BYU leads in student inventor patents, recent study shows
The ranking, by the National Academy of Inventors, finds that of BYU's 18 newly-issued patents, 10 of them list students as inventors or co-inventors.
Baby fox rescued after falling into irrigation drain in Farmington
According to a BYU press release, published research shows that nationally only a small fraction of graduate students appear on a patent. For STEM Ph.D students, it's roughly 4%, including at R1 universities, or universities with a high level of research.
BYU Technology Transfer Director Dave Brown said the BYU ranking is 'very unusual…in a good way.'
'When more than half of our U.S. patents list a student alongside a professor, that's campus … turning into a launchpad for invention,' Brown said. 'BYU is building inventors who can serve the world by solving real-life challenges.'
As those patents are mixed with a large volume of faculty-only filings, the amount that is shared with a student inventor is usually in the 10-20% range, according to the AUTM licensing survey data and peer-reviewed studies. In comparison, BYU's share of patents with student inventors is 56%.
'BYU is in a very select group — fewer than a dozen U.S. institutions — where student inventors appear on a majority of issued patents,' Brown said. 'Making the NAI Top 100 ranking shows that BYU is succeeding at training the next generation.'
Among the new patents that BYU students hold are: artificial vertebral endplates, electromagnetic trap multiplexing, integrated cleaning devices for optical instruments, and multi-stage stent devices.
Among the BYU student co-inventors in the 2024 report, some of them are listed on multiple patents.
The NAI Top 100 U.S. Universities is released annually and ranks U.S. academic institutions that play a role in the advancement of innovation through patents. The NAI has published the top 100 worldwide university list since 2013, adding the top 100 U.S. universities list in 2023.
The University of California system tops the 2024 lists, with MIT, the University of Texas system, Purdue, and Stanford in the top 5. Local universities that made the rankings include the University of Utah, BYU, and Utah State University in that order.
House Natural Resources Committee in Cedar City to discuss federal lands sales, geothermal energy
President Trump announces plan to cut prescription drug costs
House GOP unveils plan to raise debt limit by $4 trillion
BYU leads in student inventor patents, recent study shows
President Trump defends plan to accept Qatari luxury jet
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Smithsonian exhibit monkeys around with the scientific evidence on human origins
The Trump Administration recently called out the Smithsonian Institution for pushing 'one-sided, divisive political narratives,' leading GOP Sen. Jim Banks last week to introduce a bill prohibiting the Smithsonian from promoting woke ideology, as The Post exclusively reported. But American history isn't the only domain in which the Smithsonian, with an ideological ax to grind, advances misinformation. The National Museum of Natural History's Hall of Human Origins vastly distorts the scientific evidence on human evolution, seeking to convince visitors that there's nothing special about us as human beings. 'There is only about a 1.2% genetic difference between modern humans and chimpanzees,' the exhibit starts, with large photos of a human and apes. 'You and chimpanzees [are] 98.8% genetically similar.' 6 The Trump Administration recently called out the Smithsonian Institution for pushing 'one-sided, divisive political narratives.' Shutterstock / Paulm1993 No doubt you've heard this statistic before because many science popularizers say the same thing. Yet it's been known for years that these numbers are inaccurate. Thanks to a groundbreaking April paper in the journal Nature, we know just how wrong they are. For the first time, the paper reports 'complete' sequences of the genomes of chimpanzees and other apes done from scratch. When we compare them to humans, we find our genomes are more like 15% genetically different from chimpanzees'. That means the true genetic differences between humans and chimps are more than 10 times greater than what the Smithsonian tells us. The museum distorts human origins in other areas, too. Again, the purpose is to diminish the exceptional place of humans in nature. 6 The David H. Koch Hall of Human Origins exhibit is seen at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History in Washington. AP The museum's Human Origins fossil hall claims the ancient species Sahelanthropus tchadensis was an 'early human' that walked 'on two legs.' But leading paleoanthropologists sharply dispute this claim. A Nature article found that 'Sahelanthropus was an ape,' and many features 'link the specimen with chimpanzees, gorillas or both, to the exclusion of hominids.' A 2020 Journal of Human Evolution paper showed that Sahelanthropus' femur was like that of a chimp-like quadruped — in other words, it didn't walk upright, and it wasn't a human ancestor. 6 The Smithsonian exhibit presents ape-like australopithecines as 'early humans' who walked upright 'on the ground' much like us, but many scientists don't agree with this characterization, according to reports. Courtesy of Casey Luskin Similarly, the Human Origins exhibit presents the ape-like australopithecines as 'early humans' who walked upright 'on the ground' much like us. Some paleoanthropologists agree. But other scientists strongly disagree, pointing out that some australopithecines showed evidence of ape-like knuckle-walking and only limited capacity for running. Their upright-walking ability was likely best suited for walking along tree limbs, not 'on the ground' exactly like we do. Large questions remain about how they walked, and the Smithsonian gives no hint of the scientific controversy. 6 The museum had a display of *Australopithecus africanus* bust in 2010. Courtesy of Casey Luskin The museum's hominid reconstructions also humanize apes while ape-ifying humans. Australopithecus afarensis (the iconic 'Lucy') is portrayed thoughtfully gazing up at the sky, while Australopithecus africanus is presented smiling, perhaps at a friend's wry remark. Yet australopithecines had brains about the size of a chimp's, and there's no fossil evidence they were capable of abstract thought — or humor. We should remember the famed Harvard anthropologist Earnest Hooton's declaration that 'alleged restorations of ancient types of man have very little, if any, scientific value and are likely only to mislead the public.' 6 The exhibit asserts that humans and chimpanzees are '98.8% genetically similar,' but recently published research found our genomes are more like 15% different from chimpanzees. Courtesy of Casey Luskin The Smithsonian's exhibit also gives scientifically misleading support to the idea humans evolved slowly — saying 'we became human gradually,' much as Darwin imagined, from 'earlier primates.' Again, the result is to blur distinctions between us and other creatures. Yet the great Harvard evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr acknowledged there is a 'large, unbridged gap' in the fossil record between the australopithecines and the first humanlike members of our genus, Homo. In his words, we're in a position of 'not having any fossils that can serve as missing links.' One scientific commentator even said this evidence calls for a 'big bang theory of human evolution.' Why doesn't the Smithsonian disclose any of this information? 6 July marks the 100th anniversary of the Scopes 'monkey' trial. AP This month is the centennial of the Scopes 'monkey' trial, remembered as a warning against hiding scientific information about human evolution. How ironic that 100 years later, the nation's premier science museum obscures scientifically objective data on the very same subject. To fail to correct this exhibit is to use taxpayer money to miseducate the public about a question of profound scientific, sociological, and philosophical importance. Casey Luskin is the Discovery Institute Center for Science and Culture's associate director and co-author of the book 'Science and Human Origins.' He holds a geology Ph.D. from the University of Johannesburg.
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Newsweek
DOGE AI Tool to Target 100K Federal Rules for Elimination: Report
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is reportedly using a newly developed artificial intelligence (AI) tool to accelerate the rollback of federal regulations, with a stated goal of eliminating 50 percent of all federal rules by the first anniversary of President Donald Trump's second inauguration, according to a Saturday report from The Washington Post. Internal documents reviewed by the newspaper, along with interviews with four government officials familiar with the project, reveal an ambitious timeline and a wide-ranging use of the tool across various agencies. Newsweek has reached out to the White House for comment via email on Saturday. Why It Matters DOGE was created by Trump through an executive order to improve efficiency and reduce waste in the federal government. It was led by billionaire Elon Musk who departed the administration in May. The reported plan represents one of the most aggressive attempts by the Trump administration to overhaul the federal regulatory system. By automating the deregulation process, the administration aims to reduce government spending and compliance burdens significantly. However, the use of AI to interpret complex legal language and determine regulatory necessity raises legal and practical concerns, particularly regarding accuracy, oversight, and the future role of civil servants in shaping public policy, according to the Post. What to Know The "DOGE AI Deregulation Decision Tool," developed by engineers brought into government under Elon Musk's DOGE initiative, is programmed to scan about 200,000 existing federal rules and flag those that are either outdated or not legally required. According to a PowerPoint presentation dated July 1 that was obtained by the newspaper, the tool estimates that approximately 100,000 of those rules could be eliminated, primarily through automation with minimal human input. The projection claims this could save trillions in compliance costs and spark increased external investment. At the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), AI has already reviewed over 1,000 regulatory sections in under two weeks. Similarly, it was responsible for "100% of deregulations" at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), according to the PowerPoint presentation. The Post, however, reported it was not able to confirm the use of AI at the agency independently. When asked about the use of AI for deregulation, White House spokesman Harrison Fields emphasized to the newspaper that "all options are being explored" to meet the president's deregulation goals. He clarified that no single plan has been finalized, and the effort is still in early, creative stages with ongoing consultation within the White House. DOGE plans to complete agency-specific deregulation lists by September 1 and finish nationwide rollout by January 20, 2026—labeled in internal documents as "Relaunch America." Agencies are currently receiving training on how to integrate the AI tool into their regulatory review process. The presentation claims the tool could save 93 percent of the labor typically required to gut federal rules, reducing what would usually take 3.6 million work hours to just 36. Despite these goals, some federal employees expressed concern about accuracy. One HUD employee told the Post that the AI misinterpreted statutes and flagged legal language as non-compliant when it was accurate. HUD confirmed to the newspaper that while the agency is exploring AI to streamline efficiency, the system is not intended to replace expert judgment. The push to eliminate regulations is not new for Trump. In January, he issued an executive order mandating the repeal of 10 rules for every new one added. Departments like Transportation and Labor have already reported dozens of regulatory cuts. However, experts question whether such repeals will withstand scrutiny under the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs the legal process for rescinding rules. Previous attempts to bypass procedural safeguards—such as Trump's reversal of showerhead regulations—have faced legal scrutiny. DOGE's lawyers have reportedly vetted the tool, but concerns remain about whether its recommendations will be upheld in court or trusted by the private sector. While DOGE initially tried to play a leading role in the deregulation campaign, internal resistance from federal employees has slowed momentum. Agencies questioned DOGE's subject matter expertise and hesitated to outsource rulemaking authority to a third-party system. Moreover, the administration's efforts to downsize the federal workforce have hampered its ability to implement the deregulation strategy. An American flag waves at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 10 in Washington, D.C. An American flag waves at the U.S. Capitol Building on June 10 in Washington, People Are Saying Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan, told The Washington Post about Trump's unilateral efforts to cut regulations: "There's been some flashy sideshow efforts to avoid the legal strictures, but in general, they don't stick." White House spokesman Harrison Fields wrote in an email obtained by The Washington Post: "The DOGE experts creating these plans are the best and brightest in the business and are embarking on a never-before-attempted transformation of government systems and operations to enhance efficiency and effectiveness." What Happens Next? Over the next several months, agencies will use the DOGE AI tool to select rules for repeal, respond to public comments, and finalize deregulation plans. Whether the courts, the public, and the agencies themselves accept that transformation remains uncertain.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump is Shaping the Future of AI by Making ‘the Most Important Decisions Anyone in the World Has Gotten to Make,' Says Sam Altman
Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, is recognized globally as a leading voice in artificial intelligence (AI) and a key architect of its rapid advancement. His recent comments on President Donald Trump's influence over AI policy reveal both a respect for the complexity of the decisions ahead and an appreciation for Trump's adaptability in the face of technological change. Altman stated in the Bloomberg interview, 'I think he will get to make some of the most important decisions anyone in the world has gotten to make related to AI. I am optimistic he will do the right thing there. He has an unenviable job. One thing that has really impressed me about President Trump, by the way, is his ability to just understand the whole industry and all the changes and quickly seem to have a very good intuition and make good decisions about it while things are changing so fast, he has really been quite impressive to me.' More News from Barchart Dear Palantir Stock Fans, Mark Your Calendars for August 4 The 3 Buffett-Backed Dividend Stocks That Beat the Market in 2025 Should You Buy the Post-Earnings Plunge in Intel Stock? Our exclusive Barchart Brief newsletter is your FREE midday guide to what's moving stocks, sectors, and investor sentiment - delivered right when you need the info most. Subscribe today! Altman's perspective is shaped by a career spent at the intersection of technology and policy. After dropping out of Stanford, he co-founded Loopt, a location-based social networking startup, and later became president of Y Combinator, where he helped launch and scale some of Silicon Valley's most successful companies. Since 2019, Altman has led OpenAI, overseeing the development of transformative technologies such as GPT-3, DALL-E, and ChatGPT, and securing major investments, including a multi-year partnership with Microsoft (MSFT). Under his leadership, OpenAI has become a central player in global conversations about the opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence. Altman's comments on Trump reflect his understanding of the unprecedented challenges facing policymakers in the AI era. He acknowledges that decisions made at the highest levels of government will shape not only the future of technology, but also its impact on society, the economy, and global competitiveness. By crediting what he sees as Trump's intuition and adaptability, Altman points to qualities that are increasingly vital as AI evolves at a pace that often outstrips traditional regulatory frameworks. Despite Altman actually donating and campaigning for candidate Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential contest, Altman has significantly changed his tune in recent years. He called himself 'politically homeless' in a recent thread on X and continues to praise Trump in many of his interviews. In an interview with the New York Times, Altman said that Trump 'gets it' and it's now easier than ever to permit new AI and energy infrastructure. He went so far as to say he was even concerned 'that could have gone the other way,' likely referring to a potential second-term Biden presidency offering more red tape for AI innovators instead of less. His optimism about Trump's ability to 'do the right thing' is notable given the contentious debates surrounding AI governance. Altman has consistently advocated for responsible and transparent development of AI, emphasizing the need for collaboration between industry leaders and policymakers to ensure that the technology benefits all of humanity. His praise for Trump's grasp of the industry suggests a belief that effective leadership in this domain requires both technical understanding and the ability to make sound judgments amid uncertainty. Altman's remarks come at a time when governments worldwide are grappling with the implications of advanced AI, from economic disruption to ethical concerns and national security. His recognition of the 'unenviable job' facing leaders like Trump underscores the stakes involved and the need for informed, agile decision-making. As AI continues to reshape industries and societies, Altman's balanced assessment of Trump's role serves as a reminder that the future of technology will be determined not only by innovators, but also by those entrusted with guiding its development through policy and regulation. Altman's experience and influence lend weight to his observations, reinforcing the importance of thoughtful leadership in this transformative era. On the date of publication, Caleb Naysmith did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Sign in to access your portfolio
