AI+HW 2035: Shaping the Next Decade

Deming Chen; Jason Cong; Azalia Mirhoseini; Christos Kozyrakis; Subhasish Mitra; Jinjun Xiong; Cliff Young; Anima Anandkumar; Michael Littman; Aron Kirschen; Sophia Shao; Serge Leef; Naresh Shanbhag; Dejan Milojicic; Michael Schulte; Gert Cauwenberghs; Jerry M. Chow; Tri Dao; Kailash Gopalakrishnan; Richard Ho; Hoshik Kim; Kunle Olukotun; David Z. Pan; Mark Ren; Dan Roth; Aarti Singh; Yizhou Sun; Yusu Wang; Yann LeCun; Ruchir Puri

arXiv · 2603.05225

AI+HW 2035: Shaping the Next Decade

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and hardware (HW) are advancing at unprecedented rates, yet their trajectories have become inseparably intertwined. The global research community lacks a cohesive, long-term vision to strategically coordinate the development of AI and HW. This fragmentation constrains progress toward holistic, sustainable, and adaptive AI systems capable of learning, reasoning, and operating efficiently across cloud, edge, and physical environments. The future of AI depends not only on scaling intelligence, but on scaling efficiency, achieving exponential gains in intelligence per joule, rather than unbounded compute consumption. Addressing this grand challenge requires rethinking the entire computing stack. This vision paper lays out a 10-year roadmap for AI+HW co-design and co-development, spanning algorithms, architectures, systems, and sustainability. We articulate key insights that redefine scaling around energy efficiency, system-level integration, and cross-layer optimization. We identify key challenges and opportunities, candidly assess potential obstacles and pitfalls, and propose integrated solutions grounded in algorithmic innovation, hardware advances, and software abstraction. Looking ahead, we define what success means in 10 years: achieving a 1000x improvement in efficiency for AI training and inference; enabling energy-aware, self-optimizing systems that seamlessly span cloud, edge, and physical AI; democratizing access to advanced AI infrastructure; and embedding human-centric principles into the design of intelligent systems. Finally, we outline concrete action items for academia, industry, government, and the broader community, calling for coordinated national initiatives, shared infrastructure, workforce development, cross-agency collaboration, and sustained public-private partnerships to ensure that AI+HW co-design becomes a unifying long-term mission.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI cs.AR

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Deming Chen, Jason Cong, Azalia Mirhoseini, Christos Kozyrakis, Subhasish Mitra, Jinjun Xiong, Cliff Young, Anima Anandkumar, Michael Littman, Aron Kirschen, Sophia Shao, Serge Leef, Naresh Shanbhag, Dejan Milojicic, Michael Schulte, Gert Cauwenberghs, Jerry M. Chow, Tri Dao, Kailash Gopalakrishnan, Richard Ho, Hoshik Kim, Kunle Olukotun, David Z. Pan, Mark Ren, Dan Roth, Aarti Singh, Yizhou Sun, Yusu Wang, Yann LeCun, Ruchir Puri. 2026-03-05. AI+HW 2035: Shaping the Next Decade. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.05225

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗