心理追凶

为什么AI还不会科学发现？这是人工智能的终极考题_我的网站

A |     By Anna Dalla Valle    (CNS)-- Forward-looking mindset: whole-system and life cycle thinking    My work is centred on the environmental sustainability of buildings over the entire life cycle and beyond in view of the circular economy: from design and construction to use and reuse, up to final disposal or, preferably, recovery for a second life. Here, the paradigm shift is twofold, because a whole-system thinking is needed not only to consider the entire life cycle, but also to envision what happens next. The ultimate goal is to minimize environmental impacts and to drive both sustainability and innovation.    To be more explicit, the first shift involves keeping in mind the entire life cycle – from the early design stages – moving beyond the traditional focus on construction and energy efficiency during use. It is to select building products looking back to the supply chain, such as recycled content, locally sourced and bio-based solutions, while also looking ahead to performance decay, maintenance needs and the potential for extending service life. Moreover, the second shift press to move beyond the linear building process – as traditionally practiced – in which we extract raw materials, we build, we use, and eventually we demolish. Indeed, this model has reached its limits, undermining planetary resources with adverse environmental and social effects.    Interconnected choices: designing decisions that create shared value    A life cycle perspective matched with circularity inevitably challenges this linearity, wondering from the very beginning about what happens when assets become obsolete and fall into disuse, to design buildings as part of a continuous loop of resources. Accordingly, design, construction, daily use (energy and water consumption), maintenance, replacement and end-of-life turn out to be regarded not as isolated steps but interconnected with each other. In fact, at each stage, choices can either preserve or destroy value.    For example, if construction solutions are carefully selected, they can be reused in the future, either in their entirety, as whole products, or through disassembly into components, or even by separating materials. In this way, they may maintain the same function (e.g. a window reused as it is) or serve different purposes (e.g. glass cullet used as input for glass wool insulation). If technological systems are designed flexibly, buildings can reach different business segments and host concurrently different activities, resulting easily adaptable from housing to office and vice versa, instead of being demolished. If building processes integrate digital tools, data can guide smarter decisions over decades, provided that data infrastructure is ensured, followed by constant monitoring and analysis of the collected data and the update and dissemination of results across industry and practitioners as well as policymakers.    Thinking this way means making choices future-oriented, ready to embrace innovation while respecting planetary boundaries, namely limiting the environmental impact at every stage and in every region – to avoid burden shifting – not just at the beginning but along the whole (first-second) life cycle. Certainly, a demanding but exciting challenge: one I am proud to take on and in my little to contribute to.    Beyond appearances: close-up process for understanding what lies behind    In daily life, we often say to "look beyond appearances". Usually, this expression pertains to people, to underline the risk of avoiding judging someone solely by what can be seen. Now the interesting thing is that the same advice can be applied to architecture, obviously without undermining the importance of aesthetic beauty, at the core also of the New European Bauhaus initiative together with sustainability and inclusion. Nonetheless, as an architect expert in sustainable technology, I have learned to extend it to the built environment, by seeing buildings not merely as visible structures (walls, roofs, windows), but as living parts of a larger and complex system. In this sense, architecture can be compared to a plant. Plants are anchored in the soil by roots; buildings are anchored in the ground by foundations. Plants capture sunlight, absorb water, accommodate small animals, and interact with other organisms; buildings consume energy, deplete water, host human life, and interact with their surroundings. Both are deeply connected to their ecosystem.    However, to fully understand them, both must be looked beyond appearances, through a "close-up" process taken to the extreme. It is not simply a matter of focusing on details, as happens in photography and cinema fields; the intention is to delve deeper and deeper to the fuller extent: an in-depth analysis of whatever is behind, starting from the exterior to gradually shift to construction technologies, materials, up to their chemicals. The latter is, of course, not the responsibility of architects, but it lies at the heart of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), analyses that I usually perform during the decision-making at the different process stage to help building stakeholders minimize environmental impacts across the entire – potentially multiple – life cycle.    For architectural technology, for example, it is a matter of addressing, alongside conventional requirements (e.g. performance, safety, usability, well-being), the specific requirements of environmental sustainability (e.g. the rational use and optimization of materials, energy, water), taking into account the technical feasibility and evaluating the entire life cycle. At the utmost, it is to look into everything that underlies the presence of that specific material in that exact spot, its behaviour and interrelationships when in service, and its post-use journey, setting up the necessary network to actually close the loop in practice.    Material-immaterial synergy: the invisible foundations of sustainable architecture    To embrace this vision, the idea of resources is to be extended compared to the ordinary sense. Certainly, buildings are made and calls for a set of tangible resources, such as money to be started, bricks, steel, or timber to be erected, tools and equipment to be managed including in the long-term. The issue that often runs out is that buildings rely heavily as well on intangible resources, namely knowledge, skills, processes, organisation, information flows and network. These two dimensions – tangible and intangible – are closely connected and interdependent on each other. Without appropriate eco-design knowledge, even the best materials are wasted; without materials, knowledge has no application.    In such a mindset, architecture becomes a remarkable expression of the synergy between tangible resources and intangible resources: a space where East and West can successfully meet, building a bridge across cultures through openness and inclusiveness. Indeed, it is well recognized that different traditions bring different perspectives and, when combined, generate the best and more holistic solutions. The "living building" is both a technical and cultural artefact, an expression of human creativity that must not overstep the planetary boundary.    Strategic imperative: cross-border and cross-disciplinary cooperation    Evidence is found in international collaborations such as Joint Schools, where universities from different countries join forces to promote shared research and training. A concrete example of Sino-foreign cooperation is the XJTU-POLIMI Joint School, opened in Xi'an (China) in 2019 through a partnership between Politecnico di Milano and Xi'an Jiaotong University. As POLIMI's first campus outside Italy, it serves as an international platform dedicated to education and research as well as technology transfer and business incubation. This initiative, like others currently in place, aims to take the best of each part to foster shared growth and mutual learning. Italy brings its strong polytechnic culture, its multidisciplinary approach and focus on design quality, together with the European emphasis on social and environmental responsibility. China, in turn, is a leader in fast-evolving business, in the integration capacity of digital technologies and in large-scale engineering projects, pulled by top-down policies that allow fast implementation. In conjunction, these strengths can create fertile ground for innovation and speed up the transformation process within the Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) sector, always been acknowledged as resistant to change, due to its intrinsic complexity and fragmented nature.    Rethinking the built environment: buildings as resource-driven assets    The effort is to move beyond the concept of buildings as "material banks" – namely repositories where resources are temporarily stored – to rethink them and push the vision further of buildings as "resource-driven assets". While the first construct is earmarked for physical goods, that proposed calls for careful consideration of both tangible/material/visible resources and intangible/immaterial/invisible resources, taking care that everything is optimised and nothing is wasted, to preserve their value over time.    In practice, this means looking at what goes into buildings, such as materials, systems and the energy required to transform and assemble them, but also, for instance, the set of expertise, skills and specialization of practitioners involved during design. Similarly, starting from the outset, it means looking at what comes out throughout buildings life, like emissions, waste, and decommissioned materials, but also knowledge gained from monitoring and lessons learned from operations. To ignore either side of the equation (inputs-outputs) would be a missed opportunity. If we want buildings to truly act as resource-driven assets, we must synergise, map, understand, and manage the full spectrum of in- and out- flows, both tangible and intangible.    On the tangible side, this requires a deep understanding of material, energy and water flows across the entire life cycle. Which resources are extracted, transported, and assembled? How much energy is consumed, and how is it sourced? How do materials degrade over time, and how can they be reused or recycled without losing quality? These questions are essential to reduce impacts and to design systems that are both efficient and resilient.    On the intangible side, equally important are the flows of information and knowledge that connect all actors in the construction value chain. Long before a building is erected, crucial questions are: How is data exchanged among stakeholders? Is communication efficient enough to speed up the workflows? How can design capabilities evolve into maturity, meaning quality achieved through best practice? Then, as more buildings themselves add to this immaterial layer through sensors, smart meters, and digital platforms that produce valuable insights, another set of questions follows: How is this information managed, shared, and preserved? How to ensure that data supports predictive maintenance and reverse logistics? How to activate new business models based on sharing and collaboration? Just as materials should not be wasted, neither should information. Data and knowledge must be treated as resources that enrich our collective know-how, building an "infodump bank" that not only improves current performance but also informs future decisions, guides new designs and strengthens subsequent projects.    The correlation between tangible and intangible resources is ever closer: managing them together ensures that nothing is wasted and that the embedded value is preserved across time. In that respect, "no waste of resources" also means "no waste of value", since every material, every bit of data, and every piece of knowledge carries potential that, if carefully handled, can extend usefulness, inspire innovation, and create lasting benefits well beyond the life of a single project.    Global impact: construction sector as global lever for planetary sustainability    Through joint research and cross-border exchange programmes, the construction sector proves to be an extraordinary testing ground and given its global impact in terms of emissions and resource consumption, it clearly stands as a priority for change. Furthermore, never forget that buildings are everywhere and shape our daily lives, leading mindful planning crucial not only for preserving the natural environment but also human well-being.    In this framework, architects, engineers, designers, scientists and all necessary professionals can work side by side to explore new possibilities, even creating new synergies across key business sectors. Imagine if constructions integrate materials from unexpected sources such as fashion and/or food waste. Fast-fashion clothing and textile scraps, invasive plants and agricultural by-products, or even organic waste – which are currently a significant environmental burden with serious social effects – can be rethought as valuable inputs for new building solutions. In this way, the concept of waste disappears, as it serves as input resources from another industrial sector, consequently, contributing to lower material intensity (virgin material reduction), greater industrial symbiosis (new business opportunities), and implementing smarter ways to manage resources.    At the same time, digital technologies and artificial intelligence can support this process, helping to track resources, optimise flows, and potentially update in real-time the expected environmental impacts in relation to what actually happens. The ambition is to create architecture that is resource efficient and socially valuable in the long term. Considering the key role of construction, even small changes, when scale up to thousands of buildings and millions of people, can make a big difference for the planet.    At this point, the key role of China is beyond question. As the world's largest construction market and major exporter, its choices strongly affect global trends, making environmental awareness and transparency in its building sector essential. Indeed, in a globalised economy, what is produced in one region may be assembled in another, used in a third and so on throughout the different stages of the life cycle, spreading responsibilities across several borders. For this reason, it is imperative to turn LCA into a standard practice, but also to regionalise results, to identify where the greatest impacts occur over the building life cycle, including in geographical terms. Here, China inevitably results in a central hotspot to concentrate efforts: improving practices there could deliver benefits worldwide, setting the chance to become an outstanding reference and reducing burdens far beyond its borders, (hopefully) without exceeding the limits of the planet.    Yet – be warned – the focus is not solely on new construction, where starting from scratch makes everything easier: the real challenge (and greatest opportunity) stands in the existing building stock, because of representing the largest reserve of resources we already have. These artefacts embody vast amounts of materials, energy, and human effort that should not be wasted leaving unfinished and/or uninhabited. Instead of discarding them, we must be proactive to renew the existing buildings, extending their service life while improving performance to meet ever-evolving needs.    Call to action: building bridges within planetary boundaries    It is time to join forces, to move from theory to practice, from words to action. To succeed, we need lots more than technology. We need dialogue between cultures; we need young and open minds, trained to think across disciplines and borders, ready to learn from diversity, capable of working together toward a unified vision, think globally while acting locally. Green architecture should not be perceived as a trend, but as a common responsibility of the present for the future.    These are just the premises to the most open question ever: "What if we built bridges between East and West, without crossing the limits of our planet?" I therefore invite everyone to begin offering practical responses, reframing global challenges as shared opportunities for innovation.    Profile:        Anna Dalla Valle is an Assistant Professor and Researcher in the Department of Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (DABC) at Politecnico di Milano, Italy. She is an associate and active member of both the Italian LCA Network Association and the Italian Society of Architectural Technology. She represents Politecnico di Milano in the New European Bauhaus initiative and fully participates in various international organizations, including the LCA Working Group of the Italian Green Building Council, the Italian Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform, and the International Energy Agency’s working group on ' Ways to Implement Net-zero Whole Life Carbon Buildings'.                    。    “AI4S不是通用人工智能的一个应用，而是人工智能的终极考题。”上海人工智能实验室主任、首席科学家周伯文在WAIC期间的演讲中提出上述观点。         在今年的世界人工智能大会（WAIC）现场，AI4S（AI for Science）的元素比往年更多，从位列“十大镇馆之宝”的天鹜科技AI蛋白质设计平台（MatwingsVenus™）晓鹜™，再到各大高校、科研机构发布的科学智能产品……一个明确的信号是，当大语言模型的边际效益递减，资本与学术界共同将目光投向了AI4S这个被视为“科学研究第四范式”的战场。         不过，与大模型、智能体动辄引爆消费级应用不同，AI for Science缺少面向C端的爆款产品，商业化周期普遍以年为单位计算，科研界、产业界和投资人士怎么看？          AI为什么还不会科学发现          每年WAIC都会发布众多成果的上海人工智能实验室（上海AI实验室），今年也携手高校、科研机构、医院与产业伙伴，发布2026“与书生共创”十项科学智能联合创新成果。         周伯文以《AGI的下一程：迎接科学元认知时刻》为主题发表演讲。

B | 他认为，科学研究是下一个Coding（编程代码），也是突破AI智能上限的终极考题。

C | 要突破当前人工智能的上限，模型必须从被动观察走向主动干预，跨越“数据驱动、及时反馈、模仿正确”的局限，步入“世界交互、长程推理、善用失败”的科学深水区。         正如Coding在过去一年半中提升了基础模型的全面推理能力和治理水平一样，人工智能用于科学研究，从科学研究中寻找密集的反馈信号，包括失败信号，将进一步加速人工智能上限的突破。         “过去一年半，大模型越来越强，但是强在闭环的任务里，善于做那种有明确目标、有及时反馈、边界清晰的任务，比如编程、翻译、下棋都是这一类。在座很多科学家很清楚，我们科学研究是开放任务、没有标准答案，反馈周期很长，失败是常态，而且需要和物理世界交互。所以从这个意义上来讲，我们认为AI4S不是通用人工智能的应用，而是人工智能终极考题，所以我们提出，Science是下一个Coding。         除了上海AI实验室，上海交通大学、复旦大学也在WAIC期间发布了多个AI4S的成果。         比如，上海交大材料科学与工程学院副教授饶梓元发布了轻合金大模型多智能体平台“深量智研”。该平台面向镁合金、铝合金等关键轻合金材料体系，构建AI-native的材料研发方式，以深度智能理解材料机理，以可解释智能支撑研发决策，以可持续智能连接实验验证、工程放大与产业化落地，并将工艺、设备、成本、安全与规模化制造等真实约束纳入推理过程。平台贯通数据、模型、实验与反馈，将每一次研发过程沉淀为可复用的知识资产，推动先进材料研发从经验驱动迈向物理知识与数据双轮驱动。         上海科学智能研究院也在WAIC期间发布了“神珍”科学多模态基础模型。

D | 该模型立足于物质科学、生命科学、地球科学等多元学科场景，阶段性实现了跨领域科学知识的统一表征与多模态融合理解。

E | 模型总参数约110亿，面向DNA、RNA、蛋白质、小分子、地球系统和医学影像六类科学数据，在一个统一模型中同时支持科学理解与多类结果生成。

F |          “AI要从‘预测’下一个Token走向‘发现’未知的规律，而AI发现未知的科学规律将是超级智能的开始。这一进程的核心在于通过压缩从高维空间运用和发现简洁的机理，以及科学验证的高效闭环。这将促进数字与物理世界的结合和新的模型架构的产生。

G | ”复旦大学特聘教授、上智院院长漆远介绍，真实的科研是包含了文献、假设、数据、模型、仿真、实验及反馈的长链条过程，科学智能领域正着力发展能够组织复杂研究流程的系统能力。

H |          不只是高校和科研机构在探索AI4S的可能性，在今年的十大镇馆之宝中，来自企业界的天鹜科技的晓鹜™提供了一个以智能体为中心的对话式蛋白质设计平台。         用户通过自然语言提出功能需求，AI完成序列设计，随后自动衔接自动化实验室，驱动机器人完成样品制备、蛋白纯化、功能检测，实验结果直接回流到下一轮AI迭代。         天鹜科技创始人兼首席科学家、上海交通大学特聘教授洪亮对第一财经介绍，晓鹜™有别于AlphaFold（DeepMind公司开发的基于深度学习的人工智能程序）预测蛋白结构。         “得益于底层的功能标签数据库，可以直接从蛋白序列预测其功能，通过干湿迭代实现蛋白产品端到端交付，将传统蛋白质研发周期从2至5年大幅缩短至2至6个月，实验样本从万次减至百次，单个样本成功率从1%提升至30%。”          耐心资本赋能          过去以AlphaFold2为代表的AI4S，本质上是利用深度学习对特定科学数据（如蛋白质结构）进行拟合与预测，依然属于“干实验（Dry Lab）”范畴；而在2026 WAIC上多位业内嘉宾的一个共识，是AI智能体开始接管实验室机械臂，实现“干湿闭环”的自主科研。这种跃迁压缩了科研周期。以往需要数年、耗资数百万美元的新药靶点探索或新材料试错，在智能体协同下正被缩短至数周甚至数天。         同时，AI4S从技术研发到商业化落地通常需要5~10年，传统的风险投资基金难以承受这一周期，国有战略资本与产业巨头的“耐心资本”正在成为主导力量，为AI4S提供跨越“死亡之谷”的生态底座。         作为上海三大先导产业以及未来产业的战略投资者、生态构建者，今年，上海国投公司首度围绕AI4S设置了比赛。7月16日，上海国投路演中心亮相，作为该中心建成投运后的首场标杆活动，第一届“申智杯”人工智能创新大赛AI4S科学智能应用、AI算力与计算架构两大赛道决赛同时启动。         参赛代表上海交通大学材料科学与工程学院特聘教授窦红静告诉第一财经，他们这个参赛团队是一个典型的医工交叉领域，利用团队积累的材料和AI相互结合的优势，希望解决癌症临床治疗问题。         “为什么说AI4S特别重要？因为作为材料工科来说，技术就是细胞标记或蛋白的这种标记，探针技术我们可能5~10年以前就能达到，但是这些海量的数据怎么去分析，甚至做到诊断的时候，可能在百万个样本细胞里面只对100个或1000个去诊断分析，就能得到具有整体代表性的结果。”她对记者解释，这都是AI的发展给研究者带来的推演助力，包括整个高通量的统计、定量分析等，甚至现在开发出一个智能体，自动让它高通量去运作，也是得益于AI4S平台，“我觉得工科的科学家们可以更多地去跟人工智能领域的专家合作，才能有一个更好的未来”。         就在WAIC闭幕当天，申智杯成果发布暨颁奖仪式在WAIC现场举行。第一财经从上海国投公司获悉，自5月20日开放报名以来，大赛共吸引来自30余个国家和地区的1451支团队参赛，其中海外团队116支，参赛阵容涵盖头部科技企业、“双一流”高校、国家级科研院所、初创团队及独立开发者。每个赛道奖金池100万元，其中一等奖奖金20万元，二等奖每名奖金10万元，三等奖每名奖金8万元，四大赛道奖金总额达400万元。

I | 赛事落地后，围绕获奖及重点项目的专业验证、投资对接和产业转化已经同步启动。

J |          上海国投公司党委副书记、总裁戴敏敏表示，上海国投公司将常态化举办“申智杯”大赛，打造“赛事孵化—技术突破—产业落地”全链条科创服务体系，为“申智杯”大赛的所有参赛团队、创新项目提供全方位、全链条、精准化的赋能支持。并进一步打通资本对接、资源链接、产业链场景开放、政策落地辅导、成果转化“五位一体”的服务通道。         (本文来自第一财经)。

Current article:http://www.qiniaohongfangfoguisenzhai.cyou/mv6/20260826/8661676.xls

Published on:14:53:18