World's first baby born via AI-powered IVF system in Mexico

A baby has been born following a form of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) largely carried out by a machine, in what researchers say is a world first.

The development could signal a major shift in how fertility treatments are performed, The Express Tribune reported.

The machine, developed by New York-based biotech firm Conceivable Life Sciences, was used to complete 23 critical steps of a procedure known as intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). A human operator supervised the process remotely via livestream, initiating each step with the press of a button.

"This level of automation could reduce the chance of human error and fatigue affecting the outcomes," said Jacques Cohen, co-founder of the company and an expert in assisted reproduction.

In ICSI, a single sperm is injected directly into an egg, a technique often used when male infertility is involved. However, the manual nature of the process requires extreme precision and concentration, making it prone to errors.

To test the automated system, researchers recruited a couple struggling with infertility. The male partner's sperm had limited motility, and the female partner received donor eggs due to ovulatory issues.

Of the eight donor eggs, five were fertilised using the automated system, and three through conventional manual ICSI. All eight developed into embryos. An AI model then evaluated the embryos, selecting two deemed most viable—both from the automated process.

One embryo failed to implant, but the other resulted in the successful birth.

Joyce Harper, a reproductive science professor at University College London, described the result as an "exciting proof-of-concept" but noted that larger, controlled trials would be needed to determine if the system is more effective than manual IVF.

The system incorporates artificial intelligence to choose optimal sperm based on visual cues and uses a laser to immobilise them before injection.Though not immediately expected to become widespread due to cost, Cohen believes the expense will decrease with further development and standardisation. custom title: Source Article

Read More........→June 19, 2025

Public Perceives AI Scientists As Less Prudent Than Climate Scientists

Credit: iStock

A new study from the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) at the University of Pennsylvania has found that people in the United States view artificial intelligence (AI) science and scientists more negatively than climate scientists or scientists in general. The findings are based on a national survey exploring how AI compares to other scientific fields across key indicators of trustworthiness.

The research, published in PNAS Nexus, assessed perceptions using the Factors Assessing Science’s Self-Presentation (FASS) framework. This rubric evaluates credibility, prudence, bias, self-correction and perceived benefits. Compared to general science and climate science, AI fared poorly, particularly in the domain of prudence. Respondents expressed concern that AI researchers are insufficiently cautious, especially when it comes to preventing unintended consequences.

No improvement in AI perceptions over time

To determine whether public skepticism stemmed from unfamiliarity with the technology, the researchers examined changes in perception between 2024 and 2025. Despite AI becoming more visible in daily life during this period, attitudes remained largely unchanged. The persistence of negative views suggests that familiarity alone does not necessarily lead to greater public acceptance.

Climate science remains politically polarized; AI less so

Previous research has shown that political ideology strongly influences attitudes toward certain scientific fields. For example, climate science in the US has been shaped by partisan debates, and trust in medical science declined among Republicans after the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the study found that AI science is not currently subject to the same level of political division. Respondents across the political spectrum held relatively similar views about AI scientists, indicating that the field has yet to be heavily politicized.

Methodology and authorship

The findings are based on data from a national probability sample of US adults. The study was co-authored by Dror Walter, associate professor of digital communication at Georgia State University and APPC distinguished research fellow; Yotam Ophir, associate professor of communication at the University at Buffalo, State University of New York; Patrick E. Jamieson, director of APPC’s Annenberg Health and Risk Communication Institute; and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

Reference: Walter D, Ophir Y, Jamieson PE, et al. Public perceptions of AI science and scientists relatively more negative but less politicized than general and climate science. PNAS Nexus. 2025. doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf163

This content includes text that has been generated with the assistance of AI. Technology Networks' AI policy can be found here. Public Perceives AI Scientists As Less Prudent Than Climate Scientists | Technology Networks

Read More........→June 18, 2025