffic updates, weather conditions
• leisure downtime – such as Netflix and Amazon for films and programmes

AI touches every aspect of our personal and professional online lives today. Global communication and interconnectivity in business is, and continues to be, a hugely important area. Capitalising on artificial intelligence and data science is essential, and its potential growth trajectory is limitless.

Whilst AI is accepted as almost commonplace, what exactly is it and how did it originate?

What is artificial intelligence?

AI is the intelligence demonstrated by machines, as opposed to the natural intelligence displayed by both animals and humans. 

The human brain is the most complex organ, controlling all functions of the body and interpreting information from the outside world. Its neural networks comprise approximately 86 billion neurons, all woven together by an estimated 100 trillion synapses. Even now, neuroscientists are yet to unravel and understand many of its ramifications and capabilities. 

The human being is constantly evolving and learning; this mirrors how AI functions at its core. Human intelligence, creativity, knowledge, experience and innovation are the drivers for expansion in current, and future, machine intelligence technologies.

When was artificial intelligence invented?

During the Second World War, work by Alan Turing at Bletchley Park on code-breaking German messages heralded a seminal scientific turning point. His groundbreaking work helped develop some of the basics of computer science. 

By the 1950s, Turing posited whether machines could think for themselves. This radical idea, together with the growing implications of machine learning in problem solving, led to many breakthroughs in the field. Research explored the fundamental possibilities of whether machines could be directed and instructed to:

• apply their own ‘intelligence’ in solving problems like humans.

Computer and cognitive scientists, such as Marvin Minsky and John McCarthy, recognised this potential in the 1950s. Their research, which built on Turing’s, fuelled exponential growth in this area.  Attendees at a 1956 workshop, held at Dartmouth College, USA, laid the foundations for what we now consider the field of AI. Recognised as one of the world’s most prestigious academic research universities, many of those present became artificial intelligence leaders and innovators over the coming decades.

In testimony to his groundbreaking research, the Turing Test – in its updated form – is still applied to today’s AI research, and is used to gauge the measure of success of AI development and projects.

This infographic detailing the history of AI offers a useful snapshot of these main events.

How does artificial intelligence work?

AI is built upon acquiring vast amounts of data. This data can then be manipulated to determine knowledge, patterns and insights. The aim is to create and build upon all these blocks, applying the results to new and unfamiliar scenarios.

Such technology relies on advanced machine learning algorithms and extremely high-level programming, datasets, databases and computer architecture. The success of specific tasks is, amongst other things, down to computational thinking, software engineering and a focus on problem solving.

Artificial intelligence comes in many forms, ranging from simple tools like chatbots in customer services applications, through to complex machine learning systems for huge business organisations. The field is vast, incorporating technologies such as:

• Machine Learning (ML) . Using algorithms and statistical models, ML refers to computer systems which are able to learn and adapt without following explicit instructions. In ML, inferences and analysis are discerned in data patterns, split into three main types: supervised, unsupervised and reinforcement learning.
• Narrow AI . This is integral to modern computer systems, referring to those which have been taught, or have learned, to undertake specific tasks without being explicitly programmed to do so. Examples of narrow AI include: virtual assistants on mobile phones, such as those found on Apple iPhone and Android personal assistants on Google Assistant; and recommendation engines which make suggestions based on search or buying history.
• Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). At times, the worlds of science fiction and reality appear to blur. Hypothetically, AGI – exemplified by the robots in programmes such as Westworld, The Matrix, and Star Trek – has come to represent the ability of intelligent machines which understand and learn any task or process usually undertaken by a human being.
• Strong AI. This term is often used interchangeably with AGI. However, some artificial intelligence academics and researchers believe it should apply only once machines achieve sentience or consciousness.
• Natural Language Processing (NLP). This is a challenging area of AI within computer science, as it requires enormous amounts of data. Expert systems and data interpretation are required to teach intelligent machines how to understand the way in which humans write and speak. NLP applications are increasingly used, for example, within healthcare and call centre settings.
• Deepmind. As major technology organisations seek to capture the machine learning market, they are developing cloud services to tap into sectors such as leisure and recreation. For example, Google’s Deepmind has created a computer programme, AlphaGo, to play the board game Go, whereas IBM’s Watson is a super-computer which famously took part in a televised Watson and Jeopardy! Challenge. Using NLP, Watson answered questions with identifiable speech recognition and response, causing a stir in public awareness regarding the potential future of AI.

Artificial intelligence career prospects

Automation, data science and the use of AI will only continue to expand. Forecasts for the data analytics industry up to 2023 predict exponential expansion in the big data gathering sector. In The Global Big Data Analytics Forecast to 2023, Frost and Sullivan project growth at 29.7%, worth a staggering $40.6 billion.

As such, there exists much as-yet-untapped potential, with growing career prospects. Many top employers seek professionals with the skills, expertise and knowledge to propel their organisational aims forward. Career pathways may include:

• Robotics and self-driving /autonomous cars (such as Waymo, Nissan, Renault)
• Healthcare (for instance, multiple applications in genetic sequencing research, treating tumours, and developing tools to speed up diagnoses including Alzheimer’s disease)
• Academia (leading universities in AI research include MIT, Stanford, Harvard and Cambridge)
• Retail (AmazonGo shops and other innovative shopping options)

What is certain is that with every technological shift, new jobs and careers will be created to replace those lost.

Gain the qualifications to succeed in the data science and artificial intelligence sector

Are you ready to take your next step towards a challenging, and professionally rewarding, career?

The University of York’s online MSc Computer Science with Data Analytics programme will give you the theoretical and practical knowledge needed to succeed in this growing field.

Start application

Admission requirements

Start dates

Tuition and course fees

Accessibility Statement

Online programmes

Other programmes at York

University of York

York YO10 5DD United Kingdom

Freephone: 0808 189 2125 Local: +44 (0) 1904 211 030 Email:  [email protected]

© University of York Legal statements | Privacy and cookies

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 18 January 2024

The impact of artificial intelligence on employment: the role of virtual agglomeration

• Yang Shen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6781-6915 1 &
• Xiuwu Zhang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  11 , Article number:  122 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

46k Accesses

3 Citations

16 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Development studies

Sustainable Development Goal 8 proposes the promotion of full and productive employment for all. Intelligent production factors, such as robots, the Internet of Things, and extensive data analysis, are reshaping the dynamics of labour supply and demand. In China, which is a developing country with a large population and labour force, analysing the impact of artificial intelligence technology on the labour market is of particular importance. Based on panel data from 30 provinces in China from 2006 to 2020, a two-way fixed-effect model and the two-stage least squares method are used to analyse the impact of AI on employment and to assess its heterogeneity. The introduction and installation of artificial intelligence technology as represented by industrial robots in Chinese enterprises has increased the number of jobs. The results of some mechanism studies show that the increase of labour productivity, the deepening of capital and the refinement of the division of labour that has been introduced into industrial enterprises through the introduction of robotics have successfully mitigated the damaging impact of the adoption of robot technology on employment. Rather than the traditional perceptions of robotics crowding out labour jobs, the overall impact on the labour market has exerted a promotional effect. The positive effect of artificial intelligence on employment exhibits an inevitable heterogeneity, and it serves to relatively improves the job share of women and workers in labour-intensive industries. Mechanism research has shown that virtual agglomeration, which evolved from traditional industrial agglomeration in the era of the digital economy, is an important channel for increasing employment. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of the impact of modern digital technologies on the well-being of people in developing countries. To give full play to the positive role of artificial intelligence technology in employment, we should improve the social security system, accelerate the process of developing high-end domestic robots and deepen the reform of the education and training system.

Similar content being viewed by others

Automation and labour market inequalities: a comparison between cities and non-cities

The impact of industrial robot adoption on corporate green innovation in china.

Impact of industrial robots on environmental pollution: evidence from China

Introduction.

Ensuring people’s livelihood requires diligence, but diligence is not scarce. Diversification, technological upgrading, and innovation all contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goal of full and productive employment for all (SDGs 8). Since the outbreak of the industrial revolution, human society has undergone four rounds of technological revolution, and each technological change can be regarded as the deepening of automation technology. The conflict and subsequent rebalancing of efficiency and employment are constantly being repeated in the process of replacing people with machines (Liu 2018 ; Morgan 2019 ). When people realize the new wave of human economic and social development that is created by advanced technological innovation, they must also accept the “creative destruction” brought by the iterative renewal of new technologies (Michau 2013 ; Josifidis and Supic 2018 ; Forsythe et al. 2022 ). The questions of where technology will eventually lead humanity, to what extent artificial intelligence will change the relationship between humans and work, and whether advanced productivity will lead to large-scale structural unemployment have been hotly debated. China has entered a new stage of deep integration and development of the “new technology cluster” that is represented by the internet and the real economy. Physical space, cyberspace, and biological space have become fully integrated, and new industries, new models, and new forms of business continue to emerge. In the process of the vigorous development of digital technology, its characteristics in terms of employment, such as strong absorption capacity, flexible form, and diversified job demands are more prominent, and many new occupations have emerged. The new practice of digital survival that is represented by the platform economy, sharing economy, full-time economy, and gig economy, while adapting to, leading to, and innovating the transformation and development of the economy, has also led to significant changes in employment carriers, employment forms, and occupational skill requirements (Dunn 2020 ; Wong et al. 2020 ; Li et al. 2022 ).

Artificial intelligence (AI) is one of the core areas of the fourth industrial revolution, along with the transformation of the mechanical technology, electric power technology, and information technology, and it serves to promote the transformation and upgrading of the digital economy industry. Indeed, the rapid iteration and cross-border integration of general information technology in the era of the digital economy has made a significant contribution to the stabilization of employment and the promotion of growth, but this is due only to the “employment effect” caused by the ongoing development of the times and technological progress in the field of social production. Digital technology will inevitably replace some of the tasks that were once performed by human labour. In recent years, due to the influence of China’s labour market and employment structure, some enterprises have needed help in recruiting workers. Driven by the rapid development of artificial intelligence technology, some enterprises have accelerated the pace of “machine replacement,” resulting in repetitive and standardized jobs being performed by robots. Deep learning and AI enable machines and operating systems to perform more complex tasks, and the employment prospects of enterprise employees face new challenges in the digital age. According to the Future of Jobs 2020 report released by the World Economic Forum, the recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid development of automation technology are changing the job market much faster than expected, and automation and the new division of labour between humans and machines will disrupt 85 million jobs in 15 industries worldwide over the next five years. The demand for skilled jobs, such as data entry, accounting, and administrative services, has been hard hit. Thanks to the wave of industrial upgrading and the vigorous development of digitalization, the recruitment demand for AI, big data, and manufacturing industries in China has maintained high growth year-on-year under the premise of macroenvironmental uncertainty during the period ranging from 2019 to 2022, and the average annual growth rate of new jobs was close to 30%. However, this growth has also aggravated the sense of occupational crisis among white-collar workers. The research shows that the agriculture, forestry, animal husbandry, fishery, mining, manufacturing, and construction industries, which are expected to adopt a high level of intelligence, face a high risk of occupational substitution, and older and less educated workers are faced with a very high risk of substitution (Wang et al. 2022 ). Whether AI, big data, and intelligent manufacturing technology, as brand-new forms of digital productivity, will lead to significant changes in the organic composition of capital and effectively decrease labour employment has yet to reach consensus. As the “pearl at the top of the manufacturing crown,” a robot is an essential carrier of intelligent manufacturing and AI technology as materialized in machinery and equipment, and it is also an important indicator for measuring a country’s high-end manufacturing industry. Due to the large number of manufacturing employees in China, the challenge of “machine substitution” to the labour market is more severe than that in other countries, and the use of AI through robots is poised to exert a substantial impact on the job market (Xie et al. 2022 ). In essence, the primary purpose of the digital transformation of industrial enterprises is to improve quality and efficiency, but the relationship between machines and workers has been distorted in the actual application of digital technology. Industrial companies use robots as an entry point, and the study delves into the impact of AI on the labour market to provide experience and policy suggestions on the best ways of coordinating the relationship between enterprise intelligent transformation and labour participation and to help realize Chinese-style modernization.

As a new general technology, AI technology represents remarkable progress in productivity. Objectively analysing the dual effects of substitution and employment creation in the era of artificial intelligence to actively integrate change and adapt to development is essential to enhancing comprehensive competitiveness and better qualifying workers for current and future work. This research is organized according to a research framework from the published literature (Luo et al. 2023 ). In this study, we used data published by the International Federation of Robotics (IFR) and take the installed density of industrial robots in China as the main indicator of AI. Based on panel data from 30 provinces in China covering the period from 2006–2020, the impact of AI technology on employment in a developing country with a large population size is empirically examined. The issues that need to be solved in this study include the following: The first goal is to examine the impact of AI on China’s labour market from the perspective of the economic behaviour of those enterprises that have adopted the use of industrial robots in production. The realistic question we expect to answer is whether the automated processing of daily tasks has led to unemployment in China during the past fifteen years. The second goal is to answer the question of how AI will continue to affect the employment market by increasing labour productivity, changing the technical composition of capital, and deepening the division of labour. The third goal is to examine how the transformation of industrial organization types in the digital economy era affects employment through digital industrial clusters or virtual clusters. The fourth goal is to test the role of AI in eliminating gender discrimination, especially in regard to whether it can improve the employment opportunities of female employees. Then, whether workers face different employment difficulties in different industry attributes is considered. The final goal is to provide some policy insights into how a developing country can achieve full employment in the face a new technological revolution in the context of a large population and many low-skilled workers.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Section Literature Review, we summarize the literature on the impact of AI on the labour market and employment and classify it from three perspectives: pessimistic, negative, and neutral. Based on a literature review, we then summarize the marginal contribution of this study. In Section Theoretical mechanism and research hypothesis, we provide a theoretical analysis of AI’s promotion of employment and present the research hypotheses to be tested. In Section Study design and data sources, we describe the data source, variable setting and econometric model. In Section Empirical analysis, we test Hypothesis 1 and conduct a robustness test and the causal identification of the conclusion. In Section Extensibility analysis, we test Hypothesis 2 and Hypothesis 3, as well as testing the heterogeneity of the baseline regression results. The heterogeneity test employee gender and industry attributes increase the relevance of the conclusions. Finally, Section Conclusions and policy implications concludes.

Literature review

The social effect of technological progress has the unique characteristics of the times and progresses through various stages, and there is variation in our understanding of its development and internal mechanism. A classic argument of labour sociology and labour economics is that technological upgrading objectively causes workers to lose their jobs, but the actual historical experience since the industrial revolution tells us that it does not cause large-scale structural unemployment (Zhang 2023a ). While neoclassical liberals such as Adam Smith claimed that technological progress would not lead to unemployment, other scholars such as Sismondi were adamant that it would. David Ricardo endorsed the “Luddite fear” in his book On Machinery, and Marx argued that technological progress can increase labour productivity while also excluding labour participation, thus leaving workers in poverty. The worker being turned ‘into a crippled monstrosity’ by modern machinery. Technology is not used to reduce working hours and improve the quality of work, rather, it is used to extend working hours and speed up work (Spencer 2023 ). According to Schumpeter’s innovation theory, within a unified complex system, the essence of technological innovation forms from the unity of positive and negative feedback and the oneness of opposites such as “revolutionary” and “destructive.” Even a tiny technological impact can cause drastic consequences. The impact of AI on employment is different from the that of previous industrial revolutions, and it is exceptional in that “machines” are no longer straightforward mechanical tools but have assumed more of a “worker” role, just as people who can learn and think tend to do (Boyd and Holton 2018 ). AI-related technologies continue to advance, the industrialization and commercialization process continues to accelerate, and the industry continues to explore the application of AI across multiple fields. Since AI was first proposed at the Dartmouth Conference in 1956, discussions about “AI replacing human labor” and “AI defeating humans” have endlessly emerged. This dynamic has increased in intensity since the emergence of ChatGPT, which has aroused people’s concerns about technology replacing the workforce. Summarizing the literature, we can find three main arguments concerning the relationship between AI and employment:

First, AI has the effect of creating and filling jobs. The intelligent manufacturing industry paradigm characterized by AI technology will assist in forming a high-quality “human‒machine cooperation” employment mode. In an enlightened society, the social state of shared prosperity benefits the lowest class of people precisely because of the advanced productive forces and higher labour efficiency created through the refinement of the division of labour. By improving production efficiency, reducing the sales price of final products, and stimulating social consumption, technological progress exerts both price effects and income effects, which in turn drive related enterprises to expand their production scale, which, in turn, increases the demand for labour (Li et al. 2021 ; Ndubuisi et al. 2021 ; Yang 2022 ; Sharma and Mishra 2023 ; Li et al. 2022 ). People habitually regard robots as competitors for human beings, but this view only represents the materialistic view of traditional machinery. The coexistence of man and machine is not a zero-sum game. When the task evolves from “cooperation for all” to “cooperation between man and machine,” it results in fewer production constraints and maximizes total factor productivity, thus creating more jobs and generating novel collaborative tasks (Balsmeier and Woerter 2019 ; Duan et al. 2023 ). At the same time, materialized AI technology can improve the total factor production efficiency in ways that are suitable for its factor endowment structure and improve the production efficiency between upstream and downstream enterprises in the industrial chain and the value chain. This increase in the efficiency of the entire market will subsequently drive the expansion of the production scale of enterprises and promote reproduction, and its synergy will promote the synchronous growth of the labour demand involving various skills, thus resulting in a creative effect (Liu et al. 2022 ). As an essential force in the fourth industrial revolution, AI inevitably affects the social status of humans and changes the structure of the labour force (Chen 2023 ). AI and machines increase labour productivity by automating routine tasks while expanding employee skills and increasing the value of work. As a result, in a machine-for-machine employment model, low-skilled jobs will disappear, while new and currently unrealized job roles will emerge (Polak 2021 ). We can even argue that digital technology, artificial intelligence, and robot encounters are helping to train skilled robots and raise their relative wages (Yoon 2023 ).

Second, AI has both a destructive effect and a substitution effect on employment. As soon as machines emerged as the means of labour, they immediately began to compete with the workers themselves. As a modern new technology, artificial intelligence is essentially humanly intelligent labour that condenses complex labour. Like the disruptive general-purpose technologies of early industrialization, automation technologies such as AI offer both promise and fear in regard to “machine replacement.” Technological progress leads to an increase in the organic composition of capital and the relative surplus population. The additional capital formed in capital accumulation comes to absorb fewer and fewer workers compared to its quantity. At the same time, old capital, which is periodically reproduced according to the new composition, will begin to increasingly exclude the workers it previously employed, resulting in severe “technological unemployment.” The development of productivity creates more free time, especially in industries such as health care, transportation, and production environment control, which have seen significant benefits from AI. In recent years, however, some industrialized countries have faced the dilemma of declining income from labour and the slow growth of total labour productivity while applying AI on a large scale (Autor 2019 ). Low-skilled and incapacitated workers enjoy a high probability of being replaced by automation (Ramos et al. 2022 ; Jetha et al. 2023 ). It is worth noting that with the in-depth development of digital technologies, such as deep learning and big data analysis, some complex, cognitive, and creative jobs that are currently considered irreplaceable in the traditional view will also be replaced by AI, which indicates that automation technology is not only a substitute for low-skilled labour (Zhao and Zhao 2017 ; Dixon et al. 2021 ; Novella et al. 2023 ; Nikitas et al. 2021 ). Among factors, AI and robotics exert a particularly significant impact on the manufacturing job market, and industry-related jobs will face a severe unemployment problem due to the disruptive effect of AI and robotics (Zhou and Chen 2022 ; Sun and Liu 2023 ). At this stage, most of the world’s economies are facing the deep integration of the digital wave in their national economy, and any work, including high-level tasks, is being affected by digitalization and AI (Gardberg et al. 2020 ). The power of AI models is growing exponentially rather than linearly, and the rapid development and rapid diffusion of technology will undoubtedly have a devastating effect on knowledge workers, as did the industrial revolution (Liu and Peng 2023 ). In particular, the development and improvement of AI-generated content in recent years poses a more significant threat to higher-level workers, such as researchers, data analysts, and product managers, than to physical labourers. White collar workers are facing unprecedented anxiety and unease (Nam 2019 ; Fossen and Sorgner 2022 ; Wang et al. 2023 ). A classic study suggests that AI could replace 47% of the 702 job types in the United States within 20 years (Frey and Osborne 2017 ). Since the 2020 epidemic, digitization has accelerated, and online and digital resources have become a must for enterprises. Many occupations are gradually moving away from humans (Wu and Yang 2022 ; Männasoo et al. 2023 ). It is obvious that the intelligent robot arm on the factory assembly line is poised to allow factory assembly line workers to exit the stage and move into history. Career guides are being replaced by mobile phone navigation software.

Third, the effect of AI on employment is uncertain, and its impact on human work does not fall into a simple “utopian” or “dystopian” scene, but rather leads to a combination of “utopia” and “dystopia” (Kolade and Owoseni 2022 ). The job-creation effects of robotics and the emergence of new jobs that result from technological change coexist at the enterprise level (Ni and Obashi 2021 ). Adopting a suitable AI operation mode can adjust for the misallocation of resources by the market, enterprises, and individuals to labour-intensive tasks, reverse the nondirectional allocation of robots in the labour sector, and promote their reallocation in the manufacturing and service industries. The size of the impact on employment through the whole society is uncertain (Fabo et al. 2017 ; Huang and Rust 2018 ; Berkers et al. 2020 ; Tschang and Almirall 2021 ; Reljic et al. 2021 ). For example, Oschinski and Wyonch ( 2017 ) claimed that those jobs that are easily replaced by AI technology in Canada account for only 1.7% of the total labour market, and they have yet to find evidence that automation technology will cause mass unemployment in the short term. Wang et al. ( 2022 ) posited that the impact of industrial robots on labour demand in the short term is mainly negative, but in the long run, its impact on employment is mainly that of job creation. Kirov and Malamin ( 2022 ) claimed that the pessimism underlying the idea that AI will destroy the jobs and quality of language workers on a large scale is unjustified. Although some jobs will be eliminated as such technology evolves, many more will be created in the long run.

In the view that modern information technology and digital technology increase employment, the literature holds that foreign direct investment (Fokam et al. 2023 ), economic systems (Bouattour et al. 2023 ), labour skills and structure (Yang 2022 ), industrial technological intensity (Graf and Mohamed 2024 ), and the easing of information friction (Jin et al. 2023 ) are important mechanisms. The research on whether AI technology crowds out jobs is voluminous, but the conclusions are inconsistent (Filippi et al. 2023 ). This paper is focused on the influence of AI on the employment scale of the manufacturing industry, examines the job creation effect of technological progress from the perspectives of capital deepening, labour refinement, and labour productivity, and systematically examines the heterogeneous impact of the adoption of industrial robots on employment demand, structure, and different industries. The marginal contributions of this paper are as follows: first, the installation density of industrial robots is used as an indicator to measure AI, and the question of whether AI has had negative effects on employment in the manufacturing sector from the perspective of machine replacement is examined. The second contribution is the analysis of the heterogeneity of AI’s employment creation effect from the perspective of gender and industry attributes and the claim that women and the employees of labour-intensive enterprises are more able to obtain additional work benefits in the digital era. Most importantly, in contrast to the literature, this paper innovatively introduces virtual agglomeration into the path mechanism of the effect of robots on employment and holds that information technologies such as the internet, big data, and the industrial Internet of Things, which rely upon AI, have reshaped the management mode and organizational structure of enterprises. Online and offline integration work together, and information, knowledge, and technology are interconnected. In the past, the job matching mode of one person, one post, and specific individuals has changed into a multiple faceted set of tasks involving one person, many posts, and many types of people. The internet platform spawned by digital technology frees the employment mode of enterprises from being limited to single enterprises and specific gathering areas. Traditional industrial geographical agglomeration has gradually evolved into virtual agglomeration, which geometrically enlarges the agglomeration effect and mechanism and enhances the spillover effect. In the online world, individual practitioners and entrepreneurs can obtain orders, receive training, connect resources and employment needs more widely and efficiently, and they can achieve higher-quality self-employment. Virtual agglomeration has become a new path by which AI affects employment. Another literature contribution is that this study used the linear regression model of the machine learning model in the robustness test part, which verified the employment creation effect of AI from the perspective of positive contribution proportion. In causal identification, this study innovatively uses the industrial feed-in price as a tool variable to analyse the causal path of AI promoting employment.

Theoretical mechanism and research hypothesis

The direct influence of ai on employment.

With advances in machine learning, big data, artificial intelligence, and other technologies, a new generation of intelligent robots that can perform routine, repetitive, and regular production tasks requiring human judgement, problem-solving, and analytical skills has emerged. Robotic process automation technology can learn and imitate the way that workers perform repeated new tasks regarding the collecting of data, running of reports, copying of data, checking of data integrity, reading, processing, and the sending of emails, and it can play an essential role in processing large amounts of data (Alan 2023 ). In the context of an informatics- and technology-oriented economy, companies are asking employees to transition into creative jobs. According to the theory of the combined task framework, the most significant advantage of the productivity effect produced by intelligent technology is creation of new demands, that is, the creation of new tasks (Acemoglu and Restrepo 2018 ). These new task packages update the existing tasks and create new task combinations with more complex technical difficulties. Although intelligent technology is widely used in various industries, it may have a substitution effect on workers and lead to technical unemployment. However, with the rise of a new round of technological innovation and revolution, high efficiency leads to the development and growth of a series of emerging industries and exerts job creation effects. Technological progress has the effect of creating new jobs. That is, such progress creates new jobs that are more in line with the needs of social development and thus increases the demand for labour (Borland and Coelli 2017 ). Therefore, the intelligent development of enterprises will come to replace their initial programmed tasks and produce more complex new tasks, and human workers in nonprogrammed positions, such as technology and knowledge, will have more comparative advantages.

Generally, the “new technology-economy” paradigm that is derived from automation machine and AI technology is affecting the breadth and depth of employment, which is manifested as follows:

It reduces the demand for coded jobs in enterprises while increasing the demand for nonprogrammed complex labour.

The development of digital technology has deepened and refined the division of labour, accelerated the service trend of the manufacturing industry, increased the employment share of the modern service industry and created many emerging jobs.

Advanced productive forces give workers higher autonomy and increased efficiency in their work, improving their job satisfaction and employment quality. As described in Das Kapital, “Although machines actually crowd out and potentially replace a large number of workers, with the development of machines themselves (which is manifested by the increase in the number of the same kind of factories or the expansion of the scale of existing factories), the number of factory workers may eventually be more than the number of handicraft workers in the workshops or handicrafts that they crowd out… It can be seen that the relative reduction and absolute increase of employed workers go hand in hand” (Li and Zhang 2022 ).

Internet information technology reduces the distance between countries in both time and space, promotes the transnational flow of production factors, and deepens the international division of labour. The emergence of AI technology leads to the decline of a country’s traditional industries and departments. Under the new changes to the division of labour, these industries and departments may develop in late-developing countries and serve to increase their employment through international labour export.

From a long-term perspective, AI will create more jobs through the continuous expansion of the social production scale, the continuous improvement of production efficiency, and the more detailed industrial categories that it engenders. With the accumulation of human capital under the internet era, practitioners are gradually becoming liberated from heavy and dangerous work, and workers’ skills and job adaptability will undergo continuous improvement. The employment creation and compensation effects caused by technological and industrial changes are more significant than the substitution effects (Han et al. 2022 ). Accordingly, the article proposes the following two research hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): AI increases employment .

Hypothesis 2 (H2): AI promotes employment by improving labour productivity, deepening capital, and refining the division of labour .

Role of virtual agglomeration

The research on economic geography and “new” economic geography agglomeration theory focuses on industrial agglomeration in the traditional sense. This model is a geographical agglomeration model that depends on spatial proximity from a geographical perspective. Assessing the role of externalities requires a particular geographical scope, as it has both physical and scope limitations. Virtual agglomeration transcends Marshall’s theory of economies of scale, which is not limited to geographical agglomeration from the perspective of natural territory but rather takes on more complex and multidimensional forms (such as virtual clusters, high-tech industrial clusters, and virtual business circles). Under the influence of a new generation of digital technology that is characterized by big data, the Internet of Things, and the industrial internet, the digital, intelligent, and platform transformation trend is prominent in some industries and enterprises, and industrial digitalization and digital industrialization jointly promote industrial upgrading. The innovation of information technology leads to “distance death” (Schultz 1998 ). With the further materialization of digital and networked services of enterprises, the trading mode of digital knowledge and services, such as professional knowledge, information combination, cultural products, and consulting services, has transitioned from offline to digital trade, and the original geographical space gathering mode between enterprises has gradually evolved into a virtual network gathering that places the real-time exchange of data and information as its core (Wang et al. 2018 ). Tan and Xia ( 2022 ) stated that virtual agglomeration geometrically magnifies the social impact of industrial agglomeration mechanisms and agglomeration effects, and enterprises in the same industry and their upstream and downstream affiliated enterprises can realize low-cost long-distance transactions, services, and collaborative production through digital trade, resulting in large-scale zero-distance agglomeration along with neighbourhood-style production, service, circulation, and consumption. First, the knowledge and information underlying the production, design, research and development, organization, and trading of all kinds of enterprises are increasingly being completed by digital technology. The tacit knowledge that used to require face-to-face communication has become codable, transmissible, and reproducible under digital technology. Tacit knowledge has gradually become explicit, and knowledge spillover and technology diffusion have become more pronounced, which further leads to an increase in the demand for unconventional task labour (Zhang and Li 2022 ). Second, the cloud platform causes the labour pool effect of traditional geographical agglomeration to evolve into the labour “conservation land” of virtual agglomeration, and employment is no longer limited to the internal organization or constrained within a particular regional scope. Digital technology allows enterprises to hire “ghost workers” for lower wages to compensate for the possibility of AI’s “last mile.” Information technology and network platforms seek connections with all social nodes, promoting the time and space for work in a way that transcends standardized fixed frameworks. At the same time, joining or quitting work tasks, indirectly increasing the temporary and transitional nature of work and forming a decentralized management organization model of supplementary cooperation, social networks, industry experts, and skilled labour all become more convenient for workers (Wen and Liu 2021 ). With a mobile phone and a computer, labourers worldwide can create value for enterprises or customers, and the forms of labour are becoming more flexible and diverse. Workers can provide digital real-time services to employers far away from their residence, and they can also obtain flexible employment information and improve their digital skills through the leveraging of digital resources, resulting in the odd-job economy, crowdsourcing economy, sharing economy, and other economic forms. Finally, the network virtual space can accommodate almost unlimited enterprises simultaneously. In the commercial background of digital trade, while any enterprise can obtain any intermediate supply in the online market, its final product output can instantly become the intermediate input of other enterprises. Therefore, enterprises’ raw material supply and product sales rely on the whole market. At this time, the market scale effect of intermediate inputs can be infinitely amplified, as it is no longer confined to the limited space of geographical agglomeration (Duan and Zhang 2023 ). Accordingly, the following research hypothesis is proposed:

Hypothesis 3 (H3): AI promotes employment by improving the VA of enterprises .

Study design and data sources

Variable setting, explained variable.

Employment scale (ES). Compared with the agriculture and service industry, the industrial sector accommodates more labour, and robot technology is mainly applied in the industrial sector, which has the greatest demand shock effect on manufacturing jobs. In this paper, we select the number of employees in manufacturing cities and towns as the proxy variable for employment scale.

Core explanatory variable

Artificial intelligence (AI). Emerging technologies endow industrial robots with more complete technical attributes, which increases their ability to act as human beings in many work projects, enabling them to either independently complete production tasks or to assist humans in completing such tasks. This represents an important form of AI technology embedded into machinery and equipment. In this paper, the installation density of industrial robots is selected as the proxy variable for AI. Robot data mainly come from the number of robots installed in various industries at various national levels as published by the International Federation of Robotics (IFR). Because the dataset published by the IFR provides the dataset at the national-industry level and its industry classification standards are significantly different from those in China, the first lessons for this paper are drawn from the practices of Yan et al. ( 2020 ), who matches the 14 manufacturing categories published by the IFR with the subsectors in China’s manufacturing sector, and then uses the mobile share method to merge and sort out the employment numbers of various industries in various provinces. First, the national subsector data provided by the IFR are matched with the second National Economic Census data. Next, the share of employment in different industries to the total employment in the province is used to develop weights and decompose the industry-level robot data into the local “provincial-level industry” level. Finally, the application of robots in various industries at the provincial level is summarized. The Bartik shift-share instrumental variable is now widely used to measure robot installation density at the city (province) level (Wu 2023 ; Yang and Shen, 2023 ; Shen and Yang 2023 ). The calculation process is as follows:

In Eq. ( 1 ), N is a collection of manufacturing industries, Robot it is the robot installation density of province i in year t, \({{{\mathrm{employ}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{ij}}}},{{{\mathrm{t}}}} = 2006}\) is the number of employees in industry j of province i in 2006, \({{{\mathrm{employ}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{i}}}},{{{\mathrm{t}}}} = 2006}\) is the total number of employees in province i in 2006, and \({{{\mathrm{Robot}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{jt}}}}}{{{\mathrm{/employ}}}}_{{{{\mathrm{i}}}},{{{\mathrm{t}}}} = 2006}\) represents the robot installation density of each year and industry level.

Mediating variables

Labour productivity (LP). According to the definition and measurement method proposed by Marx’s labour theory of value, labour productivity is measured by the balance of the total social product minus the intermediate goods and the amount of labour consumed by the pure production sector. The specific calculation process is \(AL = Y - k/l\) , where Y represents GDP, l represents employment, k represents capital depreciation, and AL represents labour productivity. Capital deepening (CD). The per capita fixed capital stock of industrial enterprises above a designated size is used in this study as a proxy variable for capital deepening. The division of labour refinement (DLR) is refined and measured by the number of employees in producer services. Virtual agglomeration (VA) is mainly a continuation of the location entropy method in the traditional industrial agglomeration measurement idea, and weights are assigned according to the proportion of the number of internet access ports in the country. Because of the dependence of virtual agglomeration on digital technology and network information platforms, the industrial agglomeration degree of each region is first calculated in this paper by using the number of information transmissions, computer services, and software practitioners and then multiplying that number by the internet port weight. The specific expression is \(Agg_{it} = \left( {M_{it}/M_t} \right)/\left( {E_{it}/E_t} \right) \times \left( {Net_{it}/Net_t} \right)\) , where \(M_{it}\) represents the number of information transmissions, computer services and software practitioners in region i in year t, \(M_t\) represents the total number of national employees in this industry, \(E_{it}\) represents the total number of employees in region i, \(E_t\) represents the total number of national employees, \(Net_{it}\) represents the number of internet broadband access ports in region i, and \(Net_t\) represents the total number of internet broadband access ports in the country. VA represents the degree of virtual agglomeration.

Control variables

To avoid endogeneity problems caused by unobserved variables and to obtain more accurate estimation results, seven control variables were also selected. Road accessibility (RA) is measured by the actual road area at the end of the year. Industrial structure (IS) is measured by the proportion of the tertiary industry’s added value and the secondary industry’s added value. The full-time equivalent of R&D personnel is used to measure R&D investment (RD). Wage cost (WC) is calculated using city average salary as a proxy variable; Marketization (MK) is determined using Fan Gang marketization index as a proxy variable; Urbanization (UR) is measured by the proportion of the urban population to the total population at the end of the year; and the proportion of general budget expenditure to GDP is used to measure Macrocontrol (MC).

Econometric model

To investigate the impact of AI on employment, based on the selection and definition of the variables detailed above and by mapping the research ideas to an empirical model, the following linear regression model is constructed:

In Eq. ( 2 ), ES represents the scale of manufacturing employment, AI represents artificial intelligence, and subscripts t, i and m represent time t, individual i and the m th control variable, respectively. \(\mu _i\) , \(\nu _t\) and \(\varepsilon _{it}\) represent the individual effect, time effect and random disturbance terms, respectively. \(\delta _0\) is the constant term, a is the parameter to be fitted, and Control represents a series of control variables. To further test whether there is a mediating effect of mechanism variables in the process of AI affecting employment, only the influence of AI on mechanism variables is tested in the empirical part according to the modelling process and operational suggestions of the intermediary effects as proposed by Jiang ( 2022 ) to overcome the inherent defects of the intermediary effects. On the basis of Eq. ( 2 ), the following econometric model is constructed:

In Eq. ( 3 ), Media represents the mechanism variable. β 1 represents the degree of influence of AI on mechanism variables, and its significance and symbolic direction still need to be emphasized. The meanings of the remaining symbols are consistent with those of Eq. ( 2 ).

Data sources

Following the principle of data availability, the panel data of 30 provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions) in China from 2006 to 2020 (samples from Tibet and Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan were excluded due to data availability) were used as statistical investigation samples. The raw data on the installed density of industrial robots and the number of workers in the manufacturing industry come from the International Federation of Robotics and the China Labour Statistics Yearbook. The original data for the remaining indicators came from the China Statistical Yearbook, China Population and Employment Statistical Yearbook, China’s Marketization Index Report by Province (2021), the provincial and municipal Bureau of Statistics, and the global statistical data analysis platform of the Economy Prediction System (EPS). The few missing values are supplemented through linear interpolation. It should be noted that although the IFR has yet to release the number of robots installed at the country-industry level in 2020, it has published the overall growth rate of new robot installations, which is used to calculate the robot stock in 2020 for this study. The descriptive statistical analysis of relevant variables is shown in Table 1 .

Empirical analysis

To reduce the volatility of the data and address the possible heteroscedasticity problem, all the variables are located. The results of the Hausmann test and F test both reject the null hypothesis at the 1% level, indicating that the fixed effect model is the best-fitting model. Table 2 reports the fitting results of the baseline regression.

As shown in Table 2 , the results of the two-way fixed-effect (TWFE) model displayed in Column (5) show that the fitting coefficient of AI on employment is 0.989 and is significant at the 1% level. At the same time, the fitting results of other models show that the impact of AI on employment is significantly positive. The results confirm that the effect of AI on employment is positive and the effect of job creation is greater than the effect of destruction, and these conclusions are robust, thus verifying the employment creation mechanism of technological progress. Research Hypothesis 1 (H1) is supported. The new round of scientific and technological revolution represented by artificial intelligence involves the upgrading of traditional industries, the promotion of major changes in the economy and society, the driving of rapid development of the “unmanned economy,” the spawning a large number of new products, new technologies, new formats, and new models, and the provision of more possibilities for promoting greater and higher quality employment. Classical and neoclassical economics view the market mechanism as a process of automatic correction that can offset the job losses caused by labour-saving technological innovation. Under the premise of the “employment compensation” theory, the new products, new models, and new industrial sectors created by the progress of AI technology can directly promote employment. At the same time, the scale effect caused by advanced productivity results in lower product prices and higher worker incomes, which drives increased demand and economic growth, increasing output growth and employment (Ge and Zhao 2023 ). In conjunction with the empirical results of this paper, we have reason to believe that enterprises adopt the strategy of “machine replacement” to replace procedural and repetitive labour positions in the pursuit of high efficiency and high profits. However, AI improves not only enterprises’ production efficiency but also their production capacity and scale economy. To occupy a favourable share of market competition, enterprises expand the scale of reproduction. At this point, new and more complex tasks continue to emerge, eventually leading companies to hire more labour. At this stage, robot technology and application in developing countries are still in their infancy. Whether regarding the application scenario or the application scope of robots, the automation technology represented by industrial robots has not yet been widely promoted, which increases the time required for the automation technology to completely replace manual tasks, so the destruction effect of automation technology on jobs is not apparent. The fundamental market situation of the low cost of China’s labour market drives enterprises to pay more attention to technology upgrading and efficiency improvement when introducing industrial robots. The implementation of the machine replacement strategy is mainly caused by the labour shortage driven by high work intensity, high risk, simple process repetition, and poor working conditions. The intelligent transformation of enterprises points to more than the simple saving of labour costs (Dixon et al. 2021 ).

Robustness test

The above results show that the effect of AI on job creation is greater than the effect of substitution and the overall promotion of enterprises for the enhancement of employment demand. To verify the robustness of the benchmark results, the following three means of verifying the results are adopted in this study. First, we replace the explained variables. In addition to industrial manufacturing, robots are widely used in service industries, such as medical care, finance, catering, and education. To reflect the dynamic change relationship between the employment share of the manufacturing sector and the employment number of all sectors, the absolute number of manufacturing employees is replaced by the ratio of the manufacturing industry to all employment numbers. The second means is increasing the missing variables. Since many factors affect employment, this paper considers the living cots, human capital, population density, and union power in the basic regression model. The impact of these variables on employment is noticeable; for example, the existence of trade unions improves employee welfare and the working environment but raises the entry barrier for workers in the external market. The new missing variables are the average selling price of commercial and residential buildings, urban population density (person/square kilometre), nominal human capital stock, and the number of grassroots trade union organizations in the China Human Capital Report 2021 issued by Central University of Finance and Economics, which are used as proxy variables. The third means involves the use of linear regression (the gradient descent method) in machine learning regression to calculate the importance of AI to the increase in employment size. The machine learning model has a higher goodness of fit and fitting effect on the predicted data, and its mean square error and mean absolute error are more minor (Wang Y et al. 2022 ).

As seen from the robustness part of Table 3 , the results of Method 1 show that AI exerts a positive impact on the employment share in the manufacturing industry; that is, AI can increase the proportion of employment in the manufacturing industry, the use of AI creates more derivative jobs for the manufacturing industry, and the demand for the labour force of enterprises further increases. The results of method 2 show that after increasing the number of control variables, the influence of robots on employment remains significantly positive, indicating no social phenomenon of “machine replacement.” The results of method 3 show that the weight of AI is 84.3%, indicating that AI can explain most of the increase in the manufacturing employment scale and has a positive promoting effect. The above three methods confirm the robustness of the baseline regression results.

Endogenous problem

Although further control variables are used to alleviate the endogeneity problem caused by missing variables to the greatest extent possible, the bidirectional causal relationship between labour demand and robot installation (for example, enterprises tend to passively adopt the machine replacement strategy in the case of labour shortages and recruitment difficulties) still threatens the accuracy of the statistical inference results in this paper. To eliminate the potential endogeneity problem of the model, the two-stage least squares method (2SLS) was applied. In general, the cost factor that enterprises need to consider when introducing industrial robots is not only the comparative advantage between the efficiency cost of machinery and the costs of equipment and labour wages but also the cost of electricity to maintain the efficient operation of machinery and equipment. Changes in industrial electricity prices indicate that the dynamic conditions between installing robots and hiring workers have changed, and decision-makers need to reweigh the costs and profits of intelligent transformation. Changes in industrial electricity prices can impact the demand for labour by enterprises; this path does not directly affect the labour market but is rather based on the power consumption, work efficiency, and equipment prices of robots. Therefore, industrial electricity prices are exogenous relative to employment, and the demand for robots is correlated.

Electricity production and operation can be divided into power generation, transmission, distribution, and sales. China has realized the integration of exports and distribution, so there are two critical prices in practice: on-grid and sales tariffs (Yu and Liu 2017 ). The government determines the on-grid tariff according to different cost-plus models, and its regulatory policy has roughly proceeded from that of principal and interest repayment, through operating period pricing, to benchmark pricing. The sales price (also known as the catalogue price) is the price of electric energy sold by power grid operators to end users, and its price structure is formed based on the “electric heating price” that was implemented in 1976. There is differentiated pricing between industrial and agricultural electricity. Generally, government departments formulate on-grid tariffs, integrating the interests of power plants, grid enterprises, and end users. As China’s thermal power installed capacity accounts for more than 70% of the installed capacity of generators, the price of coal becomes an essential factor affecting the price of industrial internet access. The pricing strategy for electricity sales is not determined by market-oriented transmission and distribution electricity price, on-grid electricity price, or tax but rather by the goal of “stable growth and ensuring people’s livelihood” (Tang and Yang 2014 ). The externality of the feed-in price is more robust, so the paper chooses the feed-in price as an instrumental variable.

It can be seen from Table 3 that the instrumental variables in the first stage positively affect the robot installation density at the level of 1%. Meanwhile, the results of the validity test of the instrumental variables show that there are no weak instrumental variables or unidentifiable problems with this variable, thus satisfying the principle of correlation and exclusivity. The second-stage results show that robots still positively affect the demand for labour at the 1% level, but the fitting coefficient is smaller than that of the benchmark regression model. In summary, the results of fitting the calculation with the causal inference paradigm still support the conclusion that robots create more jobs and increase the labour demand of enterprises.

Extensibility analysis

Robot adoption and gender bias.

The quantity and quality of labour needed by various industries in the manufacturing sector vary greatly, and labour-intensive and capital-intensive industries have different labour needs. Over the past few decades, the demand for female employees has grown. Female employees obtain more job opportunities and better salaries today (Zhang et al. 2023 ). Female employees may benefit from reducing the content of manual labour jobs, meaning that further study of AI heterogeneity from the perspective of gender bias may be needed. As seen from Table 4 , AI has a significant positive impact on the employment of both male and female practitioners, indicating that AI technology does not have a heterogeneous effect on the dynamic gender structure. By comparing the coefficients of the two (the estimated results for men and those for women), it can be found that robots have a more significant promotion effect on female employees. AI has significantly improved the working environment of front-line workers, reduced the level of labour intensity, enabled people to free themselves of dirty and heavy work tasks, and indirectly improved the job adaptability of female workers. Intellectualization increases the flexibility of the time, place, and manner of work for workers, correspondingly improves the working freedom of female workers, and alleviates the imbalance in the choice between family and career for women to a certain extent (Lu et al. 2023 ). At the same time, women are born with the comparative advantage of cognitive skills that allow them to pay more nuanced attention to work details. By introducing automated technology, companies are increasing the demand for cognitive skills such as mental labour and sentiment analysis, thus increasing the benefits for female workers (Wang and Zhang 2022 ). Flexible employment forms, such as online car hailing, community e-commerce, and online live broadcasting, provide a broader stage for women’s entrepreneurship and employment. According to the “Didi Digital Platform and Female Ecology Research Report”, the number of newly registered female online taxi drivers in China has exceeded 265,000 since 2020, and approximately 60 percent of the heads of the e-commerce platform, Orange Heart, are women.

Industry heterogeneity

Given the significant differences in the combination of factors across the different industries in China’s manufacturing sector, there is also a significant gap in the installation density of robots; even compared to AI density, in industries with different production characteristics, indicating that there may be an opposite employment phenomenon at play. According to the number of employees and their salary level, capital stock, R&D investment, and patent technology, the manufacturing industry is divided into labour-intensive (LI), capital-intensive (CI), and technology-intensive (TI) industries.

As seen from the industry-specific test results displayed in Table 4 , the impact of AI on employment in the three attribute industries is significantly positive, which is consistent with the results of Beier et al. ( 2022 ). In contrast, labour-intensive industries can absorb more workers, and industry practitioners are better able to share digital dividends from these new workers, which is generally in line with expectations (in the labour-intensive case, the regression coefficient of AI on employment is 0.054, which is significantly larger than the regression coefficient of the other two industries). This conclusion shows that enterprises use AI to replace the labour force of procedural and process-based positions in pursuit of cost-effective performance. However, the scale effect generated by improving enterprise production efficiency leads to increased labour demand, namely, productivity and compensation effects. For example, AGV-handling robots are used to replace porters in monotonous and repetitive high-intensity work, thus realizing the uncrewed operation of storage links and the automatic handling of goods, semifinished products, and raw materials in the production process. This reduces the cost of goods storage while improving the efficiency of logistics handling, increasing the capital investment of enterprises in the expansion of market share and extension of the industrial chain.

Mechanism test

To reveal the path mechanism through which AI affects employment, in combination with H2 and H3 and the intermediary effect model constructed with Eq. ( 3 ), the TWFE model was used to fit the results shown in Table 5 .

It can be seen from Table 5 that the fitting coefficients of AI for capital deepening, labour productivity, and division of labour are 0.052, 0.071, and 0.302, respectively, and are all significant at the 1% level, indicating that AI can promote employment through the above three mechanisms, and thus research Hypothesis 2 (H2) is supported. Compared with the workshop and handicraft industry, machine production has driven incomparably broad development in the social division of labour. Intelligent transformation helps to open up the internal and external data chain, improve the combination of production factors, reduce costs and increase efficiency to enable the high-quality development of enterprises. At the macro level, the impact of robotics on social productivity, industrial structure, and product prices affects the labour demand of enterprises. At the micro level, robot technology changes the employment carrier, skill requirements, and employment form of labour and impacts the matching of labour supply and demand. The combination of the price and income effects can drive the impact of technological progress on employment creation. While improving labour productivity, AI technology reduces product production costs. In the case of constant nominal income, the market increases the demand for the product, which in turn drives the expansion of the industrial scale and increases output, resulting in an increase in the demand for labour. At the same time, the emergence of robotics has refined the division of labour. Most importantly, the development of AI technology results in productivity improvements that cannot be matched by pure labour input, which not only enables 24 h automation but also reduces error rates, improves precision, and accelerates production speeds.

Table 5 also shows that the fitting coefficient of AI to virtual agglomeration is 0.141 and significant at the 5% level, indicating that AI and digital technology can promote employment by promoting the agglomeration degree of enterprises in the cloud and network. Research Hypothesis 3 is thus supported. Industrial internet, AI, collaborative robots, and optical fidelity information transmission technology are necessary for the future of the manufacturing industry, and smart factories will become the ultimate direction of manufacturing. Under the intelligent manufacturing model, by leveraging cloud links, industrial robots, and the technological depth needed to achieve autonomous management, the proximity advantage of geographic spatial agglomeration gradually begins to fade. The panconnective features of digital technology break through the situational constraints of work, reshaping the static, linear, and demarcated organizational structure and management modes of the industrial era and increasingly facilitates dynamic, network-based, borderless organizational forms, despite the fact that traditional work tasks can be carried out on a broader network platform employing online office platforms and online meetings. While promoting cost reduction and efficiency increase, such connectivity also creates new occupations that rely on this network to achieve efficient virtual agglomeration. On the other hand, robot technology has also broken the fixed connection between people and jobs, and the previous post matching mode of one person and one specific individual has gradually evolved into an organizational structure involving multiple posts and multiple people, thus providing more diverse and inclusive jobs for different groups.

Conclusions and policy implications

Research conclusion.

The decisive impact of digitization and automation on the functioning of all society’s social subsystems is indisputable. Technological progress alone does not impart any purpose to technology, and its value (consciousness) can only be defined by its application in the social context in which it emerges (Rakowski et al. 2021 ). The recent launch of the intelligent chatbot ChatGPT by the US artificial intelligence company OpenAI, with its powerful word processing capabilities and human-computer interaction, has once again sparked global concerns about its potential impact on employment in related industries. Automation technology represented by intelligent manufacturing profoundly affects the labour supply and demand map and significantly impacts economic and social development. The application of industrial robots is a concrete reflection of the integration of AI technology and industry, and its widespread promotion and popularization in the manufacturing field have resulted in changes in production methods and exerted impacts on the labour market. In this paper, the internal mechanism of AI’s impact on employment is first delineated and then empirical tests based on panel data from 30 provinces (municipalities and autonomous regions, excluding Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan, and Xizang) in China from 2006 to 2020 are subsequently conducted. As mentioned in relation to the theory of “employment compensation,” the research described in this paper shows that the overall impact of AI on employment is positive, revealing a pronounced job creation effect, and the impact of automation technology on the labour market is mainly positively manifested as “icing on the cake.” Our conclusion is consistent with the literature (Sharma and Mishra 2023 ; Feng et al. 2024 ). This conclusion remains after replacing variables, adding missing variables, and controlling for endogeneity problems. The positive role of AI in promoting employment does not have exert opposite effects resulting from gender and industry differences. However, it brings greater digital welfare to female practitioners and workers in labour-intensive industries while relatively reducing the overall proportion of male practitioners in the manufacturing industry. Mechanism analysis shows that AI drives employment through mechanisms that promote capital deepening, the division of labour, and increased labour productivity. The digital trade derived from digital technology and internet platforms has promoted the transformation of traditional industrial agglomeration into virtual agglomeration, the constructed network flow space system is more prone to the free spillover of knowledge, technology, and creativity, and the agglomeration effect and agglomeration mechanism are amplified by geometric multiples. Industrial virtual agglomeration has become a new mechanism and an essential channel through which AI promotes employment, which helps to enhance labour autonomy, improve job suitability and encourage enterprises to share the welfare of labour among “cultivation areas.”

Policy implications

Technology is neutral, and its key lies in its use. Artificial intelligence technology, as an open new general technology, represents significant progress in productivity and is an essential driving force with the potential to boost economic development. However, it also inevitably poses many potential risks and social problems. This study helps to clarify the argument that technology replaces jobs by revealing the impact of automation technology on China’s labour market at the present stage, and its findings alleviate the social anxiety caused by the fear of machine replacement. According to the above research conclusions, the following valuable implications can be obtained.

Investment in AI research and development should be increased, and the high-end development of domestic robots should be accelerated. The development of AI has not only resulted in the improvement of production efficiency but has also triggered a change in industrial structure and labour structure, and it has also generated new jobs as it has replaced human labour. Currently, the impact of AI on employment in China is positive and helps to stabilize employment. Speeding up the development of the information infrastructure, accelerating the intelligent upgrade of the traditional physical infrastructure, and realizing the inclusive promotion of intelligent infrastructure are necessary to ensure efficient development. 5G technology and the development dividend of the digital economy can be used to increase the level of investment in new infrastructure such as cloud computing, the Internet of Things, blockchain, and the industrial internet and to improve the level of intelligent application across the industry. We need to implement the intelligent transformation of old infrastructure, upgrade traditional old infrastructure to smart new infrastructure, and digitally transform traditional forms of infrastructure such as power, reservoirs, rivers, and urban sewer pipes through the employment of sensors and access algorithms to solve infrastructure problems more intelligently. Second, the diversification and agglomeration of industrial lines are facilitated through the transformation of industrial intelligence and automation. At the same time, it is necessary to speed up the process of industrial intelligence and cultivate the prospects of emerging industries and employment carriers, particularly in regard to the development and growth of emerging producer services. The development of domestic robots should be task-oriented and application-oriented, should adhere to the effective transformation of scientific and technological achievements under the guidance of the development of the service economy. A “1 + 2 + N” collaborative innovation ecosystem should be constructed with a focus on cultivating, incubating, and supporting critical technological innovation in each subindustry of the manufacturing industry, optimizing the layout, and forming a matrix multilevel achievement transformation service. We need to improve the mechanisms used for complementing research and production, such as technology investment and authorization. To move beyond standard robot system development technology, the research and development of bionic perception and knowledge, as well as other cutting-edge technologies need to be developed to overcome the core technology “bottleneck” problem.

It is suggested that government departments improve the social security system and stabilize employment through multiple channels. The first channel is the evaluation and monitoring of the potential destruction of the low-end labour force by AI, enabled through the cooperation of the government and enterprises, to build relevant information platforms, improve the transparency of the labour market information, and reasonably anticipate structural unemployment. Big data should be fully leveraged, a sound national employment information monitoring platform should be built, real-time monitoring of the dynamic changes in employment in critical regions, fundamental groups, and key positions should be implemented, employment status information should be released, and employment early warning, forecasting, and prediction should be provided. Second, the backstop role of public service, including human resources departments and social security departments at all levels, should improve the relevant social security system in a timely manner. A mixed-guarantee model can be adopted for the potential unemployed and laws and regulations to protect the legitimate rights and interests of entrepreneurs and temporary employees should be improved. We can gradually expand the coverage of unemployment insurance and basic living allowances. For the extremely poor, unemployed or extreme labour shortage groups, public welfare jobs or special subsidies can be used to stabilize their basic lifestyles. The second is to understand the working conditions of the bottom workers at the grassroots level in greater depth, strengthen the statistical investigation and professional evaluation of AI technology and related jobs, provide skills training, employment assistance, and unemployment subsidies for workers who are unemployed due to the use of AI, and encourage unemployed groups to participate in vocational skills training to improve their applicable skillsets. Workers should be encouraged to use their fragmented time to participate in the gig and sharing economies and achieve flexible employment according to dominant conditions. Finally, a focus should be established on the impact of AI on the changing demand for jobs in specific industries, especially transportation equipment manufacturing and communications equipment, computers, and other electronic equipment manufacturing.

It is suggested that education departments promote the reform of the education and training system and deepen the coordinated development of industry-university research. Big data, the Internet of Things, and AI, as new digital production factors, have penetrated daily economic activities, driving industrial changes and changes in the supply and demand dynamics of the job market. Heterogeneity analysis results confirmed that AI imparts a high level of digital welfare for women and workers in labour-intensive industrial enterprises, but to stimulate the spillover of technology dividends in the whole society, it is necessary to dynamically optimize human capital and improve the adaptability of man-machine collaborative work; otherwise, the disruptive effect of intelligent technology on low-end, routine and programmable work will be obscured. AI has a creativity promoting effect on irregular, creative, and stylized technical positions. Hence, the contradiction between supply and demand in the labour market and the slow transformation of the labour skill structure requires attention. The relevant administrative departments of the state should take the lead in increasing investment in basic research and forming a scientific research division system in which enterprises increase their levels of investment in experimental development and multiple subjects participate in R&D. Relevant departments should clarify the urgent need for talent in the digital economy era, deepen the reform of the education system as a guide, encourage all kinds of colleges and universities to add related majors around AI and big data analysis, accelerate the research on the skill needs of new careers and jobs, and establish a lifelong learning and employment training system that meets the needs of the innovative economy and intelligent society. We need to strengthen the training of innovative, technical, and professional technical personnel, focus on cultivating interdisciplinary talent and AI-related professionals to improve worker adaptability to new industries and technologies, deepen the adjustment of the educational structure, increase the skills and knowledge of perceptual, creative, and social abilities of the workforce, and cultivate the skills needed to perform complex jobs in the future that are difficult to replace by AI. The lifelong education and training system should be improved, and enterprise employees should be encouraged to participate in vocational skills training and cultural knowledge learning through activities such as vocational and technical schools, enterprise universities, and personnel exchanges.

Research limitations

The study used panel data from 30 provinces in China from 2006 to 2020 to examine the impact of AI on employment using econometric models. Therefore, the conclusions obtained in this study are only applicable to the economic reality in China during the sample period. There are three shortcomings in this study. First, only the effect and mechanism of AI in promoting employment from a macro level are investigated in this study, which is limited by the large data particles and small sample data that are factors that reduce the reliability and validity of statistical inference. The digital economy has grown rapidly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the related industrial structures and job types have been affected by sudden public events. An examination of the impact of AI on employment based on nearly three years of micro-data (particularly the data obtained from field research) is urgent. When conducting empirical analysis, combining case studies of enterprises that are undergoing digital transformation is very helpful. Second, although the two-way fixed effect model and instrumental variable method can reveal conclusions regarding causality to a certain extent, these conclusions are not causal inference in the strict sense. Due to the lack of good policy pilots regarding industrial robots and digital parks, the topic cannot be thoroughly evaluated for determining policy and calculating resident welfare. In future research, researchers can look for policies and systems such as big data pilot zones, intelligent industrial parks, and digital economy demonstration zones to perform policy evaluations through quasinatural experiments. The use of difference in differences (DID), regression discontinuity (RD), and synthetic control method (SCM) to perform regression is beneficial. In addition, the diffusion effect caused by introducing and installing industrial robots leads to the flow of labour between regions, resulting in a potential spatial spillover effect. Although the spatial econometric model is used above, it is mainly used as a robustness test, and the direct effect is considered. This paper has yet to discuss the spatial effect from the perspective of the spatial spillover effect. Last, it is important to note that the digital infrastructure, workforce, and industrial structure differ from country to country. The study focused on a sample of data from China, making the findings only partially applicable to other countries. Therefore, the sample size of countries should be expanded in future studies, and the possible heterogeneity of AI should be explored and compared by classifying different countries according to their stage of development.

Data availability

The data generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are provided in Supplementary File “database”.

Acemoglu D, Restrepo P (2018) Low-Skill and High-Skill Automation. J Hum Cap 12(2):204–232. https://doi.org/10.1086/697242

Article   Google Scholar  

Alan H (2023) A systematic bibliometric analysis on the current digital human resources management studies and directions for future research. J Chin Hum Resour Manag 14(1):38–59. https://doi.org/10.47297/wspchrmWSP2040-800502.20231401

Autor D (2019) Work of the past, work of the future. AEA Pap Proc 109(4):1–32. https://doi.org/10.1257/pandp.20191110

Balsmeier B, Woerter M (2019) Is this time different? How digitalization influences job creation and destruction. Res Policy 48(8):103765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.010

Beier G, Matthess M, Shuttleworth L, Guan T, Grudzien DIDP, Xue B et al. (2022) Implications of Industry 4.0 on industrial employment: A comparative survey from Brazilian, Chinese, and German practitioners. Technol Soc 70:102028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102028

Berkers H, Smids J, Nyholm SR, Le Blanc PM (2020) Robotization and meaningful work in logistic warehouses: threats and opportunities. Gedrag Organisatie 33(4):324–347

Google Scholar  

Borland J, Coelli M (2017) Are robots taking our jobs? Aust Economic Rev 50(4):377–397. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8462.12245

Bouattour A, Kalai M, Helali K (2023) The nonlinear impact of technologies import on industrial employment: A panel threshold regression approach. Heliyon 9(10):e20266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20266

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Boyd R, Holton RJ (2018) Technology, innovation, employment and power: Does robotics and artificial intelligence really mean social transformation? J Sociol 54(3):331–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783317726591

Chen Z (2023) Ethics and discrimination in artificial intelligence-enabled recruitment practices. Humanities Soc Sci Commun 10:567. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02079-x

Dixon J, Hong B, Wu L (2021) The robot revolution: Managerial and employment consequences for firms. Manag Sci 67(9):5586–5605. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3812

Duan SX, Deng H, Wibowo S (2023) Exploring the impact of digital work on work-life balance and job performance: a technology affordance perspective. Inf Technol People 36(5):2009–2029. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-01-2021-0013

Duan X, Zhang Q (2023) Industrial digitization, virtual agglomeration and total factor productivity. J Northwest Norm Univ(Soc Sci) 60(1):135–144. https://doi.org/10.16783/j.cnki.nwnus.2023.01.016

Dunn M (2020) Making gigs work: digital platforms, job quality and worker motivations. N. Technol Work Employ 35(2):232–249. https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12167

Fabo B, Karanovic J, Dukova K (2017) In search of an adequate European policy response to the platform economy. Transf: Eur Rev Labour Res 23(2):163–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258916688861

Feng R, Shen C, Guo Y (2024) Digital finance and labor demand of manufacturing enterprises: Theoretical mechanism and heterogeneity analysis. Int Rev Econ Financ 89(Part A):17–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2023.07.065

Filippi E, Bannò M, Trento S (2023) Automation technologies and their impact on employment: A review, synthesis and future research agenda. Technol Forecast Soc Change 191:122448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122448

Fokam DNDT, Kamga BF, Nchofoung TN (2023) Information and communication technologies and employment in developing countries: Effects and transmission channels. Telecommun Policy 47(8):102597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102597

Forsythe E, Kahn LB, Lange F, Wiczer D (2022) Where have all the workers gone? Recalls, retirements, and reallocation in the COVID recovery. Labour Econ 78:102251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2022.102251

Fossen FM, Sorgner A (2022) New digital technologies and heterogeneous wage and employment dynamics in the United States: Evidence from individual-level data. Technol Forecast Soc Change 175:121381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121381

Frey CB, Osborne MA (2017) The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technol Forecast Soc Change 114:254–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019

Gardberg M, Heyman F, Norbäck P, Persson L (2020) Digitization-based automation and occupational dynamics. Econ Lett 189:109032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2020.109032

Ge P, Zhao Z (2023) The rise of robots and employment change: 2009–2017. J Renmin Univ China 37(1):102–115

Graf H, Mohamed H (2024) Robotization and employment dynamics in German manufacturing value chains. Struct Change Economic Dyn 68:133–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2023.10.014

Han J, Yan X, Wei N (2022) Study on regional differences of the impact of artificial intelligence on China’s employment skill structure. Northwest Popul J 43(3):45–57. https://doi.org/10.15884/j.cnki.issn.1007-0672.2022.03.004

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Huang M, Rust RT (2018) Artificial intelligence in service. J Serv Res 21(2):155–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670517752459

Jiang T (2022) Mediating effects and moderating effects in causal inference. China Ind Econ 410(5):100–120. https://doi.org/10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2022.05.005

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Jin X, Ma B, Zhang H (2023) Impact of fast internet access on employment: Evidence from a broadband expansion in China. China Econ Rev 81:102038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2023.102038

Jetha A, Bonaccio S, Shamaee A, Banks CG, Bültmann U, Smith PM et al. (2023) Divided in a digital economy: Understanding disability employment inequities stemming from the application of advanced workplace technologies. SSM - Qual Res Health 3:100293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmqr.2023.100293

Josifidis K, Supic N (2018) Income polarization of the US working class: An institutionalist view. J Econ Issues 52(2):498–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2018.1469929

Kirov V, Malamin B (2022) Are translators afraid of artificial intelligence? Societies 12(2):70. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12020070

Kolade O, Owoseni A (2022) Employment 5.0: The work of the future and the future of work. Technol Soc 71:102086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102086

Li L, Mo Y, Zhou G (2022) Platform economy and China’ s labor market: structural transformation and policy challenges. China Econ J 15(2):139–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538963.2022.2067685

Li Q, Zhang R (2022) Study on the challenges and countermeasures of coordinated development of quantity and quality of employment under the new technology-economy paradigm. J Xiangtan Univ(Philos Soc Sci) 46(5):42–45+58. https://doi.org/10.13715/j.cnki.jxupss.2022.05.019

Li Z, Hong Y, Zhang Z (2021) The empowering and competition effects of the platform-based sharing economy on the supply and demand sides of the labor market. J Manag Inf Syst 38(1):140–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2021.1870387

Liu L (2018) Occupational therapy in the fourth industrial revolution. Can J Occup Ther 85(4):272–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008417418815179

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Liu N, Gu X, Lei CK (2022) The equilibrium effects of digital technology on banking, production, and employment. Financ Res Lett 49:103196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103196

Liu Y, Peng J (2023) The impact of “AI unemployment” on contemporary youth and its countermeasures. Youth Exploration 241(1):43–51. https://doi.org/10.13583/j.cnki.issn1004-3780.2023.01.004

Lu J, Xiao Q, Wang T (2023) Does the digital economy generate a gender dividend for female employment? Evidence from China. Telecommun Policy 47(6):102545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2023.102545

Luo J, Zhuo W, Xu B (2023). The bigger, the better? Optimal NGO size of human resources and governance quality of entrepreneurship in circular economy. Management Decision ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2023-0325

Männasoo K, Pareliussen JK, Saia A (2023) Digital capacity and employment outcomes: Microdata evidence from pre- and post-COVID-19 Europe. Telemat Inform 83:102024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2023.102024

Michau JB (2013) Creative destruction with on-the-job search. Rev Econ Dyn 16(4):691–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2012.10.011

Morgan J (2019) Will we work in twenty-first century capitalism? A critique of the fourth industrial revolution literature. Econ Soc 48(3):371–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2019.1620027

Nam T (2019) Technology usage, expected job sustainability, and perceived job insecurity. Technol Forecast Soc Change 138:155–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.08.017

Ndubuisi G, Otioma C, Tetteh GK (2021) Digital infrastructure and employment in services: Evidence from Sub-Saharan African countries. Telecommun Policy 45(8):102153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102153

Ni B, Obashi A (2021) Robotics technology and firm-level employment adjustment in Japan. Jpn World Econ 57:101054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2021.101054

Nikitas A, Vitel AE, Cotet C (2021) Autonomous vehicles and employment: An urban futures revolution or catastrophe? Cities 114:103203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103203

Novella R, Rosas-Shady D, Alvarado A (2023) Are we nearly there yet? New technology adoption and labor demand in Peru. Sci Public Policy 50(4):565–578. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad007

Oschinski A, Wyonch R (2017). Future shock?: the impact of automation on Canada’s labour market.C.D. Howe Institute Commentary working paper

Polak P (2021) Welcome to the digital era—the impact of AI on business and society. Society 58:177–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-021-00588-6

Rakowski R, Polak P, Kowalikova P (2021) Ethical aspects of the impact of AI: the status of humans in the era of artificial intelligence. Society 58:196–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-021-00586-8

Ramos ME, Garza-Rodríguez J, Gibaja-Romero DE (2022) Automation of employment in the presence of industry 4.0: The case of Mexico. Technol Soc 68:101837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101837

Reljic J, Evangelista R, Pianta M (2021). Digital technologies, employment, and skills. Industrial and Corporate Change dtab059. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtab059

Schultz DE (1998) The death of distance—How the communications revolution will change our lives. Int Mark Rev 15(4):309–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/imr.1998.15.4.309.1

Sharma C, Mishra RK (2023) Imports, technology, and employment: Job creation or creative destruction. Manag Decis Econ 44(1):152–170. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3671

Shen Y, Yang Z (2023) Chasing green: The synergistic effect of industrial intelligence on pollution control and carbon reduction and its mechanisms. Sustainability 15(8):6401. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086401

Spencer DA (2023) Technology and work: Past lessons and future directions. Technol Soc 74:102294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102294

Sun W, Liu Y (2023) Research on the influence mechanism of artificial intelligence on labor market. East China Econ Manag 37(3):1–9. https://doi.org/10.19629/j.cnki.34-1014/f.220706008

Tan H, Xia C (2022) Digital trade reshapes the theory and model of industrial agglomeration — From geographic agglomeration to online agglomeration. Res Financial Econ Issues 443(6):43–52. https://doi.org/10.19654/j.cnki.cjwtyj.2022.06.004

Tang J, Yang J (2014) Research on the economic impact of the hidden subsidy of sales price and reform. China Ind Econ 321(12):5–17. https://doi.org/10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2014.12.001

Tschang FT, Almirall E (2021) Artificial intelligence as augmenting automation: Implications for employment. Acad Manag Perspect 35(4):642–659. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2019.0062

Wang PX, Kim S, Kim M (2023) Robot anthropomorphism and job insecurity: The role of social comparison. J Bus Res 164:114003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114003

Wang L, Hu S, Dong Z (2022) Artificial intelligence technology, Task attribute and occupational substitutable risk: Empirical evidence from the micro-level. J Manag World 38(7):60–79. https://doi.org/10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2022.0094

Wang R, Liang Q, Li G (2018) Virtual agglomeration: a new form of spatial organization with the deep integration of new generation information technology and real economy. J Manag World 34(2):13–21. https://doi.org/10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2018.02.002

Wang X, Zhu X, Wang Y (2022) TheImpactofRobotApplicationonManufacturingEmployment. J Quant Technol Econ 39(4):88–106. https://doi.org/10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.2022.04.002

Wang Y, Zhang Y (2022) Dual employment effect of digital economy and higher quality employment development. Expanding Horiz 231(3):43–50

Wang Y, Zhang Y, Liu J (2022) Digital finance and carbon emissions: an empirical test based on micro data and machine learning model. China Popul,Resour Environ 32(6):1–11

Wen J, Liu Y (2021) Uncertainty of new employment form: Digital labor in platform capital space and the reflection on it. J Zhejiang Gongshang Univ 171(6):92–106. https://doi.org/10.14134/j.cnki.cn33-1337/c.2021.06.009

Wong SI, Fieseler C, Kost D (2020) Digital labourers’ proactivity and the venture for meaningful work: Fruitful or fruitless? J-of-Occup-and-Organ-Psychol 93(4):887–911. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12317

Wu B, Yang W (2022) Empirical test of the impact of the digital economy on China’s employment structure. Financ Res Lett 49:103047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103047

Wu Q (2023) Sustainable growth through industrial robot diffusion: Quasi-experimental evidence from a Bartik shift-share design. Economics of Transition and Institutional Change Early Access https://doi.org/10.1111/ecot.12367

Xie M, Dong L, Xia Y, Guo J, Pan J, Wang H (2022) Does artificial intelligence affect the pattern of skill demand? Evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms. Econ Model 96:295–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2021.01.009

Yan X, Zhu K, Ma C (2020) Employment under robot Impact: Evidence from China manufacturing. Stat Res 37(1):74–87. https://doi.org/10.19343/j.cnki.11-1302/c.2020.01.006

Yang CH (2022) How artificial intelligence technology affects productivity and employment: Firm-level evidence from Taiwan. Res Policy 51(6):104536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104536

Yang Z, Shen Y (2023) The impact of intelligent manufacturing on industrial green total factor productivity and its multiple mechanisms. Front Environ Sci 10:1058664. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1058664

Yoon C (2023) Technology adoption and jobs: The effects of self-service kiosks in restaurants on labor outcomes. Technol Soc 74:102336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102336

Yu L, Liu Y (2017) Consumers’ welfare in China’s electric power industry competition. Res Econ Manag 38(8):55–64. https://doi.org/10.13502/j.cnki.issn1000-7636.2017.08.006

Zhang Q, Zhang F, Mai Q (2023) Robot adoption and labor demand: A new interpretation from external competition. Technol Soc 74:102310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102310

Zhang Y, Li X (2022) The new digital infrastructure, gig employment and spatial spillover effect. China Bus Mark 36(11):103–117. https://doi.org/10.14089/j.cnki.cn11-3664/f.2022.11.010

Article   MathSciNet   CAS   Google Scholar  

Zhang Z (2023a) The impact of the artificial intelligence industry on the number and structure of employments in the digital economy environment. Technol Forecast Soc Change 197:122881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122881

Zhao L, Zhao X (2017) Is AI endangering human job opportunities?—From a perspective of marxism. J Hebei Univ Econ Bus 38(6):17–22. https://doi.org/10.14178/j.cnki.issn1007-2101.2017.06.004

Zhou S, Chen B (2022) Robots and industrial employment: Based on the perspective of subtask model. Stat Decis 38(23):85–89. https://doi.org/10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2022.23.016

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was financially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Fujian Province (Grant No. 2022J01320).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Quantitative Economics, Huaqiao University, Xiamen, 361021, China

Yang Shen & Xiuwu Zhang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

YS: Data analysis, Writing – original draft, Software, Methodology, Formal analysis; XZ: Data collection; Supervision, Project administration, Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition. All authors substantially contributed to the article and accepted the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yang Shen .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies featuring human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

This study does not contain any study with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shen, Y., Zhang, X. The impact of artificial intelligence on employment: the role of virtual agglomeration. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 , 122 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02647-9

Download citation

Received : 23 August 2023

Accepted : 09 January 2024

Published : 18 January 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02647-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Suggested Searches

• Climate Change
• Expedition 64
• Mars perseverance
• SpaceX Crew-2
• International Space Station
• View All Topics A-Z

Humans in Space

Earth & climate, the solar system, the universe, aeronautics, learning resources, news & events.

Welcome Back to Planet Earth, Expedition 70 Crew! 

NASA “Wildfire Digital Twin” Pioneers New AI Models and Streaming Data Techniques for Forecasting Fire and Smoke

NASA Study Provides New Look at Orbital Debris, Potential Solutions 

• Search All NASA Missions
• A to Z List of Missions
• Upcoming Launches and Landings
• Spaceships and Rockets
• Communicating with Missions
• James Webb Space Telescope
• Hubble Space Telescope
• Why Go to Space
• Astronauts Home
• Commercial Space
• Destinations
• Living in Space
• Explore Earth Science
• Earth, Our Planet
• Earth Science in Action
• Earth Multimedia
• Earth Science Researchers
• Pluto & Dwarf Planets
• Asteroids, Comets & Meteors
• The Kuiper Belt
• The Oort Cloud
• Skywatching
• The Search for Life in the Universe
• Black Holes
• The Big Bang
• Dark Energy & Dark Matter
• Earth Science
• Planetary Science
• Astrophysics & Space Science
• The Sun & Heliophysics
• Biological & Physical Sciences
• Lunar Science
• Citizen Science
• Astromaterials
• Aeronautics Research
• Human Space Travel Research
• Science in the Air
• NASA Aircraft
• Flight Innovation
• Supersonic Flight
• Air Traffic Solutions
• Green Aviation Tech
• Drones & You
• Technology Transfer & Spinoffs
• Space Travel Technology
• Technology Living in Space
• Manufacturing and Materials
• Science Instruments
• For Kids and Students
• For Educators
• For Colleges and Universities
• For Professionals
• Science for Everyone
• Requests for Exhibits, Artifacts, or Speakers
• STEM Engagement at NASA
• NASA's Impacts
• Centers and Facilities
• Directorates
• Organizations
• People of NASA
• Internships
• Our History
• Doing Business with NASA
• Get Involved
• Aeronáutica
• Ciencias Terrestres
• Sistema Solar
• All NASA News
• Video Series on NASA+
• Newsletters
• Social Media
• Media Resources
• Upcoming Launches & Landings
• Virtual Events
• Sounds and Ringtones
• Interactives
• STEM Multimedia

NASA’s Psyche Fires Up Its Sci-Fi-Worthy Thrusters

Discovery Alert: Mini-Neptune in Double Star System is a Planetary Puzzle

NASA Tool Gets Ready to Image Faraway Planets

Astronaut Exercise

Eleasa Kim: Pioneering CLDP Payload Operations and Cultural Integration

NASA, IBM Research to Release New AI Model for Weather, Climate

5 Things to Know About NASA’s Tiny Twin Polar Satellites

NASA’s Juno Provides High-Definition Views of Europa’s Icy Shell

The Next Full Moon is the Flower, Corn, or Corn Planting Moon

Webb Cracks Case of Inflated Exoplanet

NASA, Industry to Start Designing More Sustainable Jet Engine Core

Aviary: A New NASA Software Platform for Aircraft Modelling

NASA’s X-59 Passes Milestone Toward Safe First Flight 

NASA’s Compact Infrared Cameras Enable New Science

Tech Today: From Spacesuits to Racing Suits

NASA Around the World: Interns Teach Virtual Lessons in Kenya

Kan Yang: Translating Science Ideas into Engineering Concepts

Aurorasaurus Roars During Historic Solar Storm

Johnson Celebrates AA and NHPI Heritage Month: Anima Patil-Sabale

Diez maneras en que los estudiantes pueden prepararse para ser astronautas

Astronauta de la NASA Marcos Berríos

Resultados científicos revolucionarios en la estación espacial de 2023

What is artificial intelligence.

Defining Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence refers to computer systems that can perform complex tasks normally done by human-reasoning, decision making, creating, etc. 

There is no single, simple definition of artificial intelligence because AI tools are capable of a wide range of tasks and outputs, but NASA follows the definition of AI found within EO 13960 , which references Section 238(g) of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019. 

• Any artificial system that performs tasks under varying and unpredictable circumstances without significant human oversight, or that can learn from experience and improve performance when exposed to data sets. 
• An artificial system developed in computer software, physical hardware, or other context that solves tasks requiring human-like perception, cognition, planning, learning, communication, or physical action. 
• An artificial system designed to think or act like a human, including cognitive architectures and neural networks. 
• A set of techniques, including machine learning that is designed to approximate a cognitive task. 
• An artificial system designed to act rationally, including an intelligent software agent or embodied robot that achieves goals using perception, planning, reasoning, learning, communicating, decision-making, and acting. 

How Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Deep Learning Fit Together

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (ML): 

AI tools used at NASA sometimes use machine learning, which uses data and algorithms to train computers to make classifications, generate predictions, or uncover similarities or trends across large datasets.

Some common methods used at NASA include: 

Decision Support

Complex processes require tools to consider imperfect or unknown situations. This method of artificial intelligence considers multiple outcomes and probabilities to inform decisions. 

Deep learning

A subset of machine learning that involves neural networks with many layers. It distinguishes itself from other forms of neural networks primarily through its capability to learn features automatically from data. 

Natural language processing

A subset of machine learning that trains computers to understand, interpret, and manipulate human language. 

Neural networks

A method to train computers to process data in a way that’s inspired by the human brain, using a layered, interconnected neuron-inspired structure.