データベース

自動化

発見

レポートの一覧に戻る

DARPAのイノベーション戦略とスタートアップとの連携

🗓 Created on 4/5/2024

📜 要約

主題と目的の要約

DARPAのイノベーション戦略とスタートアップとの連携に焦点を当て、起業家イニシアチブや技術プロジェクトの推進について調査を行った。主な目的は、新しい技術やイノベーションの促進、競争力の向上、そしてDARPAとスタートアップの連携による相互の恩恵を明らかにすることである。

主要な内容と発見

DARPAの起業家イニシアチブにより、150以上の技術プロジェクトが推進されている。
EEIがDARPAの研究チームを支援し、資金提供やメンタリング、投資家や企業パートナーとのつながりを提供している。
EnCharge AIはDARPAのOPTIMAプロジェクトに参加し、AI推論処理のためのインメモリチップを開発している。
プリンストン大学との提携により、AI処理をデータセンターから解放し、様々なデバイスに展開する取り組みが行われている。

結果と結論のまとめ

DARPAのイノベーション戦略は、スタートアップとの連携を通じて新しい技術やイノベーションを促進し、競争力を高める取り組みを行っていることが明らかになった。起業家イニシアチブや技術プロジェクトの推進により、DARPAは50年以上にわたり画期的な発明を生み出してきた特徴を維持しつつ、イノベーションの特殊部隊モデルを活用していることが示された。

このレポートが参考になりましたか？

あなたの仕事の調査業務をワンボタンでレポートにできます。

無料でリサーチ

🔍 詳細

🏷DARPAの起業家イニシアティブによるイノベーション推進

DARPAの起業家イニシアティブによるイノベーション推進

DARPAは、150以上の技術プロジェクトを推進するための起業家イニシアチブを立ち上げ、新しい技術やイノベーションを促進し、競争力を高める取り組みを行っています。EEIは、DARPAの研究チームを支援し、資金提供やメンタリング、投資家や企業パートナーとのつながりを提供しています。

DARPAの起業家イニシアティブの効果と展望

DARPAの起業家イニシアティブは、技術プロジェクトの加速と革新を促進し、国防分野における競争力を高めることが期待されます。EEIが150の研究チームをサポートすることで、革新的な技術の製品化を促進し、市場への展開を支援することが可能となります。また、外部機関との協力により、起業家精神を活性化させる取り組みが拡大されることで、さらなる成果が期待されます。

DARPA Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative (EEI)

EEIは、DARPAの研究チームを支援し、革新的な技術を製品に加速させることを目指しています。資金提供、メンタリング、投資家や企業パートナーとのつながりを提供します。

イニシアチブ

EEIを拡大し、より多くの研究チームをサポートするために、DARPAはいくつかの外部機関と協力しています。主にNobleReach Emergeと提携し、初期段階の米国投資家や企業の移行パートナーに対する起業家の専門知識とつながりを提供しています。

提供されるリソース

非希釈資金の平均額は25万ドルで、1〜2年間の経験豊富な起業家やビジネスエグゼクティブを雇用し、防衛および商業市場のための堅固なマーケティング戦略を開発することを目指しています。
長年の民間セクターでの経験を持つ専任の商品化メンター
DARPAの民間セクター移行作業部会との関与。これは、スケーリングとサプライチェーンの開発に重要な米国のトップ投資家や企業で構成されています。

影響

いくつかの優れたEEIチームが紹介されています。

Embody: 腱や靭帯の損傷修復のための次世代再生医療デバイスと治療法を開拓しています。
Tasso: 需要に応じた血液採取デバイスを開発しています。
Beta Hatch: 昆虫飼育技術を用いて、低価値の産業副産物を高価値なタンパク質、油、栄養素に変換しています。
LightDeck Diagnostics: COVID-19、敗血症、心臓マーカーのための迅速で高感度なポイントオブケア診断を提供しています。
ProbiusDx: 生物学的マトリックス内のさまざまな分析物を検出および定量するためのAI駆動のプラットフォームを開発しています。

参加方法

EEIに参加するためには、現在または以前のDARPAパフォーマー/研究者である必要があります。興味がある場合は、DARPAプログラムマネージャーにEEIへの関心について話してください。参加は随時受け付けており、限られた数のスポットがあります。また、特定のEEI技術に対する追加の資金提供や採用機会を提供したい場合は、お問い合わせください。

darpa.mil

NobleReach Emerge

DARPA EEI Commercial Solutions Opening

learn more and apply

DARPA EEI Commercial Solutions Opening

Sha-Chelle Manning

darpa.mil

🏷スタートアップとの連携による技術の進化

EnCharge AIのOPTIMAプロジェクト参加による技術開発

EnCharge AIは、DARPAのOPTIMAプロジェクトに参加し、AI推論処理のためのインメモリチップを開発しています。プリンストン大学と提携し、AI処理をデータセンターから解放し、様々なデバイスに展開することを目指しています。

EnCharge AIの取り組みによるAI技術の進化と応用の可能性

EnCharge AIの取り組みは、AI技術の普及と革新を促進する可能性があります。DARPAの支援により、AI処理の効率性と速度が向上し、様々な分野での応用が期待されます。EnCharge AIの成長と資金調達により、AIコンピューティングソリューションの進化が加速する可能性があります。

DARPAのOPTIMAプロジェクトに関する詳細情報

DARPAのOPTIMAプロジェクトは、AI処理要件の増加を緩和し、AI処理の革新をサポートすることを目指しています。
EnCharge AIは、AI推論をデータセンターから解放し、携帯電話、ノートパソコン、車両、工場などに持ち込むことを目指しています。
EnCharge AIは、VentureTech Alliance、RTX Ventures、ACVC Partnersからの追加の2260万ドルの資金調達を発表し、AIコンピューティングソリューションの開発を進めています。
EnCharge AIのCTOであるDr. Kailash Gopalakrishnanは、DARPAがAIの潜在能力を引き出すための新世代のチップの開発を支援していることに興奮しています。

nationalacademies.org

« Previous: University-Industry Partnerships in Japan

However, this late 20th century military technology evolution was only part of a much bigger picture of innovation transformation. Growth economist Carlotta Perez argues that an industrial and therefore societal transformation has occurred roughly every half century, starting with the begin- 3

These technology-based innovation cycles flow in long multi-decade waves. Arguably, not only do these waves transform economies and the way we organize societies around them, they transform military power as well; U.S. military leadership has paralleled its technological innovation leadership. Perez found that the U.S. led the last three innovation waves—the information technology revolution represents the latest. Will this leadership continue? At stake is not only economic leadership but U.S. military leadership. 4

Instead, the availability of technology advances has driven doctrine. If technology innovation is a driving force in both U.S. economic progress and military superiority, and these elements have interacted, we need to understand the causal factors behind this innovation. 5

DARPA will be used as a tool to explore the deep interaction between U.S. military leadership and technology leadership. As we attempt to understand where DARPA came from, we will also ask where it goes next, particularly in IT, as a way of focusing on the continuing strength of the defense innovation system. 6

He argued that growth rates aren’t in an equilibrium but can be altered through innovation advance, with societal well-being expanding correspondingly. The key factor behind his growth through innovation thesis, his work suggests, was the research and development system. However, because technology development is complex and not easy to measure, he treated it as “exogenous” to the economy. Professor of Economics Paul M. Romer of Stamford University articulated what I will call a second direct growth factor. 7

If the first is Solow’s technological innovation founded on R&D, Romer argued that knowledge drives economic growth, and that it is an “endogenous” element in the economy. The key factor standing behind this knowledge is science and technological talent, the “human capital engaged in research.” He suggested a prospector theory of innovation–the nation or region that fields the largest number of well-trained prospectors will find the most gold, i.e., the most innovative advances.

acting as President Roosevelt’s personal science executive during the war. He was allied to a remarkable group of fellow science organizers, including Alfred Loomis, an investment banker and scientist, physicist Ernest Lawrence of Berkley, and two university presidents, James Conant of Harvard and Arthur Compton of MIT. Successively, Bush created and took charge of the two leading organizing entities for U.S. science and technology, the National Defense Research Council (NDRC) and then the Office of Science Research and Development (OSRD). These became the coordinating entities for U.S. wartime R&D, creating crash research projects in critical areas, such as the Rad Lab at MIT and Los Alamos, and the and, in turn, insured interaction and coordination with a rich mix of research components. Influenced by the frustrations of his WWI military research experience where technology breakthrough could not transition past bureaucratic barriers into defense products, Bush kept civilian science control of critical elements of defense research, insisting that his science teams stay out of uniform and separate from military bureaucratic hierarchies which he found unsuited to the close-knit interaction needed for technology progress. 11

In other words, he proposed ending his model of connected science, and dropping his challenge model, in favor of making the federal role one of funding one stage of technology advance, exploratory basic research. His approach would become known as the “pipeline” model for science investment. The federal government would dump basic science into one end of an innovation pipeline, and somehow early and late state technology development and prototyping would occur inside the pipeline, with new technology products emerging, genie-like, at the end. Because he assembled a connected science model during WWII, Bush no doubt realized the deep connection problems in inherent this pipeline model, but likely felt that salvaging federal basic research investment was the best he could achieve in a period of anticipated peace. 12

Meanwhile, science did not stand still. New agencies proliferated, and the outbreak of the Korean War led to a renewal of defense science efforts. By the time NSF was established and funded, its potential coordinating role had been bypassed. It also became a much smaller agency than Bush anticipated, only one among many. Despite Bush’s support for one tent where scientific disciplines and agencies could coordinate their work, as they did in WWII, the U.S. thus adopted a highly decentralized model for its science endeavor. 13

Remarkably, Bush left a legacy of two conflicting models for scientific organizational advance: the connected, challenge model of his WWII institutions, which he dismantled after the war, 15

and the fundamental-science focused, disconnected, multi-headed model of post-war U.S. science institutional organization.

U.S. post-war policy institutionally severed R from D, which had been connected in the wartime model, and posited a pipeline theory of innovation where the federal government dumped research funding into one end of the pipeline, then mysterious things occurred within the innovation pipeline, then remarkable products emerged at the other end. Neoclassical economics, through the work of Robert Solow, came to realize the central role of innovation in economic growth but was unable to apply existing economic models to the mystery inside the pipeline, so treated innovation as “exogenous” to the economy. That response was ultimately unacceptable—it as though economics, after finally discovering the innovation monster in the economic growth room, then declined to look at it. So a group of growth economists, initially led by Paul Romer, gradually began to whittle away at the monster, treating it as “endogenous,” slowly delineating its economic attributes. However, this delineation process still has barely begun. 17

Economic institutions still collect extensive data on the two factors classical economics tied to economic growth, capital supply and labor supply, and data on R&D investment totals; we have little data on the monster, the content and efficiency of the innovation system.

Few are searching for and analyzing the new factors and metrics for innovation evaluation. Interestingly, two decades after Solow won the Nobel Prize for identifying the innovation monster, the U.S. Department of Commerce has announced the need to begin an intensive data collection process around innovation, although this effort is not yet funded.

The National Science Foundation, which has long collected data on innovation investment levels and science education,

has begun an effort to look at data and analysis around innovation with a program entitled the Science of Science and Innovation Policy.

Rycroft and Kash make a similar argument but use a different term: Innovation requires collaborative networks 23

which can be less face-to-face and more virtual. As we look at innovation organization at the personal level, we will explore the rule sets for three sample “great groups” of innovators.

Edison placed his famous Menlo Park lab in a simple 100-foot long wooden frame building, a lab, on his New Jersey farm. In it, he placed a team of a dozen or so artisans, mixing a wide range of skills with a few trained scientists. They worked intensely, sometimes 24/7, and took midnight breaks together, eating pies, reciting poems and singing songs. They mixed a range of disciplines and organize their intense effort around the challenge of electric light. They were a great group, highly collaborative. Great groups also require collaboration leaders and Edison was a remarkable team leader. They worked on the idea of filling the gap between electric poles with a filament placed in a vacuum tube. But that was only the breakthrough invention, not the innovation. To make their light usable, Edison and his team then must invent much of the infrastructure for electricity—from generators to wiring to fire safety to the structure of a supporting electric utility industry. Edison and his team become inventors and innovators, visionaries and (as initiators of a network of companies with Wall Street backing) vision enablers. 25

Anticipating the market crash, he sold out in 1928 with his great fortune intact. He used it to pursue science, setting up his own private lab at his Tuxedo Park, New York estate in the 1930s and assembling there a who’s who of pre-war physics. Loomis’ own field of study there was microwave physics. As WWII loomed, Vannevar Bush, respecting Loomis’ industrial organizing skills, asked him to join Roosevelt’s NRDC to mobilize science for the war. 26

The Rad lab developed great advances in microwave radar and the proximity fuse, technologies vital to success of the allies. Eight Nobel prizewinners came out of the Rad Lab and it ended up laying the foundations for important parts of modern electronics. It also embodied another feature key to successful great groups—through Loomis and Bush, the Rad Lab had direct access to the top decision makers able to mandate the execution and adaptation of its findings, Stimson and Roosevelt. 27

Brattain later commented, “It was probably one of the greatest research teams ever pulled together on a problem…. I cannot overemphasize the rapport of this group. We would meet together to discuss important steps almost on the spur of the moment of an afternoon. We would discuss things freely. I think many of us had ideas in these discussion groups, one person’s remarks suggesting an idea to another. We went to the heart of many things during the existence of this 28

These projects are not unique. A venture capitalist has commented that he looks for these same kinds of characteristics every time he funds a startup. To summarize, a common rule set seems to characterize successful innovation at the personal and face-to-face level; the rules include ensuring: a highly-collaborative team or group of great talent; a non-hierarchical, flat and democratic structure where all can contribute; a cross-disciplinary talent mix, including experimental and theoretical skills sets networked to the best thinking in relevant areas; organization around a challenge model; using a connected science model able to move breakthroughs across fundamental, applied, 30

In 1960, Licklider, trained in psychology with a background in physics and mathematics, wrote about what he called the “Man-Machine Interface” and “Human-Computer Symbiosis”: “The hope was that in not too many years, human brains and computing machines will be coupled together very tightly, and that the resulting partnership will think as no human brain has ever thought.” 32

to work on what was being called the “command and control” problem, and then that problem took off in importance. Because Kennedy and MacNamara became deeply frustrated with a profound command and control problem—their inability to obtain and analyze real time data and interact with on-scene military commanders during the Cuban Missile Crisis—DARPA gave Licklider major resources to tackle it. It was the rare case of the visionary being placed in the position of vision-enabler. Strongly backed by noted early DARPA Directors Jack Ruina and Charles Herzfeld, Licklider found, selected, funded, organized and set up a remarkable support network of early information technology researchers at universities and firms that over time built personal computing and the internet. He served at two different periods in DARPA. 34

Licklider’s DARPA model was also not a flash in the pan—internally it was able to institutionalize innovation so that successive generations of talent sustained and kept renewing the technology revolution over the long term. At the personal level of innovation, the great groups Licklider started, in turn, shared key features of the Menlo Park, Rad Lab and other groups previously discussed. Licklider’s Information Processing Techniques group was the first and greatest success of the DARPA model, but this success was not unique; DARPA was able to achieve similar accomplishments in a series of other technology areas. 36

This enables the Department of Defense (DoD) at a later stage to take advantage of this technology evolution speed up, with corresponding shared and therefore reduced development and acquisition costs. This was exactly the case with the IT revolution that Licklider and DARPA made crucial contributions to. Although IT has been in a thirty year development process which is still ongoing, DARPA’s support for and reliance on a primarily civilian sector development process enabled DoD to obtain much more quickly and cheaply the tools it needed to solve its initial command and control problem. 38

this defense transformation was built around many of the IT breakthroughs DARPA initially sponsored. 39

Admirals Bill Owens and Art Cebrowski, and others, in turn, translated this IT revolution into a working concept of “network centric warfare”

which further enabled the U.S. in the past decade to achieve unparalleled dominance in conventional warfare. And the foundation of this IT revolution, that enabled this defense transformation, was a great innovation wave that swept into the U.S. economy in the 1990s, creating strong productivity gains and new business models that led to new societal wealth creation

which, in turn, provided the funding base for the defense transformation. To summarize, the DARPA model can support traditional technology development within the defense sector where that technology is primarily or overwhelmingly defense-relevant (like stealth). Alternatively it can support joint defense-civilian sector technology development where the technology is relevant to both. This enables DoD potentially to take major advantage of academia’s openness to new ideas, the willingness of entrepreneurs to commercialize these innovations, and the corresponding scale of an economy-wide advance.

moving a technology from fundamental science connected through the development up to prototyping stages, then encouraging and promoting its concepts with partners who move it into service procurement and/or the civilian sector for initial production, enabling full innovation not simply invention. 43

The aim of DARPA’s “hybrid” approach, unique among American R&D agencies, is to ensure strong collaborative “mindshare” on the challenge and the capability to connect fundamentals with applications.

Iansati and Levien have also argued that these innovation systems start to decline or shift elsewhere when the keystone firms cease being thought leaders and instead shift to what they call “landlord” status. In this state, the “landlord” firm shifts to simply extracting value from the existing system rather than continuously attempting to renew and build the system. There have been concerns voiced in recent years and considered below, that DARPA could be moving away from its keystone role, particularly in IT. 46

DARPA has long been famed as the most successful U.S. R&D agency, so these concerns appear worth weighing. 47

Since DoD’s strategic superiority in symmetric and potentially asymmetric warfare has become in significant part its network centric capability, and secure semiconductor microprocessors are the base technology for this capability, DSB found that DoD faces a serious strategic problem as the newest generation of semiconductor production facilities is increasingly shifting to China and other Asian nations. In fact, the U.S. share of the world’s leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing capacity dropped from 36 percent to 11 percent in the past 7 years. 48

This problem may be compounded if semiconductor design and research, which historically have had to be co-located with production facilities, shift abroad as well. DARPA’s departure from its systematic support of U.S. technology leadership in this field appears to present a serious defense issue if other parts of the Department do not absorb some of this function. DARPA’s view in recent years

DoD has a long term problem with what still appears to be a foundation technology. It is serious enough that a 2005 Defense authorization bill directed DoD to implement DSB’s proposals to try to control the problem and retain U.S. technology leadership in this area. 50

A DARPA chip strategy, some would argue, should be to try to secure leadership in a post-silicon, post-Moore’s Law world in bio-nano-quantum-molecular computing; DARPA would respond that it is working in a number of those fields. Others would dispute whether it is doing enough to nurture leadership in these emerging areas.

on cybersecurity noted DARPA plans to terminate funding for its High Confidence Software and Systems development area, aiming to curtail cybersecurity funding except for classified work. Historically, one of Eisenhower’s key aims in establishing DARPA was to make sure the U.S. was never again subject to a major technology surprise like Sputnik, and it is widely acknowledged that defense and critical private sector IT systems remain vulnerable to cybersecurity attack. Defense theorists, noting the major economic consequences of the 9/11 attack on financial markets and the insurance sector have argued that asymmetric cyber attacks on fundamental financial infrastructure by largely unidentifiable state or non-state actors could be devastating to the developed world, potentially striking a powerful blow to the world economy. PITAC has noted that because IT is dominated by the private sector, and even DoD’s proposed secure high speed Global Information Grid must interact with the internet, shared solutions between defense and private sectors must be developed, so classified research in many cases cannot be effectively implemented. PITAC identified ten defense-critical IT research areas, from authentication technologies to holistic security systems, it believes require future DARPA investment. 53

Although DARPA continues to look at some IT problems, “its growing failure to support the university elements of that community is altering the innovation ecosystem” that it created “in an increasing negative way, with no other agency ready or able to pick up that role.” Some university computer science departments and labs report that although the DARPA cutbacks in funding have been at least partially made up by industry support, this is often short term and not breakthrough-oriented, and often is from Asian firms that control the IP for technology developed and for obvious competitive reasons preclude it going into U.S. spin-offs. It should be noted that an increase in NSF computer science funding has offset some of the effects of the decline in DARPA university funding. DARPA’s leadership has argued, as justification for the cutback, that it was not seeing enough new ideas from this sector. 54

Although he acknowledged that DARPA was looking at cognitive computing, he argued that there were problems in the subjects DARPA was selecting for IT research because it was not confronting key security areas. For example, “our basic model of computer security (perimeter security) is fatally flawed” and will not be solved by the “short term, risk-adverse approach being currently taken by DARPA.” He argued that our “ability to produce reliable, effective software” is tottering on “the brink of disaster” but DARPA has not focused on solutions, and also is not reviewing the fact that our basic model for computing is not yet close to human brain capability, and requires a new model “of parallel computing” with “architectures and algorithms of immense power.” He also argued that the “use of computers in education has progressed little from the ‘automated drill’ model of the Plato system of the 1960s” although “we know much more about how people learn physiologically and psychologically” including how “emotion interacts with learning” which we could put to good use in quickly training troops in urban combat and counter-insurgency, and DARPA should also be more involved in this area. DARPA spokesmen have noted in response to these arguments that DARPA has funded, as has the Army, soldier training simulation systems at USC’s center for this work, and that it was the primary initial funder of grid computing. Perhaps one part of the answer is that DARPA may lack a Licklider with the vision to see and evolve a new IT territory. Critics respond that that because of a top-down management style in recent years at DARPA, office directors and program managers lack the authority to initiate in this way. 55

may limit its access to some of the university researchers it has relied on in the past, creating difficulty over time in attracting talent. 56

Given DARPA’s historic role in successfully straddling both sectors, DARPA’s needs to protect its ability to play in both worlds. 57

and does the state of the sector justify such a retreat? 58

Where do we measure the IT wave from? If we measure it from the first post-World War II mainframe, ENIAC, the half century mark for the revolution ran out in 1995. 1995, however, was the period when we were bringing on personal computing and internet access at levels that reached a major portion of our society. If we measure the IT innovation wave from around 1995, when real time and networked computing took off with the public, then we are still a decade into an IT revolution wave. Perhaps DARPA should be moving on to another innovation wave? 60

We have already been through a succession of unfolding and sometimes parallel IT waves, from business (and military) computational capability, to data retrieval, processing and display, to advanced digital communications, to data mining and using mass data as a predictive tool, and we are beginning to make progress on symbolic manipulation and computer theorem proving and are thinking about quantum computing. The grail quest of computing is true artificial intelligence. This is not a technology pursuit similar to past efforts because it is ultimately a quest to take on a godlike power. 61

We have a long, long way to go in achieving this stage. Progress on the Turing Test—can a computer’s thinking be mistaken for a human’s—has been limited.

Although computers now play chess at the highest level and drive SUVs through DARPA’s desert and urban obstacle courses, computing isn’t even close yet to the intuitive powers of the human brain. Although an artificial intelligence quest may ultimately be futile or only partially achievable, even if we have to

While yesterday’s problem was computation of static functions in a static environment within well-understood specification, today, adaptive systems are needed that operate in environments that are dynamic and uncertain. While computation was the main past goal, communication, sensing and control are also now critical. While computing used to focus on the single operating agent, it must now focus on multiple agents that may be cooperative, neutral or adversarial. While batch processing of text and homogeneous data used to be the task, stream processing of massive heterogeneous data now is. While stand-alone applications once prevailed, deep interaction with humans is now key. While there was a binary notion of correctness in computing, now there is a trade-off between multiple criteria. In today’s computing world these opportunities arise in a far more complex environment of cheap communication, ubiquitous communication, overwhelming data, and limited human resources. Major IT tasks for the military become, for example, much deeper human computer interface, social and cultural modeling; far more robust and secure computation; smart, self-directed autonomous surveillance; and robots ready for human interaction. 64

this is a significant 65

Boomer generation scientists have been the mainstay of DoD science talent in its labs and research centers, but are now retiring in droves, and are not being adequately replaced. DoD faces a very serious science talent supply problem and needs hiring and retention flexibility beyond civil service limits, but a rigid position in the past by DoD personnel staff that there must be only one personnel system for all at DoD has thwarted Congressional reform efforts to create more flexibility for scientists. The pressure of the tempo of ongoing military operations is, in turn, putting pressure on funding for science in the military services. The pattern of technology leadership in DoD may not be as strong as in the past. DDR&E leaders of the caliber of John Foster, Malcolm Currie and William Perry have been infrequent, and the overall depth of technical competence in the Office of the Secretary of Defense to backup DARPA and push for technology implementation has declined. Overall, the picture for DoD science is not getting prettier, and this is against a backdrop of serious problems in U.S. physical science in general, as explored in recent major reports by the National Academies. 66

>. http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_NCW.pdf

Next: Public-Private Linkage in Biomedical Research in Japan: Lessons of the 1990s »

defense.gov

insidehpc.com

$22.6 million funding

a series of foundational peer-reviewed published papers

www.enchargeai.com/technology

EnCharge AI

digital.gov

heal itself

report (PDF, 336 KB, 24 pages)

report (PDF, 336 KB, 24 pages)

ocw.mit.edu

🏷国家安全保障への貢献

DARPAの特徴とイノベーション戦略

DARPAは、国防高等研究計画局であり、50年以上にわたり画期的な発明を生み出してきた。その特徴は迅速さ、小規模な組織、控えめな予算である。DARPAはイノベーションの特殊部隊モデルを持ち、野心的な目標、一時的なプロジェクトチーム、独立性を重視している。

DARPAモデルの私企業への適応性

DARPAのモデルは、私企業にも適応可能であり、野心的な目標を設定し、専門家チームを短期間で結集することで迅速な成果を生み出している。また、独立性を持つことで大胆なリスクを取り、最高の人材を説得して参加させることができる。これらの要素は、イノベーションの促進において重要であり、私企業もDARPAの成功を参考にすることができる。

DARPAのSBIRとSTTRプログラムに関するPhase II提案の手順

DARPAのSmall Business Innovation Research (SBIR)とSmall Business Technology Transfer (STTR)プログラムは、国家安全保障に対処するための革新的なアプローチを提案する機会を提供する。Phase II提案には、提案カバーシート、技術ボリューム、他のボリューム、詐欺、浪費、濫用トレーニング、移行と商品化サポートプログラムなどが含まれる。

DARPAが将来のビジョンを共有

DARPAは、AIの進化、新技術の開発、国家安全保障の重要性に焦点を当てた将来のビジョンを共有している。AIの進化と新技術の開発に注力し、国家の安全を確保するための取り組みを行っている。

DARPAが商業アクセラレーターを活用して前進

DARPAは、商業アクセラレーターを活用して国家安全保障のための画期的な技術への投資を行い、技術の持続的なポジティブな影響を確認することを目指している。商業アクセラレーターは、技術ソリューションの商業的実現可能性とマーケティング戦略の評価、起業家の特定、民間投資資本への接続を行っている。

darpa.mil

hbr.org

intelligencecommunitynews.com

Loren Blinde

Review the DARPA commercial accelerators synopsis.

darpa.mil

🖍 考察

結果の確認

DARPAの起業家イニシアティブにより、EEIが150の研究チームをサポートすることで、革新的な技術の製品化が促進され、市場への展開が支援されることが明らかになりました。また、EnCharge AIの取り組みにより、AI技術の普及と革新が促進され、AI処理の効率性と速度が向上して様々な分野での応用が期待されています。

これらの結果は、DARPAの支援がイノベーションを加速し、国防分野における競争力を高める重要な役割を果たしていることを示しています。また、外部機関との協力により、起業家精神が活性化され、さらなる成果が期待されています。

重要性と影響の分析

得られた結果から、DARPAのイノベーション戦略は国防分野だけでなく、産業界全体に重要な影響を与えていることが分かります。技術の製品化や市場展開の支援は、新たなビジネスチャンスを生み出し、経済成長に貢献しています。また、AI技術の普及と革新は、様々な分野での効率化や革新を促進し、競争力の向上につながると考えられます。

これらの成果は、DARPAのイノベーション戦略が持つ重要性を示しており、今後も継続して支援されるべきであると言えます。他の応用例や元の仮説と比較することで、その価値と影響をより明確に理解することが重要です。

ネクストステップの提案

調査から生じた疑問点や未解決の課題に対処するために、次の行動計画を提案します。まず、起業家精神の活性化をさらに促進するために、教育プログラムや支援体制の強化が必要です。また、AI技術の応用範囲を拡大するために、産業界との連携を強化し、新たな市場への展開を支援する取り組みが重要です。

さらに、技術の製品化や市場展開における課題や障壁を克服するために、専門家チームのサポートやリソースの提供が必要です。これにより、革新的な技術の実用化が加速し、成果を最大化することが可能となります。

今後の調査の方向性

今回の調査における限界点を踏まえると、起業家精神の活性化やAI技術の応用拡大に関するさらなる調査が必要です。特に、異なる産業分野におけるイノベーションの影響や成長戦略についての研究が重要です。また、新たな技術トレンドや市場動向に関する情報収集を行い、今後のイノベーション戦略に活かすことが求められます。

このレポートが参考になりましたか？

あなたの仕事の調査業務をワンボタンでレポートにできます。

無料でリサーチ

📖 レポートに利用された参考文献

検索結果: 15件追加のソース: 0件チャット: 0件

120件の参考文献から15件の情報を精査し、約75,000語の情報を整理しました。あなたは約7時間の調査時間を削減したことになります🎉

調査された文献

120件

精査された情報

15件

整理された情報量

約75,000語

削減された時間

約7時間

🏷 DARPAの起業家イニシアティブによるイノベーション推進

DARPA Launches Entrepreneurial Initiative to Propel over 150 ...

“DARPA-funded scientists produce technologies that have the potential to upend existing markets, establish military advantage, and create ...

darpa.mil

DARPA Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative (EEI)

The Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative's goal is to accelerate transformational innovations to products and is positioned to support 150 DARPA research teams ...

darpa.mil

How to Participate in DARPA's SBIR and STTR Programs

The goals of the SBIR Program are to: stimulate technological innovation; use small business to meet federal R&D needs; foster and encourage participation by ...

darpa.mil

[PDF] Innovation at DARPA

DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, was founded early in 1958 by. President Eisenhower. Initially called ARPA, it was created in response ...

darpa.mil

[PDF] Small Business Financing Options - Darpa

Possible financing mechanisms applicable for small businesses are outlined below. Government Funding. Small businesses participating in the Small Business ...

darpa.mil

🏷 スタートアップとの連携による技術の進化

Startup Partners with Princeton on DARPA In-Memory AI Chip

An AI startup co-founded by a Princeton University professor has won an $18.6 million DOD grant to develop an in-memory chip built to deliver ...

insidehpc.com

[PDF] Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)

EEI investment supports development of a robust and deliberate Go- to-Market strategy for DARPA-funded advanced technology, into high-value ...

defense.gov

Class 8, Part 1: DARPA as the Connected Model in the Innovation ...

The class will use as a case study the evolution of personal computing and its internet application, using Waldrop's text to consider various elements of the ...

mit.edu

DARPA: A Case Study in Open Innovation - Digital.gov

And the agency often gets ideas from building communities of practice in specific areas, often spurred on by open competition and collaboration.

digital.gov

The Connected Science Model for Innovation - The DARPA Role

To summarize, the DARPA model can support traditional technology development within the defense sector where that technology is primarily or overwhelmingly ...

nationalacademies.org

🏷 国家安全保障への貢献

“Special Forces” Innovation: How DARPA Attacks Problems

Two of them advanced to low-volume production, were then further developed in collaboration with our colleagues in other parts of the company, and will soon ...

hbr.org

[PDF] Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) & Small ... - Darpa

Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs ... Review Information, DARPA will provide the proposer a technical evaluation ... Software Under Small ...

darpa.mil

DARPA moves forward with commercial accelerators

The mission of DARPA's Commercial Strategy is to accelerate DARPA's R&D technology into future products, services, and capabilities for both ...

intelligencecommunitynews.com

Collaborating Toward Integrated Commercial Lunar Infrastructure

DARPA has a 65-year legacy of playing a crucial role in enabling the space technology research and development (R&D) ecosystem: de-risking ...

darpa.mil

DARPA Shares Its Vision for the Future

“DARPA focuses heavily on building collaborative communities of expertise in institutions across the country,” the report notes. “This ...

darpa.mil

📖 レポートに利用されていない参考文献

検索結果: 34件追加のソース: 0件チャット: 0件

Industry - Darpa

Partnerships are essential to success for all opportunities, and DARPA encourages aspiring performers to assemble multidisciplinary teams of researchers when ...

darpa.mil

Thinking differently, driving innovation at DARPA

Breakthrough innovation, says DARPA's director, Dr. Stefanie Tompkins, requires thinking differently, breaking free of limiting assumptions and biases, and ...

kpmg.us

DARPA Innovation Fellowship

Innovation Fellows develop and manage portfolios of high-impact, exploratory efforts to identify breakthrough technologies for the Department of Defense. DARPA ...

darpa.mil

Bringing Classified Innovation to Defense and Government Systems ...

The BRIDGES initiative is a pilot effort sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to connect innovation from small companies that ...

darpa.mil

DOD Seeks to Grow Partnerships with Silicon Valley Startups

Innovations arms at the Defense Department say tech programs can thrive amid greater partnerships with startups.

govciomedia.com

DARPA: A Role Model for Government Innovation

This new approach stresses partnerships expand access to opportunity and provide the opportunity for greater value creation. Strategic partnerships are thus a ...

challenge.org

DARPA's Approach to Innovation and Its Reflection in Industry - NCBI

INTRODUCTION. Today's world is changing rapidly, providing exceptional challenges and opportunities. As shown by recent events, it is increasingly complex ...

nih.gov

DARPA's Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative fosters innovation ...

DARPA's Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative focuses on fostering an ecosystem favorable to innovative companies, not just individual ...

federalnewsnetwork.com

Opportunities - Darpa

DARPA pursues opportunities for transformational change rather than incremental advances. It does so collaboratively as part of a robust innovation ...

darpa.mil

14. IARPA: A Modified DARPA Innovation Model

DARPA and IARPA are clearly mainstays of the extended pipeline model, able to apply acquisition budgets from their overall agencies to implement technologies ...

openbookpublishers.com

Models and Ecosystem to Facilitate Breakthrough Innovations

The Economist called DARPA an agency that “shaped the modern world,” and it models the values, spirit, and technical structure that have the potential to spur ...

the-learning-agency.com

A Case Study on DARPA: An Exemplar for Government Strategic ...

Advocates for a mission economy contend that government bureaucracy can be transformed through a strategic structuring that would improve ...

springer.com

The DARPA Model for Transformative Technologies - 1. Introduction

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has become an “innovation icon,” widely recognized for playing an important role in the creation and ...

openedition.org

[PDF] DARPA: the Differentiator - OSF

Besides building a DARPA-like agency, venture investing can be a strategy other nations use to transfer U.S. developed technologies. In a 2018 DIUX report 22, ...

osf.io

The Changing Landscape of Dual-Use Technology: Will Startups ...

ARPA-H is modeled after the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which has a long history of supporting breakthrough technologies ...

masschallenge.org

The Untold History of DARPA, the Pentagon Agency that Changed ...

This history of DARPA relies on interviews and declassified records to tell the story of the agency's many successes and failures.

dau.edu

DARPA - Wikipedia

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is a research and development agency of the United States Department of Defense responsible for the ...

wikipedia.org

Promises and Challenges of the “ARPA Model”

Performers at ARPA-E and DARPA may be funded through common mechanisms (grants, contracts, cooperative agreements), but both DOD and DOE also provide ...

uchicago.edu

[PDF] Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: Overview and Issues ...

This report provides an overview of DARPA, including the agency's organizational structure, characteristics (i.e., the “DARPA model”), and ...

fas.org

Engaging DARPA - UArizona Research, Innovation & Impact

With a roughly $2.8B budget in FY14, DARPA invests in revolutionary (i.e., high risk, high reward) ideas that can lead to breakthrough technologies and next ...

arizona.edu

3. NSF and DARPA as Models for Research Funding

Funds are awarded in the form of grants through a competitive process organized and administered by a program manager. Competitions take place on a regular ...

openedition.org

Opportunities - Darpa

It does so collaboratively as part of a robust innovation ... technical claims to enable accurate assessments of scientific content. ... DARPA collaborated with ...

darpa.mil

[PDF] Defense Advanced Research Projects ... - Department of Defense

INTRODUCTION. DARPA's mission is to make strategic, early investments in breakthrough science and technology that.

defense.gov

Proposer Instructions: General Terms and Conditions - Darpa

All electronic and information technology acquired or created through a Broad Agency Announcement must satisfy the accessibility requirements of ...

darpa.mil

DARPA Increases Access to Critical Tools, IP to Accelerate Innovation

Through DARPA Toolbox, successful proposers will receive greater access to commercial vendors' technologies and tools via pre-negotiated, low- ...

darpa.mil

Arm and DARPA Sign Partnership Agreement to Accelerate ...

“Our expanded DARPA partnership will provide them with access to the broadest range of Arm technology to develop compute solutions supported by ...

arm.com

About DARPA

It works within an innovation ecosystem that includes academic, corporate and governmental partners, with a constant focus on the Nation's military Services ...

darpa.mil

DARPA Director Seeks to Foster an Innovation Ecosystem - MeriTalk

The focus, Tompkins added, is to extend innovation into the DoD ecosystem from DoD research labs to academic research institutions to the ...

meritalk.com

Enabling Mission Impact: Funding Strategies for High-Risk High ...

Governments & foundations around the world are seeking strategies to optimize their investments towards societal challenges.

mit.edu

AI Next: the Future of AI Innovation with DARPA - LinkedIn

In September 2018, DARPA announced a multi-year investment of more than $2 billion on artificial intelligence research and development in a ...

linkedin.com

DARPA Collaborates with Commercial Partners to Accelerate ...

We offered to collaborate by funding additional experts to join their team and provide rigorous government verification and validation of their ...

darpa.mil

Beyond the Osprey: DARPA wants high-speed vertical takeoff X-plane

The companies vying for DARPA's SPRINT program could take a wide variety of approaches to creating a high-speed vertical lift aircraft.

defensenews.com

Forward to the Future: Visions of 2045 - Darpa

A big part of DARPA's mission is to envision the future and make the impossible possible.

darpa.mil

DARPA and other agencies work on plans to revive chip industry

The main objective of this week's summit is to work on ways to boost research, development and manufacturing for the chip industry. DARPA is ...

geekwire.com

📊 ドメイン統計

参照ドメイン数: 29引用済み: 8総文献数: 120

darpa.mil

引用: 8件/ 総数: 52件

引用率: 15.4%

hbr.org

引用: 1件/ 総数: 5件

引用率: 20.0%

defense.gov

引用: 1件/ 総数: 4件

引用率: 25.0%

insidehpc.com

引用: 1件/ 総数: 2件

引用率: 50.0%

mit.edu

引用: 1件/ 総数: 2件

引用率: 50.0%

digital.gov

引用: 1件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 100.0%

nationalacademies.org

引用: 1件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 100.0%

intelligencecommunitynews.com

引用: 1件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 100.0%

challenge.org

引用: 0件/ 総数: 7件

引用率: 0.0%

nih.gov

引用: 0件/ 総数: 6件

引用率: 0.0%

the-learning-agency.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 6件

引用率: 0.0%

federalnewsnetwork.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 5件

引用率: 0.0%

kpmg.us

引用: 0件/ 総数: 3件

引用率: 0.0%

openedition.org

引用: 0件/ 総数: 3件

引用率: 0.0%

masschallenge.org

引用: 0件/ 総数: 3件

引用率: 0.0%

fas.org

引用: 0件/ 総数: 3件

引用率: 0.0%

springer.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 2件

引用率: 0.0%

uchicago.edu

引用: 0件/ 総数: 2件

引用率: 0.0%

arizona.edu

引用: 0件/ 総数: 2件

引用率: 0.0%

govciomedia.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

openbookpublishers.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

osf.io

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

dau.edu

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

wikipedia.org

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

arm.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

meritalk.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

linkedin.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

defensenews.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

geekwire.com

引用: 0件/ 総数: 1件

引用率: 0.0%

このレポートが参考になりましたか？

あなたの仕事の調査業務をワンボタンでレポートにできます。

無料でリサーチ

新しいテーマを調査する

運営会社サービス概要メディア

サインイン

DARPAのイノベーション戦略とスタートアップとの連携

📜 要約

主題と目的の要約

主要な内容と発見

結果と結論のまとめ

このレポートが参考になりましたか？

🔍 詳細

🏷DARPAの起業家イニシアティブによるイノベーション推進

DARPAの起業家イニシアティブによるイノベーション推進

DARPAの起業家イニシアティブの効果と展望

DARPA Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative (EEI)

イニシアチブ

提供されるリソース

影響

参加方法

🏷スタートアップとの連携による技術の進化

EnCharge AIのOPTIMAプロジェクト参加による技術開発

EnCharge AIの取り組みによるAI技術の進化と応用の可能性

DARPAのOPTIMAプロジェクトに関する詳細情報

🏷国家安全保障への貢献

DARPAの特徴とイノベーション戦略

DARPAモデルの私企業への適応性

DARPAのSBIRとSTTRプログラムに関するPhase II提案の手順

DARPAが将来のビジョンを共有

DARPAが商業アクセラレーターを活用して前進

🖍 考察

結果の確認

重要性と影響の分析

ネクストステップの提案

今後の調査の方向性

このレポートが参考になりましたか？

📖 レポートに利用された参考文献

🏷 DARPAの起業家イニシアティブによるイノベーション推進

🏷 スタートアップとの連携による技術の進化

🏷 国家安全保障への貢献

📖 レポートに利用されていない参考文献

📊 ドメイン統計

このレポートが参考になりましたか？