School of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences

Subterms

    Latest story

    150 Shares199 Views

    Fotini Christia named director of the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society

    by

    Fotini Christia, the Ford International Professor of Social Sciences in the Department of Political Science, has been named the new director of the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS), effective July 1.“Fotini is well-positioned to guide IDSS into the next chapter. With her tenure as the director of the Sociotechnical Systems Research Center and as an associate director of IDSS since 2020, she has actively forged connections between the social sciences, data science, and computation,” says Daniel Huttenlocher, dean of the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing and the Henry Ellis Warren Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. “I eagerly anticipate the ways in which she will advance and champion IDSS in alignment with the spirit and mission of the Schwarzman College of Computing.”“Fotini’s profound expertise as a social scientist and her adept use of data science, computational tools, and novel methodologies to grasp the dynamics of societal evolution across diverse fields, makes her a natural fit to lead IDSS,” says Asu Ozdaglar, deputy dean of the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing and head of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.Christia’s research has focused on issues of conflict and cooperation in the Muslim world, for which she has conducted fieldwork in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Iraq, the Palestinian Territories, and Yemen, among others. More recently, her research has been directed at examining how to effectively integrate artificial intelligence tools in public policy.She was appointed the director of the Sociotechnical Systems Research Center (SSRC) and an associate director of IDSS in October 2020. SSRC, an interdisciplinary center housed within IDSS in the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing, focuses on the study of high-impact, complex societal challenges that shape our world.As part of IDSS, she is co-organizer of a cross-disciplinary research effort, the Initiative on Combatting Systemic Racism. Bringing together faculty and researchers from all of MIT’s five schools and the college, the initiative builds on extensive social science literature on systemic racism and uses big data to develop and harness computational tools that can help effect structural and normative change toward racial equity across housing, health care, policing, and social media. Christia is also chair of IDSS’s doctoral program in Social and Engineering Systems.Christia is the author of “Alliance Formation in Civil War” (Cambridge University Press, 2012), which was awarded the Luebbert Award for Best Book in Comparative Politics, the Lepgold Prize for Best Book in International Relations, and a Distinguished Book Award from the International Studies Association. She is co-editor with Graeme Blair (University of California, Los Angeles) and Jeremy Weinstein (incoming dean at Harvard Kennedy School) of “Crime, Insecurity, and Community Policing: Experiments on Building Trust,” forthcoming in August 2024 with Cambridge University Press.Her research has also appeared in Science, Nature Human Behavior, Review of Economic Studies, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, NeurIPs, Communications Medicine, IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, American Political Science Review, and Annual Review of Political Science, among other journals. Her opinion pieces have been published in Foreign Affairs, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe, among other outlets.A native of Greece, where she grew up in the port city of Salonika, Christia moved to the United States to attend college at Columbia University. She graduated magna cum laude in 2001 with a joint BA in economics–operations research and an MA in international affairs. She joined the MIT faculty in 2008 after receiving her PhD in public policy from Harvard University.Christia succeeds Noelle Selin, a professor in IDSS and the Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences. Selin has led IDSS as interim director for the 2023-24 academic year since July 2023, following Professor Martin Wainwright.“I am incredibly grateful to Noelle for serving as interim director this year. Her contributions in this role, as well as her time leading the Technology and Policy Program, have been invaluable. I’m delighted she will remain part of the IDSS community as a faculty member,” says Huttenlocher. More

    More stories

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      A data-driven approach to making better choices

      by

      Imagine a world in which some important decision — a judge’s sentencing recommendation, a child’s treatment protocol, which person or business should receive a loan — was made more reliable because a well-designed algorithm helped a key decision-maker arrive at a better choice. A new MIT economics course is investigating these interesting possibilities.Class 14.163 (Algorithms and Behavioral Science) is a new cross-disciplinary course focused on behavioral economics, which studies the cognitive capacities and limitations of human beings. The course was co-taught this past spring by assistant professor of economics Ashesh Rambachan and visiting lecturer Sendhil Mullainathan.Rambachan studies the economic applications of machine learning, focusing on algorithmic tools that drive decision-making in the criminal justice system and consumer lending markets. He also develops methods for determining causation using cross-sectional and dynamic data.Mullainathan will soon join the MIT departments of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and Economics as a professor. His research uses machine learning to understand complex problems in human behavior, social policy, and medicine. Mullainathan co-founded the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) in 2003.The new course’s goals are both scientific (to understand people) and policy-driven (to improve society by improving decisions). Rambachan believes that machine-learning algorithms provide new tools for both the scientific and applied goals of behavioral economics.“The course investigates the deployment of computer science, artificial intelligence (AI), economics, and machine learning in service of improved outcomes and reduced instances of bias in decision-making,” Rambachan says.There are opportunities, Rambachan believes, for constantly evolving digital tools like AI, machine learning, and large language models (LLMs) to help reshape everything from discriminatory practices in criminal sentencing to health-care outcomes among underserved populations.Students learn how to use machine learning tools with three main objectives: to understand what they do and how they do it, to formalize behavioral economics insights so they compose well within machine learning tools, and to understand areas and topics where the integration of behavioral economics and algorithmic tools might be most fruitful.Students also produce ideas, develop associated research, and see the bigger picture. They’re led to understand where an insight fits and see where the broader research agenda is leading. Participants can think critically about what supervised LLMs can (and cannot) do, to understand how to integrate those capacities with the models and insights of behavioral economics, and to recognize the most fruitful areas for the application of what investigations uncover.The dangers of subjectivity and biasAccording to Rambachan, behavioral economics acknowledges that biases and mistakes exist throughout our choices, even absent algorithms. “The data used by our algorithms exist outside computer science and machine learning, and instead are often produced by people,” he continues. “Understanding behavioral economics is therefore essential to understanding the effects of algorithms and how to better build them.”Rambachan sought to make the course accessible regardless of attendees’ academic backgrounds. The class included advanced degree students from a variety of disciplines.By offering students a cross-disciplinary, data-driven approach to investigating and discovering ways in which algorithms might improve problem-solving and decision-making, Rambachan hopes to build a foundation on which to redesign existing systems of jurisprudence, health care, consumer lending, and industry, to name a few areas.“Understanding how data are generated can help us understand bias,” Rambachan says. “We can ask questions about producing a better outcome than what currently exists.”Useful tools for re-imagining social operationsEconomics doctoral student Jimmy Lin was skeptical about the claims Rambachan and Mullainathan made when the class began, but changed his mind as the course continued.“Ashesh and Sendhil started with two provocative claims: The future of behavioral science research will not exist without AI, and the future of AI research will not exist without behavioral science,” Lin says. “Over the course of the semester, they deepened my understanding of both fields and walked us through numerous examples of how economics informed AI research and vice versa.”Lin, who’d previously done research in computational biology, praised the instructors’ emphasis on the importance of a “producer mindset,” thinking about the next decade of research rather than the previous decade. “That’s especially important in an area as interdisciplinary and fast-moving as the intersection of AI and economics — there isn’t an old established literature, so you’re forced to ask new questions, invent new methods, and create new bridges,” he says.The speed of change to which Lin alludes is a draw for him, too. “We’re seeing black-box AI methods facilitate breakthroughs in math, biology, physics, and other scientific disciplines,” Lin  says. “AI can change the way we approach intellectual discovery as researchers.”An interdisciplinary future for economics and social systemsStudying traditional economic tools and enhancing their value with AI may yield game-changing shifts in how institutions and organizations teach and empower leaders to make choices.“We’re learning to track shifts, to adjust frameworks and better understand how to deploy tools in service of a common language,” Rambachan says. “We must continually interrogate the intersection of human judgment, algorithms, AI, machine learning, and LLMs.”Lin enthusiastically recommended the course regardless of students’ backgrounds. “Anyone broadly interested in algorithms in society, applications of AI across academic disciplines, or AI as a paradigm for scientific discovery should take this class,” he says. “Every lecture felt like a goldmine of perspectives on research, novel application areas, and inspiration on how to produce new, exciting ideas.”The course, Rambachan says, argues that better-built algorithms can improve decision-making across disciplines. “By building connections between economics, computer science, and machine learning, perhaps we can automate the best of human choices to improve outcomes while minimizing or eliminating the worst,” he says.Lin remains excited about the course’s as-yet unexplored possibilities. “It’s a class that makes you excited about the future of research and your own role in it,” he says. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Q&A: Exploring ethnic dynamics and climate change in Africa

      by

      Evan Lieberman is the Total Professor of Political Science and Contemporary Africa at MIT, and is also director of the Center for International Studies. During a semester-long sabbatical, he’s currently based at the African Climate and Development Initiative at the University of Cape Town.In this Q&A, Lieberman discusses several climate-related research projects he’s pursuing in South Africa and surrounding countries. This is part of an ongoing series exploring how the School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences is addressing the climate crisis.Q: South Africa is a nation whose political and economic development you have long studied and written about. Do you see this visit as an extension of the kind of research you have been pursuing, or a departure from it?A: Much of my previous work has been animated by the question of understanding the causes and consequences of group-based disparities, whether due to AIDS or Covid. These are problems that know no geographic boundaries, and where ethnic and racial minorities are often hardest hit. Climate change is an analogous problem, with these minority populations living in places where they are most vulnerable, in heat islands in cities, and in coastal areas where they are not protected. The reality is they might get hit much harder by longer-term trends and immediate shocks.In one line of research, I seek to understand how people in different African countries, in different ethnic groups, perceive the problems of climate change and their governments’ response to it. There are ethnic divisions of labor in terms of what people do — whether they are farmers or pastoralists, or live in cities. So some ethnic groups are simply more affected by drought or extreme weather than others, and this can be a basis for conflict, especially when competing for often limited government resources.In this area, just like in my previous research, learning what shapes ordinary citizen perspectives is really important, because these views affect people’s everyday practices, and the extent to which they support certain kinds of policies and investments their government makes in response to climate-related challenges. But I will also try to learn more about the perspectives of policymakers and various development partners who seek to balance climate-related challenges against a host of other problems and priorities.Q: You recently published “Until We Have Won Our Liberty,” which examines the difficult transition of South Africa from apartheid to a democratic government, scrutinizing in particular whether the quality of life for citizens has improved in terms of housing, employment, discrimination, and ethnic conflicts. How do climate change-linked issues fit into your scholarship?A: I never saw myself as a climate researcher, but a number of years ago, heavily influenced by what I was learning at MIT, I began to recognize more and more how important the issue of climate change is. And I realized there were lots of ways in which the climate problem resonated with other kinds of problems I had tackled in earlier parts of my work.There was once a time when climate and the environment was the purview primarily of white progressives: the “tree huggers.” And that’s really changed in recent decades as it has become evident that the people who’ve been most affected by the climate emergency are ethnic and racial minorities. We saw with Hurricane Katrina and other places [that] if you are Black, you’re more likely to live in a vulnerable area and to just generally experience more environmental harms, from pollution and emissions, leaving these communities much less resilient than white communities. Government has largely not addressed this inequity. When you look at American survey data in terms of who’s concerned about climate change, Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans are more unified in their worries than are white Americans.There are analogous problems in Africa, my career research focus. Governments there have long responded in different ways to different ethnic groups. The research I am starting looks at the extent to which there are disparities in how governments try to solve climate-related challenges.Q: It’s difficult enough in the United States taking the measure of different groups’ perceptions of the impact of climate change and government’s effectiveness in contending with it. How do you go about this in Africa?A: Surprisingly, there’s only been a little bit of work done so far on how ordinary African citizens, who are ostensibly being hit the hardest in the world by the climate emergency, are thinking about this problem. Climate change has not been politicized there in a very big way. In fact, only 50 percent of Africans in one poll had heard of the term.In one of my new projects, with political science faculty colleague Devin Caughey and political science doctoral student Preston Johnston, we are analyzing social and climate survey data [generated by the Afrobarometer research network] from over 30 African countries to understand within and across countries the ways in which ethnic identities structure people’s perception of the climate crisis, and their beliefs in what government ought to be doing. In largely agricultural African societies, people routinely experience drought, extreme rain, and heat. They also lack the infrastructure that can shield them from the intense variability of weather patterns. But we’re adding a lens, which is looking at sources of inequality, especially ethnic differences.I will also be investigating specific sectors. Africa is a continent where in most places people cannot take for granted universal, piped access to clean water. In Cape Town, several years ago, the combination of failure to replace infrastructure and lack of rain caused such extreme conditions that one of the world’s most important cities almost ran out of water.While these studies are in progress, it is clear that in many countries, there are substantively large differences in perceptions of the severity of climate change, and attitudes about who should be doing what, and who’s capable of doing what. In several countries, both perceptions and policy preferences are differentiated along ethnic lines, more so than with respect to generational or class differences within societies.This is interesting as a phenomenon, but substantively, I think it’s important in that it may provide the basis for how politicians and government actors decide to move on allocating resources and implementing climate-protection policies. We see this kind of political calculation in the U.S. and we shouldn’t be surprised that it happens in Africa as well.That’s ultimately one of the challenges from the perch of MIT, where we’re really interested in understanding climate change, and creating technological tools and policies for mitigating the problem or adapting to it. The reality is frustrating. The political world — those who make decisions about whether to acknowledge the problem and whether to implement resources in the best technical way — are playing a whole other game. That game is about rewarding key supporters and being reelected.Q: So how do you go from measuring perceptions and beliefs among citizens about climate change and government responsiveness to those problems, to policies and actions that might actually reduce disparities in the way climate-vulnerable African groups receive support?A: Some of the work I have been doing involves understanding what local and national governments across Africa are actually doing to address these problems. We will have to drill down into government budgets to determine the actual resources devoted to addressing a challenge, what sorts of practices the government follows, and the political ramifications for governments that act aggressively versus those that don’t. With the Cape Town water crisis, for example, the government dramatically changed residents’ water usage through naming and shaming, and transformed institutional practices of water collection. They made it through a major drought by using much less water, and doing it with greater energy efficiency. Through the government’s strong policy and implementation, and citizens’ active responses, an entire city, with all its disparate groups, gained resilience. Maybe we can highlight creative solutions to major climate-related problems and use them as prods to push more effective policies and solutions in other places.In the MIT Global Diversity Lab, along with political science faculty colleague Volha Charnysh, political science doctoral student Jared Kalow, and Institute for Data, Systems and Society doctoral student Erin Walk, we are exploring American perspectives on climate-related foreign aid, asking survey respondents whether the U.S. should be giving more to people in the global South who didn’t cause the problems of climate change but have to suffer the externalities. We are particularly interested in whether people’s desire to help vulnerable communities rests on the racial or national identity of those communities.From my new seat as director of the Center for International Studies (CIS), I hope to do more and more to connect social science findings to relevant policymakers, whether in the U.S. or in other places. CIS is making climate one of our thematic priority areas, directing hundreds of thousands of dollars for MIT faculty to spark climate collaborations with researchers worldwide through the Global Seed Fund program. COP 28 (the U.N. Climate Change Conference), which I attended in December in Dubai, really drove home the importance of people coming together from around the world to exchange ideas and form networks. It was unbelievably large, with 85,000 people. But so many of us shared the belief that we are not doing enough. We need enforceable global solutions and innovation. We need ways of financing. We need to provide opportunities for journalists to broadcast the importance of this problem. And we need to understand the incentives that different actors have and what sorts of messages and strategies will resonate with them, and inspire those who have resources to be more generous. More

    • 38 Shares129 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Characterizing social networks

      by

      People tend to connect with others who are like them. Alumni from the same alma mater are more likely to collaborate over a research project together, or individuals with the same political beliefs are more likely to join the same political parties, attend rallies, and engage in online discussions. This sociology concept, called homophily, has been observed in many network science studies. But if like-minded individuals cluster in online and offline spaces to reinforce each other’s ideas and form synergies, what does that mean for society?

      Researchers at MIT wanted to investigate homophily further to understand how groups of three or more interact in complex societal settings. Prior research on understanding homophily has studied relationships between pairs of people. For example, when two members of Congress co-sponsor a bill, they are likely to be from the same political party.

      However, less is known about whether group interactions between three or more people are likely to occur between similar individuals. If three members of Congress co-sponsor a bill together, are all three likely to be members of the same party, or would we expect more bipartisanship? When the researchers tried to extend traditional methods to measure homophily in these larger group interactions, they found the results can be misleading.

      “We found that homophily observed in pairs, or one-to-one interactions, can make it seem like there’s more homophily in larger groups than there really is,” says Arnab Sarker, graduate student in the Institute for Data, Systems and Society (IDSS) and lead author of the study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “The previous measure didn’t account for the way in which two people already know each other in friendship settings,” he adds.

      To address this issue, Sarker, along with co-authors Natalie Northrup ’22 and Ali Jadbabaie, the JR East Professor of Engineering, head of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and core faculty member of IDSS, developed a new way of measuring homophily. Borrowing tools from algebraic topology, a subfield in mathematics typically applied in physics, they developed a new measure to understand whether homophily occurred in group interactions.

      The new measure, called simplicial homophily, separates the homophily seen in one-on-one interactions from those in larger group interactions and is based on the mathematical concept of a simplicial complex. The researchers tested this new measure with real-world data from 16 different datasets and found that simplicial homophily provides more accurate insights into how similar things interact in larger groups. Interestingly, the new measure can better identify instances where there is a lack of similarity in larger group interactions, thus rectifying a weakness observed in the previous measure.

      One such example of this instance was demonstrated in the dataset from the global hotel booking website, Trivago. They found that when travelers are looking at two hotels in one session, they often pick hotels that are close to one another geographically. But when they look at more than two hotels in one session, they are more likely to be searching for hotels that are farther apart from one another (for example, if they are taking a vacation with multiple stops). The new method showed “anti-homophily” — instead of similar hotels being chosen together, different hotels were chosen together.

      “Our measure controls for pairwise connections and is suggesting that there’s more diversity in the hotels that people are looking for as group size increases, which is an interesting economic result,” says Sarker.

      Additionally, they discovered that simplicial homophily can help identify when certain characteristics are important for predicting if groups will interact in the future. They found that when there’s a lot of similarity or a lot of difference between individuals who already interact in groups, then knowing individual characteristics can help predict their connection to each other in the future.

      Northrup was an undergraduate researcher on the project and worked with Sarker and Jadbabaie over three semesters before she graduated. The project gave her an opportunity to take some of the concepts she learned in the classroom and apply them.

      “Working on this project, I really dove into building out the higher-order network model, and understanding the network, the math, and being able to implement it at a large scale,” says Northrup, who was in the civil and environmental engineering systems track with a double major in economics.

      The new measure opens up opportunities to study complex group interactions in a broad range of network applications, from ecology to traffic and socioeconomics. One of the areas Sarker has interest in exploring is the group dynamics of people finding jobs through social networks. “Does higher-order homophily affect how people get information about jobs?” he asks.    

      Northrup adds that it could also be used to evaluate interventions or specific policies to connect people with job opportunities outside of their network. “You can even use it as a measurement to evaluate how effective that might be.”

      The research was supported through funding from a Vannevar Bush Fellowship from the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense and from the U.S. Army Research Office Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative. More

    • 100 Shares199 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Blueprint Labs launches a charter school research collaborative

      by

      Over the past 30 years, charter schools have emerged as a prominent yet debated public school option. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 7 percent of U.S. public school students were enrolled in charter schools in 2021, up from 4 percent in 2010. Amid this expansion, families and policymakers want to know more about charter school performance and its systemic impacts. While researchers have evaluated charter schools’ short-term effects on student outcomes, significant knowledge gaps still exist. 

      MIT Blueprint Labs aims to fill those gaps through its Charter School Research Collaborative, an initiative that brings together practitioners, policymakers, researchers, and funders to make research on charter schools more actionable, rigorous, and efficient. The collaborative will create infrastructure to streamline and fund high-quality, policy-relevant charter research. 

      Joshua Angrist, MIT Ford Professor of Economics and a Blueprint Labs co-founder and director, says that Blueprint Labs hopes “to increase [its] impact by working with a larger group of academic and practitioner partners.” A nonpartisan research lab, Blueprint’s mission is to produce the most rigorous evidence possible to inform policy and practice. Angrist notes, “The debate over charter schools is not always fact-driven. Our goal at the lab is to bring convincing evidence into these discussions.”

      Collaborative kickoff

      The collaborative launched with a two-day kickoff in November. Blueprint Labs welcomed researchers, practitioners, funders, and policymakers to MIT to lay the groundwork for the collaborative. Over 80 participants joined the event, including leaders of charter school organizations, researchers at top universities and institutes, and policymakers and advocates from a variety of organizations and education agencies. 

      Through a series of panels, presentations, and conversations, participants including Rhode Island Department of Education Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green, CEO of Noble Schools Constance Jones, former Knowledge is Power Program CEO Richard Barth, president and CEO of National Association of Charter School Authorizers Karega Rausch, and many others discussed critical topics in the charter school space. These conversations influenced the collaborative’s research agenda. 

      Several sessions also highlighted how to ensure that the research process includes diverse voices to generate actionable evidence. Panelists noted that researchers should be aware of the demands placed on practitioners and should carefully consider community contexts. In addition, collaborators should treat each other as equal partners. 

      Parag Pathak, the Class of 1922 Professor of Economics at MIT and a Blueprint Labs co-founder and director, explained the kickoff’s aims. “One of our goals today is to begin to forge connections between [attendees]. We hope that [their] conversations are the launching point for future collaborations,” he stated. Pathak also shared the next steps for the collaborative: “Beginning next year, we’ll start investing in new research using the agenda [developed at this event] as our guide. We will also support new partnerships between researchers and practitioners.”

      Research agenda

      The discussions at the kickoff informed the collaborative’s research agenda. A recent paper summarizing existing lottery-based research on charter school effectiveness by Sarah Cohodes, an associate professor of public policy at the University of Michigan, and Susha Roy, an associate policy researcher at the RAND Corp., also guides the agenda. Their review finds that in randomized evaluations, many charter schools increase students’ academic achievement. However, researchers have not yet studied charter schools’ impacts on long-term, behavioral, or health outcomes in depth, and rigorous, lottery-based research is currently limited to a handful of urban centers. 

      The current research agenda focuses on seven topics:

      the long-term effects of charter schools;
      the effect of charters on non-test score outcomes;
      which charter school practices have the largest effect on performance;
      how charter performance varies across different contexts;
      how charter school effects vary with demographic characteristics and student background;
      how charter schools impact non-student outcomes, like teacher retention; and
      how system-level factors, such as authorizing practices, impact charter school performance.
      As diverse stakeholders’ priorities continue to shift and the collaborative progresses, the research agenda will continue to evolve.

      Information for interested partners

      Opportunities exist for charter leaders, policymakers, researchers, and funders to engage with the collaborative. Stakeholders can apply for funding, help shape the research agenda, and develop new research partnerships. A competitive funding process will open this month.

      Those interested in receiving updates on the collaborative can fill out this form. Please direct questions to chartercollab@mitblueprintlabs.org. More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Bridging the gap between preschool policy, practice, and research

      by

      Preschool in the United States has grown dramatically in the past several decades. From 1970 to 2018, preschool enrollment increased from 38 percent to 64 percent of eligible students. Fourteen states are currently discussing preschool expansion, with seven likely to pass some form of universal eligibility within the next calendar year. Amid this expansion, families, policymakers, and practitioners want to better understand preschools’ impacts and the factors driving preschool quality. 

      To address these and other questions, MIT Blueprint Labs recently held a Preschool Research Convening that brought researchers, funders, practitioners, and policymakers to Nashville, Tennessee, to discuss the future of preschool research. Parag Pathak, the Class of 1922 Professor of Economics at MIT and a Blueprint Labs co-founder and director, opened by sharing the goals of the convening: “Our goals for the next two days are to identify pressing, unanswered research questions and connect researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and funders. We also hope to craft a compelling research agenda.”

      Pathak added, “Given preschool expansion nationwide, we believe now is the moment to centralize our efforts and create knowledge to inform pressing decisions. We aim to generate rigorous preschool research that will lead to higher-quality and more equitable preschool.”

      Over 75 participants hailing from universities, early childhood education organizations, school districts, state education departments, and national policy organizations attended the convening, held Nov. 13-14. Through panels, presentations, and conversations, participants discussed essential subjects in the preschool space, built the foundations for valuable partnerships, and formed an actionable and inclusive research agenda.

      Research presented

      Among research works presented was a recent paper by Blueprint Labs affiliate Jesse Bruhn, an assistant professor of economics at Brown University and co-author Emily Emick, also of Brown, reviewing the state of lottery-based preschool research. They found that random evaluations from the past 60 years demonstrate that preschool improves children’s short-run academic outcomes, but those effects fade over time. However, positive impacts re-emerge in the long term through improved outcomes like high school graduation and college enrollment. Limited rigorous research studies children’s behavioral outcomes or the factors that lead to high-quality preschool, though trends from preliminary research suggest that full-day programs, language immersion programs, and specific curricula may benefit children.  

      An earlier Blueprint Labs study that was also presented at the convening is the only recent lottery-based study to provide insight on preschool’s long-term impacts. The work, conducted by Pathak and two others, reveals that enrolling in Boston Public Schools’ universal preschool program boosts children’s likelihood of graduating high school and enrolling in college. Yet, the preschool program had little detectable impact on elementary, middle, and high school state standardized test scores. Students who attended Boston preschool were less likely to be suspended or incarcerated in high school. However, research on preschool’s impacts on behavioral outcomes is limited; it remains an important area for further study. Future work could also fill in other gaps in research, such as access, alternative measures of student success, and variation across geographic contexts and student populations.

      More data sought

      State policy leaders also spoke at the event, including Lisa Roy, executive director of the Colorado Department of Early Childhood, and Sarah Neville-Morgan, deputy superintendent in the Opportunities for All Branch at the California Department of Education. Local practitioners, such as Elsa Holguín, president and CEO of the Denver Preschool Program, and Kristin Spanos, CEO of First 5 Alameda County, as well as national policy leaders including Lauren Hogan, managing director of policy and professional advancement at the National Association for the Education of Young Children, also shared their perspectives. 

      In panel discussions held throughout the kickoff, practitioners, policymakers, and researchers shared their perspectives on pressing questions for future research, including: What practices define high-quality preschool? How does preschool affect family systems and the workforce? How can we expand measures of effectiveness to move beyond traditional assessments? What can we learn from preschool’s differential impacts across time, settings, models, and geographies?

      Panelists also discussed the need for reliable data, sharing that “the absence of data allows the status quo to persist.” Several sessions focused on involving diverse stakeholders in the research process, highlighting the need for transparency, sensitivity to community contexts, and accessible communication about research findings.

      On the second day of the Preschool Research Convening, Pathak shared with attendees, “One of our goals… is to forge connections between all of you in this room and support new partnerships between researchers and practitioners. We hope your conversations are the launching pad for future collaborations.” Jason Sachs, the deputy director of early learning at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and former director of early childhood at Boston Public Schools, provided closing remarks.

      The convening laid the groundwork for a research agenda and new research partnerships that can help answer questions about what works, in what context, for which kids, and under which conditions. Answers to these questions will be fundamental to ensure preschool expands in the most evidence-informed and equitable way possible.

      With this goal in mind, Blueprint Labs aims to create a new Preschool Research Collaborative to equip practitioners, policymakers, funders, and researchers with rigorous, actionable evidence on preschool performance. Pathak states, “We hope this collaborative will foster evidence-based decision-making that improves children’s short- and long-term outcomes.” The connections and research agenda formed at the Preschool Research Convening are the first steps toward achieving that goal. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Co-creating climate futures with real-time data and spatial storytelling

      by

      Virtual story worlds and game engines aren’t just for video games anymore. They are now tools for scientists and storytellers to digitally twin existing physical spaces and then turn them into vessels to dream up speculative climate stories and build collective designs of the future. That’s the theory and practice behind the MIT WORLDING initiative.

      Twice this year, WORLDING matched world-class climate story teams working in XR (extended reality) with relevant labs and researchers across MIT. One global group returned for a virtual gathering online in partnership with Unity for Humanity, while another met for one weekend in person, hosted at the MIT Media Lab.

      “We are witnessing the birth of an emergent field that fuses climate science, urban planning, real-time 3D engines, nonfiction storytelling, and speculative fiction, and it is all fueled by the urgency of the climate crises,” says Katerina Cizek, lead designer of the WORLDING initiative at the Co-Creation Studio of MIT Open Documentary Lab. “Interdisciplinary teams are forming and blossoming around the planet to collectively imagine and tell stories of healthy, livable worlds in virtual 3D spaces and then finding direct ways to translate that back to earth, literally.”

      At this year’s virtual version of WORLDING, five multidisciplinary teams were selected from an open call. In a week-long series of research and development gatherings, the teams met with MIT scientists, staff, fellows, students, and graduates, as well as other leading figures in the field. Guests ranged from curators at film festivals such as Sundance and Venice, climate policy specialists, and award-winning media creators to software engineers and renowned Earth and atmosphere scientists. The teams heard from MIT scholars in diverse domains, including geomorphology, urban planning as acts of democracy, and climate researchers at MIT Media Lab.

      Mapping climate data

      “We are measuring the Earth’s environment in increasingly data-driven ways. Hundreds of terabytes of data are taken every day about our planet in order to study the Earth as a holistic system, so we can address key questions about global climate change,” explains Rachel Connolly, an MIT Media Lab research scientist focused in the “Future Worlds” research theme, in a talk to the group. “Why is this important for your work and storytelling in general? Having the capacity to understand and leverage this data is critical for those who wish to design for and successfully operate in the dynamic Earth environment.”

      Making sense of billions of data points was a key theme during this year’s sessions. In another talk, Taylor Perron, an MIT professor of Earth, atmospheric and planetary sciences, shared how his team uses computational modeling combined with many other scientific processes to better understand how geology, climate, and life intertwine to shape the surfaces of Earth and other planets. His work resonated with one WORLDING team in particular, one aiming to digitally reconstruct the pre-Hispanic Lake Texcoco — where current day Mexico City is now situated — as a way to contrast and examine the region’s current water crisis.

      Democratizing the future

      While WORLDING approaches rely on rigorous science and the interrogation of large datasets, they are also founded on democratizing community-led approaches.

      MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning graduate Lafayette Cruise MCP ’19 met with the teams to discuss how he moved his own practice as a trained urban planner to include a futurist component involving participatory methods. “I felt we were asking the same limited questions in regards to the future we were wanting to produce. We’re very limited, very constrained, as to whose values and comforts are being centered. There are so many possibilities for how the future could be.”

      Scaling to reach billions

      This work scales from the very local to massive global populations. Climate policymakers are concerned with reaching billions of people in the line of fire. “We have a goal to reach 1 billion people with climate resilience solutions,” says Nidhi Upadhyaya, deputy director at Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center. To get that reach, Upadhyaya is turning to games. “There are 3.3 billion-plus people playing video games across the world. Half of these players are women. This industry is worth $300 billion. Africa is currently among the fastest-growing gaming markets in the world, and 55 percent of the global players are in the Asia Pacific region.” She reminded the group that this conversation is about policy and how formats of mass communication can be used for policymaking, bringing about change, changing behavior, and creating empathy within audiences.

      Socially engaged game development is also connected to education at Unity Technologies, a game engine company. “We brought together our education and social impact work because we really see it as a critical flywheel for our business,” said Jessica Lindl, vice president and global head of social impact/education at Unity Technologies, in the opening talk of WORLDING. “We upscale about 900,000 students, in university and high school programs around the world, and about 800,000 adults who are actively learning and reskilling and upskilling in Unity. Ultimately resulting in our mission of the ‘world is a better place with more creators in it,’ millions of creators who reach billions of consumers — telling the world stories, and fostering a more inclusive, sustainable, and equitable world.”

      Access to these technologies is key, especially the hardware. “Accessibility has been missing in XR,” explains Reginé Gilbert, who studies and teaches accessibility and disability in user experience design at New York University. “XR is being used in artificial intelligence, assistive technology, business, retail, communications, education, empathy, entertainment, recreation, events, gaming, health, rehabilitation meetings, navigation, therapy, training, video programming, virtual assistance wayfinding, and so many other uses. This is a fun fact for folks: 97.8 percent of the world hasn’t tried VR [virtual reality] yet, actually.”

      Meanwhile, new hardware is on its way. The WORLDING group got early insights into the highly anticipated Apple Vision Pro headset, which promises to integrate many forms of XR and personal computing in one device. “They’re really pushing this kind of pass-through or mixed reality,” said Dan Miller, a Unity engineer on the poly spatial team, collaborating with Apple, who described the experience of the device as “You are viewing the real world. You’re pulling up windows, you’re interacting with content. It’s a kind of spatial computing device where you have multiple apps open, whether it’s your email client next to your messaging client with a 3D game in the middle. You’re interacting with all these things in the same space and at different times.”

      “WORLDING combines our passion for social-impact storytelling and incredible innovative storytelling,” said Paisley Smith of the Unity for Humanity Program at Unity Technologies. She added, “This is an opportunity for creators to incubate their game-changing projects and connect with experts across climate, story, and technology.”

      Meeting at MIT

      In a new in-person iteration of WORLDING this year, organizers collaborated closely with Connolly at the MIT Media Lab to co-design an in-person weekend conference Oct. 25 – Nov. 7 with 45 scholars and professionals who visualize climate data at NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, planetariums, and museums across the United States.

      A participant said of the event, “An incredible workshop that had had a profound effect on my understanding of climate data storytelling and how to combine different components together for a more [holistic] solution.”

      “With this gathering under our new Future Worlds banner,” says Dava Newman, director of the MIT Media Lab and Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics chair, “the Media Lab seeks to affect human behavior and help societies everywhere to improve life here on Earth and in worlds beyond, so that all — the sentient, natural, and cosmic — worlds may flourish.” 

      “WORLDING’s virtual-only component has been our biggest strength because it has enabled a true, international cohort to gather, build, and create together. But this year, an in-person version showed broader opportunities that spatial interactivity generates — informal Q&As, physical worksheets, and larger-scale ideation, all leading to deeper trust-building,” says WORLDING producer Srushti Kamat SM ’23.

      The future and potential of WORLDING lies in the ongoing dialogue between the virtual and physical, both in the work itself and in the format of the workshops. More

    • 63 Shares159 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Leveraging language to understand machines

      by

      Natural language conveys ideas, actions, information, and intent through context and syntax; further, there are volumes of it contained in databases. This makes it an excellent source of data to train machine-learning systems on. Two master’s of engineering students in the 6A MEng Thesis Program at MIT, Irene Terpstra ’23 and Rujul Gandhi ’22, are working with mentors in the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab to use this power of natural language to build AI systems.

      As computing is becoming more advanced, researchers are looking to improve the hardware that they run on; this means innovating to create new computer chips. And, since there is literature already available on modifications that can be made to achieve certain parameters and performance, Terpstra and her mentors and advisors Anantha Chandrakasan, MIT School of Engineering dean and the Vannevar Bush Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and IBM’s researcher Xin Zhang, are developing an AI algorithm that assists in chip design.

      “I’m creating a workflow to systematically analyze how these language models can help the circuit design process. What reasoning powers do they have, and how can it be integrated into the chip design process?” says Terpstra. “And then on the other side, if that proves to be useful enough, [we’ll] see if they can automatically design the chips themselves, attaching it to a reinforcement learning algorithm.”

      To do this, Terpstra’s team is creating an AI system that can iterate on different designs. It means experimenting with various pre-trained large language models (like ChatGPT, Llama 2, and Bard), using an open-source circuit simulator language called NGspice, which has the parameters of the chip in code form, and a reinforcement learning algorithm. With text prompts, researchers will be able to query how the physical chip should be modified to achieve a certain goal in the language model and produced guidance for adjustments. This is then transferred into a reinforcement learning algorithm that updates the circuit design and outputs new physical parameters of the chip.

      “The final goal would be to combine the reasoning powers and the knowledge base that is baked into these large language models and combine that with the optimization power of the reinforcement learning algorithms and have that design the chip itself,” says Terpstra.

      Rujul Gandhi works with the raw language itself. As an undergraduate at MIT, Gandhi explored linguistics and computer sciences, putting them together in her MEng work. “I’ve been interested in communication, both between just humans and between humans and computers,” Gandhi says.

      Robots or other interactive AI systems are one area where communication needs to be understood by both humans and machines. Researchers often write instructions for robots using formal logic. This helps ensure that commands are being followed safely and as intended, but formal logic can be difficult for users to understand, while natural language comes easily. To ensure this smooth communication, Gandhi and her advisors Yang Zhang of IBM and MIT assistant professor Chuchu Fan are building a parser that converts natural language instructions into a machine-friendly form. Leveraging the linguistic structure encoded by the pre-trained encoder-decoder model T5, and a dataset of annotated, basic English commands for performing certain tasks, Gandhi’s system identifies the smallest logical units, or atomic propositions, which are present in a given instruction.

      “Once you’ve given your instruction, the model identifies all the smaller sub-tasks you want it to carry out,” Gandhi says. “Then, using a large language model, each sub-task can be compared against the available actions and objects in the robot’s world, and if any sub-task can’t be carried out because a certain object is not recognized, or an action is not possible, the system can stop right there to ask the user for help.”

      This approach of breaking instructions into sub-tasks also allows her system to understand logical dependencies expressed in English, like, “do task X until event Y happens.” Gandhi uses a dataset of step-by-step instructions across robot task domains like navigation and manipulation, with a focus on household tasks. Using data that are written just the way humans would talk to each other has many advantages, she says, because it means a user can be more flexible about how they phrase their instructions.

      Another of Gandhi’s projects involves developing speech models. In the context of speech recognition, some languages are considered “low resource” since they might not have a lot of transcribed speech available, or might not have a written form at all. “One of the reasons I applied to this internship at the MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab was an interest in language processing for low-resource languages,” she says. “A lot of language models today are very data-driven, and when it’s not that easy to acquire all of that data, that’s when you need to use the limited data efficiently.” 

      Speech is just a stream of sound waves, but humans having a conversation can easily figure out where words and thoughts start and end. In speech processing, both humans and language models use their existing vocabulary to recognize word boundaries and understand the meaning. In low- or no-resource languages, a written vocabulary might not exist at all, so researchers can’t provide one to the model. Instead, the model can make note of what sound sequences occur together more frequently than others, and infer that those might be individual words or concepts. In Gandhi’s research group, these inferred words are then collected into a pseudo-vocabulary that serves as a labeling method for the low-resource language, creating labeled data for further applications.

      The applications for language technology are “pretty much everywhere,” Gandhi says. “You could imagine people being able to interact with software and devices in their native language, their native dialect. You could imagine improving all the voice assistants that we use. You could imagine it being used for translation or interpretation.” More

    • 75 Shares159 Views

      in Data Management & Statistics

      Forging climate connections across the Institute

      by

      Climate change is the ultimate cross-cutting issue: Not limited to any one discipline, it ranges across science, technology, policy, culture, human behavior, and well beyond. The response to it likewise requires an all-of-MIT effort.

      Now, to strengthen such an effort, a new grant program spearheaded by the Climate Nucleus, the faculty committee charged with the oversight and implementation of Fast Forward: MIT’s Climate Action Plan for the Decade, aims to build up MIT’s climate leadership capacity while also supporting innovative scholarship on diverse climate-related topics and forging new connections across the Institute.

      Called the Fast Forward Faculty Fund (F^4 for short), the program has named its first cohort of six faculty members after issuing its inaugural call for proposals in April 2023. The cohort will come together throughout the year for climate leadership development programming and networking. The program provides financial support for graduate students who will work with the faculty members on the projects — the students will also participate in leadership-building activities — as well as $50,000 in flexible, discretionary funding to be used to support related activities. 

      “Climate change is a crisis that truly touches every single person on the planet,” says Noelle Selin, co-chair of the nucleus and interim director of the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society. “It’s therefore essential that we build capacity for every member of the MIT community to make sense of the problem and help address it. Through the Fast Forward Faculty Fund, our aim is to have a cohort of climate ambassadors who can embed climate everywhere at the Institute.”

      F^4 supports both faculty who would like to begin doing climate-related work, as well as faculty members who are interested in deepening their work on climate. The program has the core goal of developing cohorts of F^4 faculty and graduate students who, in addition to conducting their own research, will become climate leaders at MIT, proactively looking for ways to forge new climate connections across schools, departments, and disciplines.

      One of the projects, “Climate Crisis and Real Estate: Science-based Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies,” led by Professor Siqi Zheng of the MIT Center for Real Estate in collaboration with colleagues from the MIT Sloan School of Management, focuses on the roughly 40 percent of carbon dioxide emissions that come from the buildings and real estate sector. Zheng notes that this sector has been slow to respond to climate change, but says that is starting to change, thanks in part to the rising awareness of climate risks and new local regulations aimed at reducing emissions from buildings.

      Using a data-driven approach, the project seeks to understand the efficient and equitable market incentives, technology solutions, and public policies that are most effective at transforming the real estate industry. Johnattan Ontiveros, a graduate student in the Technology and Policy Program, is working with Zheng on the project.

      “We were thrilled at the incredible response we received from the MIT faculty to our call for proposals, which speaks volumes about the depth and breadth of interest in climate at MIT,” says Anne White, nucleus co-chair and vice provost and associate vice president for research. “This program makes good on key commitments of the Fast Forward plan, supporting cutting-edge new work by faculty and graduate students while helping to deepen the bench of climate leaders at MIT.”

      During the 2023-24 academic year, the F^4 faculty and graduate student cohorts will come together to discuss their projects, explore opportunities for collaboration, participate in climate leadership development, and think proactively about how to deepen interdisciplinary connections among MIT community members interested in climate change.

      The six inaugural F^4 awardees are:

      Professor Tristan Brown, History Section: Humanistic Approaches to the Climate Crisis  

      With this project, Brown aims to create a new community of practice around narrative-centric approaches to environmental and climate issues. Part of a broader humanities initiative at MIT, it brings together a global working group of interdisciplinary scholars, including Serguei Saavedra (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering) and Or Porath (Tel Aviv University; Religion), collectively focused on examining the historical and present links between sacred places and biodiversity for the purposes of helping governments and nongovernmental organizations formulate better sustainability goals. Boyd Ruamcharoen, a PhD student in the History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology, and Society (HASTS) program, will work with Brown on this project.

      Professor Kerri Cahoy, departments of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences (AeroAstro): Onboard Autonomous AI-driven Satellite Sensor Fusion for Coastal Region Monitoring

      The motivation for this project is the need for much better data collection from satellites, where technology can be “20 years behind,” says Cahoy. As part of this project, Cahoy will pursue research in the area of autonomous artificial intelligence-enabled rapid sensor fusion (which combines data from different sensors, such as radar and cameras) onboard satellites to improve understanding of the impacts of climate change, specifically sea-level rise and hurricanes and flooding in coastal regions. Graduate students Madeline Anderson, a PhD student in electrical engineering and computer science (EECS), and Mary Dahl, a PhD student in AeroAstro, will work with Cahoy on this project.

      Professor Priya Donti, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science: Robust Reinforcement Learning for High-Renewables Power Grids 

      With renewables like wind and solar making up a growing share of electricity generation on power grids, Donti’s project focuses on improving control methods for these distributed sources of electricity. The research will aim to create a realistic representation of the characteristics of power grid operations, and eventually inform scalable operational improvements in power systems. It will “give power systems operators faith that, OK, this conceptually is good, but it also actually works on this grid,” says Donti. PhD candidate Ana Rivera from EECS is the F^4 graduate student on the project.

      Professor Jason Jackson, Department of Urban Studies and Planning (DUSP): Political Economy of the Climate Crisis: Institutions, Power and Global Governance

      This project takes a political economy approach to the climate crisis, offering a distinct lens to examine, first, the political governance challenge of mobilizing climate action and designing new institutional mechanisms to address the global and intergenerational distributional aspects of climate change; second, the economic challenge of devising new institutional approaches to equitably finance climate action; and third, the cultural challenge — and opportunity — of empowering an adaptive socio-cultural ecology through traditional knowledge and local-level social networks to achieve environmental resilience. Graduate students Chen Chu and Mrinalini Penumaka, both PhD students in DUSP, are working with Jackson on the project.

      Professor Haruko Wainwright, departments of Nuclear Science and Engineering (NSE) and Civil and Environmental Engineering: Low-cost Environmental Monitoring Network Technologies in Rural Communities for Addressing Climate Justice 

      This project will establish a community-based climate and environmental monitoring network in addition to a data visualization and analysis infrastructure in rural marginalized communities to better understand and address climate justice issues. The project team plans to work with rural communities in Alaska to install low-cost air and water quality, weather, and soil sensors. Graduate students Kay Whiteaker, an MS candidate in NSE, and Amandeep Singh, and MS candidate in System Design and Management at Sloan, are working with Wainwright on the project, as is David McGee, professor in earth, atmospheric, and planetary sciences.

      Professor Siqi Zheng, MIT Center for Real Estate and DUSP: Climate Crisis and Real Estate: Science-based Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies 

      See the text above for the details on this project. More