MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Survey of Next-Generation AI and Its Evolving Landscape

2025· preprint· en· W4412604194 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and Data Classification
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersPakistan Institute of Engineering and Applied Sciences
KeywordsGeographyComputer scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AI began as a theory only, but now it has evolved into a strong & revolutionary force. This force is changing industries workflow, global economies operate, governments run, and how we live our daily life via various emerging AI technologies. Considering the current evolution and rapid advancements of AI, we present this survey to deliver an in-depth review of 15 emerging AI technologies. In this survey, we will discuss their technical foundations, impact, real-world applications with statistical evidence followed by challenges & future directions. Key emerging technologies we’ve covered in this survey include Edge AI, Generative AI, Self-Supervised Learning, Explainable AI, Multi-Modal models, Causal AI, Synthetic Data Generation, Transfer Learning, Group Policy Optimization, Mixture of Experts, Neuromorphic Computing, AI for Sustainability, Federated Learning, as well as AI Ethics and Fairness. Our survey is also extended to Quantum ML. What makes our survey stand out is the multidimensional approach we have taken. In addition to the technical progress, we address critical concerns such as algorithmic bias, data privacy, and environmental sustainability, while emphasizing solutions for secure collaboration and efficient large-scale modeling. Moreover, we have enlisted the latest challenges, limitations in existing technologies following future directions. Also, we’ve excluded outdated literature to ensure that our survey addresses the latest concerns and developments in AI. Hence, this survey is a roadmap for policymakers, researchers, and industry leaders navigating through the future of AI, pointing out the need for interdisciplinary collaboration and responsible innovation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and Data ClassificationFrench-language works237,207