Expert attention map

The Who's Who of AI

What credible people across AI noticed, why it matters, and where the field is converging or disagreeing.

2,397 searchable experts 4,280 tracked across all sources
Build my stream Create my edition
Filter the conversation Who is saying what?

Combine a professional role with a reaction lens. Both must match the same attributed contribution.

Clear all
New Network reaction maps

See how experts are reacting—not just what they shared.

Posts are grouped by conversation and tone. Select a lens to filter the stream; these are never permanent labels on people.

0 live reaction maps in this view

No development in this filter has enough independent reactions yet. The maps appear as soon as the evidence supports them.

Showing signals surfaced by Marzena Karpinska ×
Debated

The questions experts are actively pulling apart

One card per development. Sources are clustered; reaction bundles describe these posts, never the people behind them.

No developments match these filters yet.

Try the field-wide view or clear one of the filters.

Clear filters
More conversations

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

3 experts · 11 posts · 14d ago
Ted Underwood Marzena Karpinska Jenna Russell
Multiple readings Concern & critique · 1 Research & technical analysis · 1
Ted Underwood: This is complex — and likely a bit fragile — but very cool. Actually less interested in the ostensible end goal (Pangram for Ideas) and more in the problems you have to solve to get there (separati…
Ted Underwood: There's some crazy stuff in the ablations. The order of elements has almost no significance. The "discourse roles" they infer? Not load-bearing. You can remove them. On the other hand, it's possibl…
Open the thread →