Tag Archives: Bar-Ilan University

In-home (one day in the future) eyesight correction

Leave a reply

It’s easy to become blasé about ‘futuristic’ developments but every once in a while something comes along that shocks you out of your complacency as this March 8, 2018 news item did for me,

A revolutionary, cutting-edge technology, developed by researchers at Bar-Ilan University’s Institute of Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials (BINA), has the potential to provide a new alternative to eyeglasses, contact lenses, and laser correction for refractive errors.

The technology, known as Nano-Drops, was developed by opthamologist Dr. David Smadja from Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Prof. Zeev Zalevsky from Bar-Ilan’s Kofkin Faculty of Engineering, and Prof. Jean-Paul Moshe Lellouche, head of the Department of Chemistry at Bar-Ilan.

It seems like it would be eye drops, eh? This March 8, 2018 Bar-Ilan University press release, which originated the news item, proceeds to redefine eyedrops,

Nano-Drops achieve their optical effect and correction by locally modifying the corneal refractive index. The magnitude and nature of the optical correction is adjusted by an optical pattern that is stamped onto the superficial layer of the corneal epithelium with a laser source. The shape of the optical pattern can be adjusted for correction of myopia (nearsightedness), hyperopia (farsightedness) or presbyopia (loss of accommodation ability). The laser stamping onto the cornea [emphasis mine] takes a few milliseconds and enables the nanoparticles to enhance and ‘activate’ this optical pattern by locally changing the refractive index and ultimately modifying the trajectory of light passing through the cornea.

The laser stamping source does not relate to the commonly known ‘laser treatment for visual correction’ that ablates corneal tissue. It is rather a small laser device that can connect to a smartphone [emphasis mine] and stamp the optical pattern onto the corneal epithelium by placing numerous adjacent pulses in a very speedy and painless fashion.  Tiny corneal spots created by the laser allow synthetic and biocompatible nanoparticles to enter and locally modify the optical power of the eye [emphasis mine] at the desired correction.

In the future this technology may enable patients to have their vision corrected in the comfort of their own home. [emphasis mine] To accomplish this, they would open an application on their smartphone to measure their vision, connect the laser source device for stamping the optical pattern at the desired correction, and then apply the Nano-Drops to activate the pattern and provide the desired correction.

Upcoming in-vivo experiments in rabbits will allow the researchers to determine how long the effect of the Nano-Drops will last after the initial application. Meanwhile, this promising technology has been shown, through ex-vivo experiments, to efficiently correct nearly 3 diopters of both myopia and presbyopia in pig eyes.

The researchers do not seem to have published a paper about this work. However, there is a March 19, 2018 article by Shoshanna Solomon for the Times of Israel, which provides greater  detail about how you or I would use this technology,

…

The Israeli researchers came up with a way to reshape the cornea, which accounts for 60 percent of the eye’s optical power. They tried out their system on the eyes of dead pigs, which have an optical system that is very similar to that of humans.

…

There are three steps to the technology that is now in development.

The first step requires patients to measure their eyesight via their smartphones. There are already a number of apps that do this, said Smadja. The second step requires the patients to use a second app — being developed by the researchers — which would have a laser device clipped onto the smartphone. This device will deliver laser pulses to the eye in less than a second that etch a shallow shape onto the cornea to help correct its refractive error. During the last stage, the Nano-Drops — made up of nontoxic nanoparticles of proteins — are put into the eye and they activate the shape, thus correcting the patients’ vision.

“It’s like when you write something with fuel on the ground and the fuel dries up, and then you throw a flame onto the fuel and the fire takes the shape of the writing,” Smadja explained. “The drops activate the pattern.”

The technology, unlike current laser operations that correct eyesight, does not remove tissue and is thus noninvasive, and it suits most eyes, expanding the scope of patients who can correct their vision, he said.

…

It’s a good article and, if you have the time, it’s worth reading in its entirety. Of course, it’s a long from ‘being in development’ to ‘available at the store’.

How might artificial intelligence affect urban life in 2030? A study

Leave a reply

Peering into the future is always a chancy business as anyone who’s seen those film shorts from the 1950’s and 60’s which speculate exuberantly as to what the future will bring knows.

A sober approach (appropriate to our times) has been taken in a study about the impact that artificial intelligence might have by 2030. From a Sept. 1, 2016 Stanford University news release (also on EurekAlert) by Tom Abate (Note: Links have been removed),

A panel of academic and industrial thinkers has looked ahead to 2030 to forecast how advances in artificial intelligence (AI) might affect life in a typical North American city – in areas as diverse as transportation, health care and education ­– and to spur discussion about how to ensure the safe, fair and beneficial development of these rapidly emerging technologies.

Titled “Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030,” this year-long investigation is the first product of the One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence (AI100), an ongoing project hosted by Stanford to inform societal deliberation and provide guidance on the ethical development of smart software, sensors and machines.

“We believe specialized AI applications will become both increasingly common and more useful by 2030, improving our economy and quality of life,” said Peter Stone, a computer scientist at the University of Texas at Austin and chair of the 17-member panel of international experts. “But this technology will also create profound challenges, affecting jobs and incomes and other issues that we should begin addressing now to ensure that the benefits of AI are broadly shared.”

The new report traces its roots to a 2009 study that brought AI scientists together in a process of introspection that became ongoing in 2014, when Eric and Mary Horvitz created the AI100 endowment through Stanford. AI100 formed a standing committee of scientists and charged this body with commissioning periodic reports on different aspects of AI over the ensuing century.

“This process will be a marathon, not a sprint, but today we’ve made a good start,” said Russ Altman, a professor of bioengineering and the Stanford faculty director of AI100. “Stanford is excited to host this process of introspection. This work makes practical contribution to the public debate on the roles and implications of artificial intelligence.”

The AI100 standing committee first met in 2015, led by chairwoman and Harvard computer scientist Barbara Grosz. It sought to convene a panel of scientists with diverse professional and personal backgrounds and enlist their expertise to assess the technological, economic and policy implications of potential AI applications in a societally relevant setting.

“AI technologies can be reliable and broadly beneficial,” Grosz said. “Being transparent about their design and deployment challenges will build trust and avert unjustified fear and suspicion.”

The report investigates eight domains of human activity in which AI technologies are beginning to affect urban life in ways that will become increasingly pervasive and profound by 2030.

The 28,000-word report includes a glossary to help nontechnical readers understand how AI applications such as computer vision might help screen tissue samples for cancers or how natural language processing will allow computerized systems to grasp not simply the literal definitions, but the connotations and intent, behind words.

The report is broken into eight sections focusing on applications of AI. Five examine application arenas such as transportation where there is already buzz about self-driving cars. Three other sections treat technological impacts, like the section on employment and workplace trends which touches on the likelihood of rapid changes in jobs and incomes.

“It is not too soon for social debate on how the fruits of an AI-dominated economy should be shared,” the researchers write in the report, noting also the need for public discourse.

“Currently in the United States, at least sixteen separate agencies govern sectors of the economy related to AI technologies,” the researchers write, highlighting issues raised by AI applications: “Who is responsible when a self-driven car crashes or an intelligent medical device fails? How can AI applications be prevented from [being used for] racial discrimination or financial cheating?”

The eight sections discuss:

Transportation: Autonomous cars, trucks and, possibly, aerial delivery vehicles may alter how we commute, work and shop and create new patterns of life and leisure in cities.

Home/service robots: Like the robotic vacuum cleaners already in some homes, specialized robots will clean and provide security in live/work spaces that will be equipped with sensors and remote controls.

Health care: Devices to monitor personal health and robot-assisted surgery are hints of things to come if AI is developed in ways that gain the trust of doctors, nurses, patients and regulators.

Education: Interactive tutoring systems already help students learn languages, math and other skills. More is possible if technologies like natural language processing platforms develop to augment instruction by humans.

Entertainment: The conjunction of content creation tools, social networks and AI will lead to new ways to gather, organize and deliver media in engaging, personalized and interactive ways.

Low-resource communities: Investments in uplifting technologies like predictive models to prevent lead poisoning or improve food distributions could spread AI benefits to the underserved.

Public safety and security: Cameras, drones and software to analyze crime patterns should use AI in ways that reduce human bias and enhance safety without loss of liberty or dignity.

Employment and workplace: Work should start now on how to help people adapt as the economy undergoes rapid changes as many existing jobs are lost and new ones are created.

“Until now, most of what is known about AI comes from science fiction books and movies,” Stone said. “This study provides a realistic foundation to discuss how AI technologies are likely to affect society.”

Grosz said she hopes the AI 100 report “initiates a century-long conversation about ways AI-enhanced technologies might be shaped to improve life and societies.”

You can find the A100 website here, and the group’s first paper: “Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030” here. Unfortunately, I don’t have time to read the report but I hope to do so soon.

The AI100 website’s About page offered a surprise,

This effort, called the One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence, or AI100, is the brainchild of computer scientist and Stanford alumnus Eric Horvitz who, among other credits, is a former president of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.

In that capacity Horvitz convened a conference in 2009 at which top researchers considered advances in artificial intelligence and its influences on people and society, a discussion that illuminated the need for continuing study of AI’s long-term implications.

Now, together with Russ Altman, a professor of bioengineering and computer science at Stanford, Horvitz has formed a committee that will select a panel to begin a series of periodic studies on how AI will affect automation, national security, psychology, ethics, law, privacy, democracy and other issues.

“Artificial intelligence is one of the most profound undertakings in science, and one that will affect every aspect of human life,” said Stanford President John Hennessy, who helped initiate the project. “Given’s Stanford’s pioneering role in AI and our interdisciplinary mindset, we feel obliged and qualified to host a conversation about how artificial intelligence will affect our children and our children’s children.”

Five leading academicians with diverse interests will join Horvitz and Altman in launching this effort. They are:

  • Barbara Grosz, the Higgins Professor of Natural Sciences at HarvardUniversity and an expert on multi-agent collaborative systems;
  • Deirdre K. Mulligan, a lawyer and a professor in the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley, who collaborates with technologists to advance privacy and other democratic values through technical design and policy;

    This effort, called the One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence, or AI100, is the brainchild of computer scientist and Stanford alumnus Eric Horvitz who, among other credits, is a former president of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.

    In that capacity Horvitz convened a conference in 2009 at which top researchers considered advances in artificial intelligence and its influences on people and society, a discussion that illuminated the need for continuing study of AI’s long-term implications.

    Now, together with Russ Altman, a professor of bioengineering and computer science at Stanford, Horvitz has formed a committee that will select a panel to begin a series of periodic studies on how AI will affect automation, national security, psychology, ethics, law, privacy, democracy and other issues.

    “Artificial intelligence is one of the most profound undertakings in science, and one that will affect every aspect of human life,” said Stanford President John Hennessy, who helped initiate the project. “Given’s Stanford’s pioneering role in AI and our interdisciplinary mindset, we feel obliged and qualified to host a conversation about how artificial intelligence will affect our children and our children’s children.”

    Five leading academicians with diverse interests will join Horvitz and Altman in launching this effort. They are:

    • Barbara Grosz, the Higgins Professor of Natural Sciences at HarvardUniversity and an expert on multi-agent collaborative systems;
    • Deirdre K. Mulligan, a lawyer and a professor in the School of Information at the University of California, Berkeley, who collaborates with technologists to advance privacy and other democratic values through technical design and policy;
    • Yoav Shoham, a professor of computer science at Stanford, who seeks to incorporate common sense into AI;
    • Tom Mitchell, the E. Fredkin University Professor and chair of the machine learning department at Carnegie Mellon University, whose studies include how computers might learn to read the Web;
    • and Alan Mackworth, a professor of computer science at the University of British Columbia [emphases mine] and the Canada Research Chair in Artificial Intelligence, who built the world’s first soccer-playing robot.

    I wasn’t expecting to see a Canadian listed as a member of the AI100 standing committee and then I got another surprise (from the AI100 People webpage),

    Study Panels

    Study Panels are planned to convene every 5 years to examine some aspect of AI and its influences on society and the world. The first study panel was convened in late 2015 to study the likely impacts of AI on urban life by the year 2030, with a focus on typical North American cities.

    2015 Study Panel Members

    • Peter Stone, UT Austin, Chair
    • Rodney Brooks, Rethink Robotics
    • Erik Brynjolfsson, MIT
    • Ryan Calo, University of Washington
    • Oren Etzioni, Allen Institute for AI
    • Greg Hager, Johns Hopkins University
    • Julia Hirschberg, Columbia University
    • Shivaram Kalyanakrishnan, IIT Bombay
    • Ece Kamar, Microsoft
    • Sarit Kraus, Bar Ilan University
    • Kevin Leyton-Brown, [emphasis mine] UBC [University of British Columbia]
    • David Parkes, Harvard
    • Bill Press, UT Austin
    • AnnaLee (Anno) Saxenian, Berkeley
    • Julie Shah, MIT
    • Milind Tambe, USC
    • Astro Teller, Google[X]
  • [emphases mine] and the Canada Research Chair in Artificial Intelligence, who built the world’s first soccer-playing robot.

I wasn’t expecting to see a Canadian listed as a member of the AI100 standing committee and then I got another surprise (from the AI100 People webpage),

Study Panels

Study Panels are planned to convene every 5 years to examine some aspect of AI and its influences on society and the world. The first study panel was convened in late 2015 to study the likely impacts of AI on urban life by the year 2030, with a focus on typical North American cities.

2015 Study Panel Members

  • Peter Stone, UT Austin, Chair
  • Rodney Brooks, Rethink Robotics
  • Erik Brynjolfsson, MIT
  • Ryan Calo, University of Washington
  • Oren Etzioni, Allen Institute for AI
  • Greg Hager, Johns Hopkins University
  • Julia Hirschberg, Columbia University
  • Shivaram Kalyanakrishnan, IIT Bombay
  • Ece Kamar, Microsoft
  • Sarit Kraus, Bar Ilan University
  • Kevin Leyton-Brown, [emphasis mine] UBC [University of British Columbia]
  • David Parkes, Harvard
  • Bill Press, UT Austin
  • AnnaLee (Anno) Saxenian, Berkeley
  • Julie Shah, MIT
  • Milind Tambe, USC
  • Astro Teller, Google[X]

I see they have representation from Israel, India, and the private sector as well. Refreshingly, there’s more than one woman on the standing committee and in this first study group. It’s good to see these efforts at inclusiveness and I’m particularly delighted with the inclusion of an organization from Asia. All too often inclusiveness means Europe, especially the UK. So, it’s good (and I think important) to see a different range of representation.

As for the content of report, should anyone have opinions about it, please do let me know your thoughts in the blog comments.

Surgical nanobots to be tested in humans in 2015?

1 Reply

Thanks to James Lewis at the Foresight Institute’s* blog and his Jan. 6, 2015 posting about an an announcement of human clinical trials for surgical nanobots (Note: Links have been removed),

… as structural DNA nanotechnology rapidly expanded the repertoire of atomically precise nanostructures that can be fabricated, it became possible to fabricate functional DNA nanostructures incorporating logic gates to deliver and release molecular cargo for medical applications, as we reported a couple years ago (DNA nanotechnology-based nanorobot delivers cell suicide message to cancer cells). More recently, DNA nanorobots have been coated with lipid to survive immune attack inside the body.

Lewis then notes this (Note: A link has been removed),

 … “Ido Bachelet announces 2015 human trial of DNA nanobots to fight cancer and soon to repair spinal cords“:

At the British Friends of Bar-Ilan University’s event in Otto Uomo October 2014 Professor Ido Bachelet announced the beginning of the human treatment with nanomedicine. He indicates DNA nanobots can currently identify cells in humans with 12 different types of cancer tumors.

A human patient with late stage leukemia will be given DNA nanobot treatment. Without the DNA nanobot treatment the patient would be expected to die in the summer of 2015. Based upon animal trials they expect to remove the cancer within one month.

The information was excerpted from Brian Wang’s Dec. 27, 2014 post on his Nextbigfuture blog,

One Trillion 50 nanometer nanobots in a syringe will be injected into people to perform cellular surgery.

The DNA nanobots have been tuned to not cause an immune response. They have been adjusted for different kinds of medical procedures. Procedures can be quick or ones that last many days.

…

Using DNA origami and molecular programming, they are reality. These nanobots can seek and kill cancer cells, mimic social insect behaviors, carry out logical operators like a computer in a living animal, and they can be controlled from an Xbox. Ido Bachelet from the bio-design lab at Bar Ilan University explains this technology and how it will change medicine in the near future.

I advise reading both Wang’s and Lewis’ posts in their entirety. To give you a sense of how their posts differ (Lewis is more technical), I solicited information from the websites hosting their blog postings.

Here’s more about Wang from the About page on the Nextbigfuture blog,

Brian L. Wang, M.B.A. is a long time futurist. A lecturer at the Singularity University and Nextbigfuture.com author. He worked on the most recent ten year plan for the Institute for the Future and at a two day Institute for the Future workshop with Universities and City planners in Hong Kong (advising the city of Hong Kong on their future plans). He had a TEDx lecture on Energy. Brian is available as a speaker for corporations and organizations that value accurate and detailed insight into the development of technology global trends.

Lewis provides a contrast (from the About page listing Lewis on the Foresight Institute website),

Jim received a B.A. in chemistry from the University of Pennsylvania in 1967, an M.A. in chemistry from Harvard University in 1968, and a Ph.D. in chemistry, from Harvard University in 1972. After doing postdoctoral research at the Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research, Lausanne, Switzerland, from 1971-1973, Jim did research in the molecular biology of tumor viruses at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, from 1973-1980, first as a postdoctoral researcher, and then as a Staff Investigator and Senior Staff Investigator. He continued his research as an Associate Member, Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, from 1980-1988, and then joined the Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute in Seattle, WA, as a Senior Research Investigator from 1988-1996. Since 1996 he has been working as a consultant on nanotechnology.

Getting back to Bachelet, his team’s work, a precursor for this latest initiative, has been featured here before in an April 11, 2014 post,

This latest cockroach item, which concerns new therapeutic approaches, comes from an April 8, 2014 article by Sarah Spickernell for New Scientist (Note: A link has been removed),

It’s a computer – inside a cockroach. Nano-sized entities made of DNA that are able to perform the same kind of logic operations as a silicon-based computer have been introduced into a living animal.

Ido Bachelet can be seen in this February 2014 video describing the proposed surgical nanobots,

Bar-Ilan University where Bachelet works is located in Israel. You can find more information about this work and more on the Research group for Bio-Design website.

*The possessive was moved from Foresight to Institute as in Institute’s on Nov. 11, 2015.

Computerized cockroaches as precursors to new healing techniques

Leave a reply

The last time I wrote about cockroaches was in a June 26, 2013 posting about cyborg cockroaches and neuroscience. This latest cockroach item, which concerns new therapeutic approaches, comes from an April 8, 2014 article by Sarah Spickernell for New Scientist (Note: A link has been removed),

It’s a computer – inside a cockroach. Nano-sized entities made of DNA that are able to perform the same kind of logic operations as a silicon-based computer have been introduced into a living animal.

The DNA computers – known as origami robots because they work by folding and unfolding strands of DNA – travel around the insect’s body and interact with each other, as well as the insect’s cells. When they uncurl, they can dispense drugs carried in their folds.

“DNA nanorobots could potentially carry out complex programs that could one day be used to diagnose or treat diseases with unprecedented sophistication,” says Daniel Levner, a bioengineer at the Wyss Institute at Harvard University.

Levner and his colleagues at Bar Ilan University in Ramat-Gan, Israel, made the nanobots by exploiting the binding properties of DNA. When it meets a certain kind of protein, DNA unravels into two complementary strands. By creating particular sequences, the strands can be made to unravel on contact with specific molecules – say, those on a diseased cell. When the molecule unravels, out drops the package wrapped inside.

Spickernell’s description of the researchers’ plan to increase the amount of computing power in a cockroach to the equivalent of an eight-bit computer seems eye-opening until you read about their plans for preliminary human clinical trials using the same technique for mammals as they have in insects.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the research paper,

Universal computing by DNA origami robots in a living animal by Yaniv Amir, Eldad Ben-Ishay, Daniel Levner, Shmulik Ittah, Almogit Abu-Horowitz, & Ido Bachelet. Nature Nanotechnology (2014) doi:10.1038/nnano.2014.58 Published online 06 April 2014

The paper is behind a paywall but there is an option for a free preview via ReadCube access.

Theranostics (nanomedicine) in Israel

Leave a reply

There’s a very intriguing nanomedicine project in Tel Aviv, Israel. Called Nanomedicines for Personalized Theranostics, the project combines diagnostics and therapeutics for a personalized medical experience. From the Oct. 19, 2012 news item on Nanowerk (Note: I have removed a link),

Tel Aviv University [TAU] has been appointed by the Israel National Nanotechnology Initiative (INNI) to lead a consortium on “Nanomedicines for Personalized Theranostics”, a combined system of diagnostics and therapeutic treatments. This consortium of 11 laboratories will be dedicated to developing nano-sized drug delivery systems for the detection and treatment of various diseases. Eight of the labs are TAU-led, with additional participation from Hebrew University Jerusalem, Bar-Ilan University and Ben Gurion University of the Negev.

The ultimate goal is to design a new class of drugs that can destroy faulty proteins in angiogenesis-dependent diseases that involve the growth of new blood vessels from existing vessels — including cancer, infectious diseases and heart diseases — and deliver these drugs safely into the body. Beyond the academic realm, the group aims to create spin-off companies based on licensed technologies they develop, creating the basis for a thriving biotechnology industry within Israel.

The news item provides some insight into the situation in Israel,

Although considered a beacon of research and development, the field of biotechnology in Israel has suffered drawbacks, both in academia and industry. Higher salaries lure the best minds abroad, and international companies have more private capital with which to sustain businesses.

“Israel has amazing intellectual resources, but we are constantly combating budget constraints. With this project, the idea is to create future technologies built on Israeli creativity that also allow us to bring in the brightest people and better funding,” says Prof. Peer [Scientific Director Prof. Dan Peer]. While many great biotechnology ideas were born in Israel, the economic situation stymied the establishment of many more successful companies within the country, he observes. “We want to maintain the advantages that we have in the life sciences while boosting this lagging industry. Our research as part of the FTA [the Focal Technology Area within the INNI] will be a starting engine.”

Prof. Peer hopes that in two years, researchers will be able to start translating their research into practical applications.

The INNI is also working to combat “brain drain” in the academic world by giving TAU and other institutions the means to attract outstanding young researchers back home to Israel, both with funding and with the prestige of the project.

Is there a country in the world that isn’t concerned about ‘brain drain’?

Nanopaprika.eu celebrates 4th anniversary

3 Replies

It started as a social networking community for nanoscientists in 2007. From the Nov. 25, 2011 news item on Nanotechnology Now,

“It’s all started accidentally”
– recalls András Paszternák, PhD, founder of the portal. “One cold November morning, I met Professor Erika Kálmán, my PhD supervisor, at the corridor of the Chemical Research Center of Hungarian Academy of Sciences. She offer me to edit an already existing Hungarian nanowebpage. I asked for time to reflect, and in next day I suggested to start a community site, which will be updated with new content by members.” adds the Postdoctoral Fellow from Bar-Ilan University.

The page can be described as a place of constant renewal from the beginning. In 2011 it has become even more attractive with an international virtual poster conference, research teams and members “HOT papers” database.

Today there are many from USA, across Europe to Asia who are using the webpage to find new jobs, awards, or partners to start joint research projects.

The website Paszternák founded is nanopaprika.eu. From Nanopaprika’s About us page,

The heat is on for an online social networking community for nanoscientists. The International Nanoscience Community, TINC, was cooked up by Hungarian chemistry PhD student Andras Paszternak. It now provides a rich menu of communication tools for the international community of scientists working in the growing field of nanoscience and nanotechnology and recently passed the 5100 members mark.
The virtual nano community is fully equipped with all the functions one expects from a modern online networking site: personal chat, a scientific forum, more than 50 thematic groups, including microscopy, nanomedicine, and even a discussion forum on safety and toxicity. TINC is also a media partner for more than 45 nano conferences on different topics in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012.

The easiest way to describe nanopaprika would be to say that if the LinkedIn and Nanowerk websites had a child born in Europe, this would be it.