Meet organised on recent advancements in AI
Addressing the gathering, Dr Ramakrishna cited examples like railway signalling automation, smart municipal lighting, and health monitoring platforms, all built using a systems engineering approach integrating electronics, software, and data analytics.
He emphasised the superiority of deterministic automation systems over probabilistic AI models for delivering robust, reliable, and scalable solutions.
Dr R Venkat Rao, Chairman of NRIIT, Principal of NRIIT Dr C Naga Bhaskar, Conference Chairman and Dean, CSE & Allied Dr KV Sambasivarao, Convener and Head of the CSE Department Dr D Suneetha, Director (Academics) Dr G Sambasivarao, Dr D Kailasa Rao, Director (Student affairs) also spoke.
The conference attracted 284 research paper submissions, of which 114 were accepted for presentation after a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, achieving a 40.14 percent acceptance rate. About 122 prestigious institutions worldwide, including Wright State University, California State University, ISRO, Amrita University, Vellore Institute of Technology, National Forensic Sciences University, and Nectar Info Tek LLC (USA), Chandigarh University, Mahindra University, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, and Anna University participated in the conference reflecting its global academic stature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
13-07-2025
- News18
What's Been Knocked About By Shadow-Boxing Over Keeladi?
That was bound to fuel charges of manipulation, and lead to allegations of suppressing the 'truth". It would also make any professional—as superintending archaeologist Amarnath Ramakrishnan definitely is—double down on his work. After all, another Archaeological Survey of India stalwart KK Muhammed also refused to budge from his report on the Hindu pillars and terracotta figures found beneath the Babri Masjid though he was under intense pressure. Even in Tamil Nadu, the case of Keeladi is not unique; T Satyamurthy, who led excavations at Adichanallur, also went through travails related to the submission of his findings. Not only did a century go by between the first dig and the next—1904 and 2003-4—over 15 years elapsed before the ASI came out with a report about what was found. And Tamil parties cited its findings as proof of a separate civilisation separate and superior to the Sindhu-Sarasvati one. As the Adichanallur saga continued, ASI asked Ramakrishna for clarifications on what depth (and therefore what date) some artefacts were excavated in Keeladi too, particularly those attributed to the oldest period, saying they needed more analysis. Like Satyamurthy, Ramakrishna did not budge, asserting his findings were sound and based on established archaeological procedures—stratigraphic sequences, material culture and Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. 'Science" has long been used as a weapon to prop up hypotheses on antiquity and tear them apart. So it is not surprising that in Keeladi too, science is being posited as the neutral adjudicator in a bruising battle of competing political ideologies as state elections in Tamil Nadu loom menacingly. Setting up a museum in Keeladi even as excavations and discoveries are still happening point to the drumming up of popular support for discoveries yet to be peer-reviewed. The southern extremity of Indian is the location of many ancient burial sites—in cists, cairns and urns—but no settlements had been found until the dig at Keeladi. Indeed, even the 178 urns unearthed at Adichanallur had human remains with a diverse racial range: 35% Caucasoid, 30% Mongoloid, 16% Negroid, 6% Australoid, 8% ethnic Dravidian, and 5% mixed trait. Thus, Adichanallur was not a strong candidate to assert a superior 'Dravidian' civilisation. So Keeladi, 12 km southeast of Madurai—one of many ancient sites identified along the Vaigai river, is now the poster-place for Tamil pride. Thousands of artefacts were unearthed there by ASI's Ramakrishna, indicating a 2,100-year-old thriving urban centre of the Sangam era, the first discovery of this kind. Many theories have been expounded since then about Keeladi, including postulations that it was sophisticated and 'highly literate' and even 'secular'. Assertions of 'secularism' in that pre-modern society even though the presence of ritual burials prove that the people of that time had certain beliefs indicates a distinct political agenda given the trajectory of current Dravidian politics; the politicisation of Keeladi is clear. That is why the Centre and ASI have to tread carefully, even when citing science as the reason for their scepticism about Keeladi's antiquity, or any other aspect of the findings there. When Ramakrishna refused the Centre's order to revise his 982-page report on the two phases of excavations he carried out at Keeladi in 2014-2016, he gained huge support from segments in the state who claimed 'northern' bias. Transferring Ramakrishna to Assam—a very bureaucratic move—and delays in central funds for more excavations at Keeladi only exacerbated Tamil anger. Eventually excavations there by ASI restarted, but under PS Sriraman. However, Sriraman concluded there was no continuity in the brick structures discovered earlier, so all the accusations of suppression of Tamil heritage surfaced again. The Madras High Court intervened, visited Keeladi and ordered ASI to continue digging and allow Tamil Nadu's department of archaeology to join in. The latter promptly published a report in 2019 saying Keeladi was an urban settlement dating from 6th century BCE to 1st century CE. In January 2023 Ramakrishna, by then back in Tamil Nadu, submitted his report on the first two phases. But he was again transferred thrice more in quick succession. Meanwhile the third phase of excavation by the state's archaeology department has been accompanied by strong 'Tamil pride' narratives by a wide range of mostly non-experts in archaeology. The ASI, and by extension the Centre, maintain that scientific lacunae remain about Keeladi. advetisement The discovery of hundreds of ancient megalithic burials points to the probability of nearly as many as-yet unexcavated human settlements too, as hunter-gatherers gradually became agro-pastoralists. But centuries of disconnect with our ancient roots, then colonial exploitation followed by post-1947 decades of focus on increasing agricultural production and economic infrastructure has led to the destruction of evidence that could have given a clearer picture. But instead of shadow-boxing, the Centre (and the ASI) must join hands with Tamil Nadu, and indeed all states, to formulate a policy on accessing excavation sites that are so crucial to our understanding of India's ancient heritage. Extensive digs in the north have led to the realisation that the Indus was not the fountainhead of subcontinental civilisation and that many more contemporary settlements flourished further east along a paleo-channel of the Sarasvati.
Indian Express
28-06-2025
- Indian Express
Tech should be for empowerment, not exclusion: Aaditeshwar Seth, Professor, IIT Delhi
Aaditeshwar Seth is a pioneer in the Information and Communication Technologies for Development (ICT4D) space in India, and has built several tech platforms, with an eye on empowering the disadvantaged sections of society. A professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at IIT Delhi and running the ACT4D (Appropriate Computing Technologies for Development) research group, his interests include building tools for environment and natural resource management in rural areas, participatory information sharing systems in low-literacy environments, and the ethics of information systems. He is the co-founder of The CoRE Stack (Commoning for Resilience and Equality), a digital public infrastructure consisting of datasets and tools that can be used by rural communities to improve sustainability in their farms and villages. He is also the co-founder of Gram Vaani, an organisation designing tech tools to enable voice-based participatory media services for rural communities. Aaditeshwar is an engineering graduate from IIT Kanpur and has a Ph.D from the University of Waterloo. Aaditeshwar spoke to on the trends and challenges in the ICT4D space in India, the projects that have worked and those that failed, and his views on designing technology to empower the voiceless. Edited excerpts: Aaditeshwar Seth: Things have changed a lot. The space, which was once driven by internal purpose, now has a lot of new actors. There are nonprofits, startups, social enterprises, governments, international organisations, and large corporations. There are companies like Google and Microsoft eyeing this space, perhaps looking at it from a market opportunity perspective rather than as a development challenge. Not only has the number of innovations and investors increased, but the pace of this work, even in underdeveloped regions, has accelerated. But on the negative side, we have not thought about how to design technology with users in mind. We are not mindful enough about the harm it can cause. We talk about minimising risks, but do not follow through. Perhaps some are reinventing the wheel. The irony is that communities have often already lived these journeys. But their wisdom has not been translated into frameworks or principles to guide on how we build new technologies. I feel that, after all these years, we could have done things in a more thoughtful way. Many players are in the space with goals that are not necessarily aligned with earlier development objectives. Their metrics are different; it could be something like user count, and you will do anything to increase it. But if the metrics were of real impact, like how many government schemes became accessible because of the tools, the outcome would have been different. These are not things that did not work, but rather things that could have been done much better. Aaditeshwar Seth: The key issue is the principles that should have been followed for such projects. They are simple ones like extensive pilots, testing before scaling, understanding potential harm, and minimising risks. These principles have not been fully internalised by the ecosystem. For instance, there was a public health project involving ASHA and Anganwadi workers, delivering vaccines and last-mile healthcare. The data collected — like vaccine scheduling, stock issues, and shortfalls — was useful for performance monitoring and planning. However, this data was sent upward but not returned to the health workers or communities in a way that would help them. For example, a worker could have called a family before a vaccination day or tallied how many vaccines were needed. But the system did not empower frontline workers; it added reporting burdens without direct benefits. Similarly, NREGA has a strong MIS for transparency and has been used for social audits. However, the data is not easy to access. Only someone with specific skills can navigate the MIS. In theory, it meets all criteria, but in practice, there are missed opportunities. Currently, users of such data are limited to financial accounting purposes. On the ground, there are still issues of network connectivity in rural areas, and photo uploads often fail, delaying payments. Women's labour especially gets impacted — for example, work like digging pits for mango planting or water conservation may need flexible timings, but the system now expects workers to log attendance at fixed hours. Technology was introduced to prevent leakage and corruption, but has ended up creating rigidity in the system. Aaditeshwar Seth: One example is using voice technology for education. With Google Assistant, voice recognition, and transcription, users with limited literacy are able to access information effectively. Even on social media platforms like WhatsApp or Facebook, communities are organising unions and social movements. People are figuring out how to use these platforms effectively. Another example is Gram Vaani, which improved social accountability through communication tools. People could call in, discuss problems with government schemes like NREGA, and get verified information. This helped social audits and improved access. These platforms worked not necessarily because of the specific project but because the underlying principles were strong. Aaditeshwar Seth: This is a project focused on rural communities and climate resilience. Issues like falling groundwater levels, soil erosion, and deforestation are being tackled using tech tools. These tools are being used for water and land-use planning, for deciding on where to build check dams or farm ponds. With mobile access, people can now view land-use patterns and rainfall to improve water availability planning. These systems are also tied to schemes like NREGA, which provides funds for constructing such assets. But in practice, the scheme implementation is often top-down. The selection of locations for structures is affected by local power dynamics. Tools are now being developed to allow communities to submit demands online, identify suitable locations based on scientific data, and improve social accountability. This open platform approach helps even small farmers to participate in decision-making. The process involves providing a village location, and the platform suggests optimal interventions. This is also designed to work collectively, not just farmer by farmer. The goal is to use satellite data and machine learning to map conditions and needs. Communities can then verify and submit demands, and platforms can push these to government schemes like NREGA. The panchayat ultimately needs to approve these plans, but this method increases transparency and social accountability. This project has been underway for about two years. It uses satellite data (like from ISRO), combines it with machine learning, and makes it available via mobile apps and dashboards. The team includes environmental researchers, field organisations, engineers, and academic collaborators from institutions like IIT Delhi. The key is to design technologies that put power into the hands of marginalised people. For example, Gram Vaani enabled people to voice their problems, and once these were publicly known, leaders had to act. Similarly, in the current project, people can identify good locations for structures themselves, reducing dependence on officials or auditors. Aaditeshwar Seth: The book talks about how often technology reinforces existing power. But the goal is to design, deploy, and manage technology so that it empowers those without power. Commercialisation of the tools is one way out for marketing them, but if the tools are simple, you might not need a large marketing budget. Word-of-mouth and thoughtful design can reduce costs. Academia can also anchor and support such initiatives. A long-term vision could be to link such tech platforms with income-generating schemes. Instruments like carbon credits are emerging. If communities can demonstrate results, like restored water tables, they could perhaps benefit from these credits. Over time, cooperatives or community-owned models can connect to these markets. Aaditeshwar Seth: It is a lab with students, faculty, and collaborators working on research problems. Earlier, we worked on low-cost computing for community radio stations. The lab supports research, and then deployment happens through organisations like Gram Vaani or CoRE Stack. Currently, all our focus is on CoRE Stack. The lab offers access to real-world problems, and the deployments benefit from research. Both are symbiotic. Aaditeshwar Seth: There are many interesting use cases. For example, using AI for multilingual communication or translating messages to make systems like Gram Vaani more accessible. These things are getting easier, but context still matters. Determining what information applies in what situation is still hard. Unlike a mobile phone, where actions are deterministic, AI systems have uncertainties like misinformation. Users need critical thinking to question what they are seeing or reading. So while AI has great potential, it also demands more awareness from users. But if done right, it can help scale impact.
Time of India
23-06-2025
- Time of India
2,848 students awarded degrees
Altogether 2,848 students were awarded degrees at the 58th convocation of IIT-Kanpur. The President's Gold Medal was awarded to Talin Gupta from the Department of Computer Science and Engineering. The Director's Gold Medal for the 4-year UG programme went to Dhruv Misra from Department of Electrical Engineering.
