CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-time LHC data filtering

Re:CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-tim... by amelius on Saturday March 28, 2026 @09:52AM (#47554617)

At this point AI basically means "we didn't know how to solve the problem so we just threw a black box at it".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-tim... by integralid on Saturday March 28, 2026 @10:54AM (#47555149)

I disagree. More often than not is "We know how to solve the problem, and the solution is some linear algebra"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-tim... by Legend2440 on Saturday March 28, 2026 @12:08PM (#47555865)

I disagree with both of you.

It's not about linear algebra (which is just used as a way to represent arbitrary functions), it's about data. When your problem is better specified from data than from first principles, it's time to use an ML model.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-tim... by disqard on Saturday March 28, 2026 @03:39PM (#47557583)

I think what you're expressing is also known as "the Bitter Lesson".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CERN uses tiny AI models burned into silicon for real-tim... by mpierini on Wednesday April 01, 2026 @08:57AM (#47600223)

Wrong! We do how to solve the problem, but the solution does not run on an electronic board at 100 nsec. So it has to be approximated with a function that runs within that time constraint. Also, if deciding to accept/reject events based on a learned metric of typicality is not AI, then why guessing the next token is AI? We have robots going around the LHC tunnel fixing things in high radiation environment. Is that enough AI? If not, we accept volunteers to replace the robots… Relax people and try to imagine that life might be more complicated than what an oversimplified general public article says

[ Parent | on HN ]