Lithium-ion batteries power everything from electric cars to laptops to leaf blowers. Despite their widespread adoption, lithium-ion batteries carry limited amounts of energy, and rare overheating can lead to safety concerns. Consequently, for decades, researchers have sought a more reliable battery. 

Solid-state batteries are less flammable and can hold more energy, but they often require intense pressure to function. This requirement has made them difficult to use in applications, but new research from Georgia Tech could change that. 

The research group of Matthew McDowell, professor and Carter N. Paden Jr. Distinguished Chair in the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering and the School of Materials Science and Engineering, has designed a new metal for solid-state batteries that enables operation at lower pressures. While lithium metal is often used in these batteries, McDowell’s group discovered that combining lithium with softer sodium metal results in improved performance and novel behavior.

McDowell and his collaborators presented their findings in the paper, “Interface Morphogenesis with a Deformable Secondary Phase in Solid-State Lithium Batteries,” published in Science on June 5.

Stackable Solution

Lithium-ion batteries have been the industry standard because they combine compact size, reliability, and longevity. However, they contain a liquid “electrolyte,” which helps lithium ions move in the battery but is also flammable. In solid-state batteries, this electrolyte is a solid material that is less flammable. The challenge is that when the battery is used, the lithium metal in the battery changes its shape, potentially losing contact with the solid electrolyte, which degrades performance. A common way to ensure the metal doesn’t lose contact is to apply high pressure to these batteries.

“A solid-state battery usually requires metal plates to apply this high pressure, and those plates can be bigger than the battery itself,” McDowell said. “This makes the battery too heavy and bulky to be effective.”

The researchers, led by Georgia Tech research scientist Sun Geun Yoon, sought a solution. The solid-state batteries would still require some pressure to function, but they found that by also using a softer metal, less pressure is required. The researchers decided to pair the commonly used lithium metal with a surprising element: sodium. 

“Adding sodium metal is the breakthrough,” McDowell noted. “It seems counterintuitive because sodium is not active in the battery system, but it’s very soft, which helps improve the performance of the lithium.”

How soft can sodium be? In a controlled environment, a person could stick their gloved finger into sodium metal and leave an imprint. 

From Biology to Battery

To understand the enhanced performance of their battery, the researchers borrowed a concept from biology called morphogenesis. This concept explains how tissues or other biological structures evolve based on local stimuli. Morphogenesis is rarely seen in materials science, but the researchers found that the combination of lithium and sodium behaves according to this concept. 

McDowell’s research group has been working on applying morphogenesis to battery materials as part of a project funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in collaboration with several other universities. Their battery is among the first viable demonstrations of this concept — effectively, the sodium deforms readily at the low pressures needed for solid-state batteries to function. 

Battery Boon

The possibilities of a viable, smaller solid-state battery are vast. Imagine a phone battery that could last much longer or an electric vehicle that could drive 500 miles between charges. With this in mind, McDowell and his team have filed for a patent for this battery system.

While solid-state batteries still have some way to go before commercial use, results like these could mean that solid-state batteries can compete with lithium-ion. McDowell’s lab continues to experiment with other materials to further improve performance. 

Funding from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

Aluminum scrap is one of the most common materials found on military bases and aircraft carriers worldwide. Now, the U.S. Army has tapped Georgia Tech to help turn that waste into power that can be generated off the grid and on demand. 

The Army Research Office awarded Georgia Tech and its partners $20 million to develop scalable, efficient methods for transforming aluminum into hydrogen energy. The project could lead to a new, low-cost, clean, and efficient energy source powered by discarded materials. 

Aaron Stebner, professor and Eugene C. Gwaltney Jr. Chair in Manufacturing in the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering and professor in the School of Materials Science and Engineering, will oversee the multi-year effort at Georgia Tech together with Scott McWhorter, lead for Federal Initiatives at the Strategic Energy Institute.

In addition to several team members from Georgia Tech and the Georgia Tech Research Institute, the project includes researchers from Fort Valley State University, the 21st Century Partnership, MatSys, and Drexel University. 

“Aluminum already reacts with water — even wastewater and floodwater — to create hydrogen gas, power, and thermal energy,” McWhorter said. “If aluminum can be efficiently upcycled into stored energy, it could be a game-changer.” 

The team’s goal is to experiment with aluminum’s material properties so it can be inexpensively manufactured to create a highly effective reaction that produces low-cost, clean hydrogen.

“Having this ability would allow military bases to be less dependent on the use of a foreign country’s electrical grids,” said Stebner, who is also co-director of Georgia Artificial Intelligence in Manufacturing and faculty at the Georgia Tech Manufacturing Institute. 

Manufacturing Aluminum

Several years ago, the Army Research Lab discovered and patented the basic technology for recycling aluminum to produce hydrogen gas. However, current manufacturing methods require too much energy for the amount of hydrogen energy produced.  

To make the technology viable and effective, Stebner and his colleagues will research alternate manufacturing processes and then develop automated methods for safely producing and storing stable aluminum. They also plan to optimize these processes using digital twin technologies.

Currently, manufacturers use large machines to grind up and tumble the aluminum in very controlled environments, because stray aluminum powder can be explosive. These methods are very costly. 

Stebner and the team are looking into small, modular technologies that could allow for convenient, onsite energy generation. According to Stebner, they are interested in determining how these smaller machines could be so efficient that they could be powered using solar panels. 

Stebner envisions that a field of solar panels could power the aluminum-processing modules — the aluminum recycling could be done while the sun shines and produce power 24/7. 

Sustainable Impact 

Once they have developed the manufacturing techniques and processes, the team plans to test their efficacy by generating power for rural Georgia communities. Success here would prove the technology could be viable for military deployments and other off-grid scenarios. 

“The Deep South — especially middle and southern Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana — often has enormous energy disruptions during hurricanes or power outages due to flooding and severe rains,” Stebner said. “Manufacturers can be hesitant to build big plants there, because the grids aren’t as stable. This same technology that the Army plans to use for remote military bases could be a game-changer in rural Georgia.”

If power is unexpectedly cut in those areas, floodwater could then be used to make hydrogen gas. While hydrogen has not yet had its day in the sun, it has great potential as an alternative to fossil fuels, Stebner says. 

“From a sustainability perspective, any time you can take something that’s already waste — like scrap aluminum and wastewater — and turn it into a high-value product that can be used to power communities, that is a huge win.” 

Funding: Army Research Office

Georgia Tech scientists have uncovered evidence that a mountain on the rim of Jezero Crater — where NASA’s Perseverance Rover is currently collecting samples for possible return to Earth — is likely a volcano. Called Jezero Mons, it is nearly half the size of the crater itself and could add critical clues to the habitability and volcanism of Mars, transforming how we understand Mars’ geologic history.

The study, “Evidence for a composite volcano on the rim of Jezero crater on Mars,” was published this May in the Nature-family journal Communications Earth & Environment, and underscores how much we have left to learn about one of the most well-studied regions of Mars.

Lead author Sara C. Cuevas-Quiñones completed the research as an undergraduate during a summer program at Georgia Tech; she is now a graduate student at Brown University. The team also included corresponding author Professor James J. Wray (School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences), Assistant Professor Frances Rivera-Hernández (School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences), and Jacob Adler, then a postdoctoral fellow at Georgia Tech and now an assistant research professor at Arizona State University. 

“Volcanism on Mars is intriguing for a number of reasons — from the implications it has on habitability, to better constraining the geologic history,” Wray says. “Jezero Crater is one of the best studied sites on Mars. If we are just now identifying a volcano here, imagine how many more could be on Mars. Volcanoes may be even more widespread across Mars than we thought.”

A mountain in the margins

Wray first noticed the mountain in 2007, while considering Jezero Crater as a graduate student. 

“I was looking at low-resolution photos of the area and noticed a mountain on the crater’s rim,” he recalls. “To me, it looked like a volcano, but it was difficult to get additional images.” At the time, Jezero Crater was newly discovered, and imaging focused almost entirely on its intriguing water history, which is on the opposite side of the 28-mile-wide crater.

Then, Jezero Crater, due to these lake-like sedimentary deposits, was selected as the landing spot for the 2020 Perseverance Rover — an ongoing NASA mission seeking signs of ancient Martian life and collecting rock samples for possible return to Earth.

However, after landing, some of the first rocks Perseverance encountered were not the sedimentary deposits one might expect from a previously-flooded area — they were volcanic. Wray suspected he might know the origin of these rocks, but to make a case for it, he would need to show that the mountain on the edge of Jezero Crater could indeed be a volcano.

A new researcher — and old data

The opportunity presented itself several months after Perseverance landed when Cuevas-Quiñones applied to a Summer Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) program hosted by the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences to work with Wray. 

“A previous study led by Briony Horgan (professor of planetary science at Purdue University) had also suggested that Jezero Mons could be volcanic,” Cuevas-Quiñones says. “I began wondering if there was a way to home in on these suspicions.”

The team partnered with study coauthor Rivera-Hernández, who specializes in characterizing the surface of planets and their habitability. They decided to use datasets gathered from spacecraft orbiting Mars to compare the properties of Jezero Mons to other, known, volcanoes. “We can’t visit Mars and definitively prove that Jezero Mons is a volcano, but we can show that it shares the same properties with existing volcanoes — both here on Earth and Mars,” Wray explains.

“We used data from the Mars Odyssey Orbiter, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter, and Perseverance Rover, all in combination to puzzle this out,” he adds. “I think this shows that these older spacecraft can be extremely valuable long after their initial missions end — these old spacecraft can still make important discoveries and help us answer tricky questions.”

For Cuevas-Quiñones, it also underscores the importance of REU programs and opportunities for undergraduates. “I was an undergraduate student at the time, and this was my first time conducting research,” she says. “It was fascinating to learn how different data sets could be used to decode the origin of a landscape. After Jezero Mons, it became clear to me that I would continue to study Mars and other planetary bodies.”

The search for life — and determining Mars’ age

The discovery makes the crater even more intriguing in the search for past life on Mars. A volcano so close to watery Jezero Crater could add a critical source of heat on an otherwise cold planet, including the potential for hydrothermal activity — energy that life could use to thrive. 

This type of system also holds interest for Mars as a whole. “The coalescence of these two types of systems makes Jezero more interesting than ever,” shares Wray. “We have samples of incredible sedimentary rocks that could be from a habitable region alongside igneous rocks with important scientific value.” If returned to Earth, igneous rocks can be radioisotope dated to know their age very precisely. Dating the Jezero Crater samples could be used to calibrate age estimates, providing an unprecedented window into the geologic history of the planet.

The take home message? “Mars is the best place we have to look in our solar system for signs of life, and thanks to the Perseverance Rover collecting samples in Jezero, the United States has samples from the best rocks in the best place on Mars,” Wray says. “If these samples are returned to Earth, we can do incredible, groundbreaking science with them.”

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-02329-7

Funding: Cuevas-Quiñones was supported by Georgia Tech’s 2021 Research Experience for Undergraduates program sponsored by 3M corporation. Wray was supported by NASA funding for Co-Investigators on HiRISE and CaSSIS. CaSSIS is a project of the University of Bern and funded through the Swiss Space Office via ESA’s PRODEX program. The instrument hardware development was also supported by the Italian Space Agency (ASI) (ASI-INAF agreement 2020-17-HH.0), INAF/Astronomical Observatory of Padova, and the Space Research Center (CBK) in Warsaw. Support from SGF (Budapest), the University of Arizona Lunar and Planetary Lab, and NASA are also gratefully acknowledged. Operation support from the UK Space Agency is also acknowledged.

In a world rapidly embracing artificial intelligence, researchers are turning their attention to a critical question: How can AI agents become not just tools, but true teammates? Christopher MacLellan, assistant professor in the School of Interactive Computing and faculty member of the Institute for People and Technology, and his team are tackling this challenge head-on through a groundbreaking initiative that blends research, competition, and collaboration.

At the heart of their work is a unique human-AI teaming tournament competition — believed to be the first of its kind — designed to explore how people and AI agents can work together effectively. Unlike traditional AI competitions that pit agents against one another, this event emphasizes cooperation. Participants design AI agents that can collaborate with humans or other agents to achieve shared goals in a team tournament setting.

“We’re interested in using cooperative games as a tool to understand how people and agents can team together more effectively,” MacLellan explains. “This competition is a step toward designing AI that doesn’t just follow commands, but anticipates needs and acts as a true partner.”

The competition, now in its second year and hosted in conjunction with the IEEE Conference on Games, invites participants to submit their own AI agents or join as human players teaming up with others’ agents. With up to $1,000 in cash prizes sponsored by IEEE, the August event offers both a fun and meaningful way to contribute to the future of AI development. 

The team’s research paper about the game, Dice Adventure: An Asymmetrical Collaborative Game for Exploring the Hybrid Teaming Effects, won the best paper award at this year’s International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games.

More than just a contest, the initiative reflects a broader vision. As MacLellan puts it, “Society is moving toward a future where humans and agents work seamlessly together. We want to design for the best possible futures — where AI agents know how to team back with people.”

This vision challenges the conventional view of AI as mere tools. Instead, it promotes a paradigm where agents are proactive collaborators — anticipating needs, adapting to human behavior, and contributing meaningfully to shared objectives.

For those interested in participating in the upcoming tournament competition or learning more, details including dates and registration information are available on the competition’s official webpage: https://strong-tact.github.io. The competition is taking place online during June and July and the results will be presented at the IEEE 2025 Conference on Games, Aug 26-29.

As AI continues to evolve, efforts like this competition are paving the way for a future where humans and machines don’t just coexist — they thrive together as teammates.

About the Research
This research was supported by the Army Research Lab STRONG program awards W911NF2120126, W911NF2120101, W911NF2320203.

Citation: Zhang, Q., Smith, G., Ziyu, L., Dong, Y., Harpstead, E. & MacLellan, C.J. (2025). Dice Adventure: An Asymmetrical Collaborative Game for Exploring the Hybrid Teaming Effects. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. https://doi.org/10.1145/3723498.3723793.

From grocery bills to gas prices and the cost of new cars, Americans are feeling the ripple effects of an increasingly uncertain global economy. According to Georgia Tech experts, while headlines often focus on trade wars or interest rates, the underlying forces at play — and their long-term consequences — are more complex.

Recession Risks and the Current Economic Climate

Alex Hsu, a finance professor in the Scheller College of Business, suggests we may already be in a mild recession, even if it’s not yet officially declared. 

“Recession declarations are always made after the fact,” he explains. “A real-time clue? Look at crude oil prices — they’re down 15% this year, often signaling slowing economic activity.” That’s similar to the trend seen in the early months of the 2008 recession, when oil prices dropped sharply as demand weakened. Despite this, the labor market remains strong in certain sectors, creating a mixed economic picture that’s tough to navigate. 

“If you’re trying to get a sense of where the economy is going,” Hsu adds, “watch weekly jobless claims and energy prices — those are among the most timely indicators available.”

How Tariffs Are (and Aren’t) Affecting Prices

Tibor Besedeš, a professor in the School of Economics, likens tariffs to sales taxes — costs added at the border that can eventually be passed to consumers. 

“If a $20,000 imported car is hit with a 25% tariff, someone’s paying that $5,000,” he says. Besedeš warns that most tariffs imposed since early 2025 affect nearly all imported goods — cars, electronics, toys, and clothing. He cites past studies showing tariffs on Chinese goods were largely paid by U.S. consumers, and this time may be no different. “China has told its firms not to lower prices. So, we should expect prices here to rise.”

However, the recent agreement that began on May 14 between the U.S. and China on a new trade deal has offered a moment of relief. As part of the agreement, both countries will temporarily ease tariffs announced in April for 90 days, with China suspending its planned 34% tariff on U.S. goods, while maintaining a 10% tariff during the pause. Similarly, the United States will suspend its 34% reciprocal tariff while keeping a 10% tariff in place.

“It’s a welcome sign that hopefully trade tensions are subsiding and that after 90 days there will be a more permanent deal whereby the tariffs at least do not increase from these reduced levels,” Besedeš says. “It’s difficult to say anything more concrete but, overall, I take this as a positive sign that we may be stepping back from the brink of an all-out trade war and empty shelves in stores.”

Yet even with signs of progress, uncertainty lingers. Hsu, while cautiously optimistic, adds that “The 90-day pause only prolongs the trade instability. Although it is a good sign that the administration seems willing to negotiate, businesses are still in a holding pattern until a more definitive resolution is reached.”

The Bigger Picture: Global Alliances and Economic Protectionism

As countries reorient their trade relations in response to shifting U.S. policies, Besedeš warns that the long-term consequences could leave the U.S. isolated on the global stage. 

“Countries are starting to look for alternative trading partners," he says. “If the U.S. is not careful, it could lose its influence in global trade, leading to slower economic growth.” He suggests that the growing shift toward regional trade blocs and alternative alliances — such as the EU-China partnership — could erode U.S. competitiveness. 

Hsu concurs, noting that global economic shifts, coupled with increasing tariffs, could exacerbate the risks of a financial crisis. “Pay attention to the credit market,” he advises. “When liquidity dries up, it can cause the financial system to freeze, leading to contagion.” He notes that the Federal Reserve is closely monitoring these risks and still has a range of policy tools at its disposal to help stabilize the system in the event of a crisis.

The Road Ahead

As Americans navigate rising prices and economic uncertainty, these experts suggest focusing on fundamentals — energy prices, jobless claims, and the broader flow of trade and investment. Whether tariffs prove to be a temporary disruption or a lasting shift in global commerce, the trade policies of today are shaping the economic realities of tomorrow. And while the recent U.S.-China agreement marks a hopeful step, the full extent of its impact on consumers, businesses, and global relationships remains to be seen.

Thomasville, Georgia, is a hub of training and talent for local manufacturers. But Mason Miller could tell there was something missing.

“We didn't have any training for advanced manufacturing in our area,” said Miller, vice president of Academic Affairs at Southern Regional Technical College (SRTC), which offers education and training programs in technical and manufacturing fields. “Companies had to go out and recruit people from Michigan to run their machines. That's when we said, ‘We don’t want that to happen — we need to be doing that right here.’”

That’s where the Georgia Tech Manufacturing Institute (GTMI) stepped in. Working with partner program Georgia Artificial Intelligence in Manufacturing (Georgia AIM), GTMI helped connect SRTC with the resources and expertise needed to develop a robust training program tailored to the needs of local manufacturers.

Miller said at first, he was skeptical. “When GTMI said they wanted to be partners, I thought, ‘OK, this is another situation where we're going to talk for a minute, everybody says things and then goes away — and that’s it,’” said Miller. “That's not how it's been at all.”

Rather, it’s been a true partnership driven by SRTC, with curriculum focused on automation and robotics developed by the Technical College System of Georgia and GTMI. The curriculum is also shaped by local industry input to directly address workforce gaps in the region’s manufacturing sector. 

“As a state institution, we're here to serve you,” said Steven Sheffield, senior assistant director of Research Operations at GTMI and a point person of the partnership. “Tell us the problem, and we will work hard to try to solve it with you.”

Filling the Workforce Gap

Miller was committed to giving SRTC students the advanced manufacturing skills needed to stand out in the workforce. Yet the evolving manufacturing landscape and the needs of local manufacturers revealed gaps in SRTC’s curriculum, particularly in AI, automation, and robotics.

With GTMI and Georgia AIM researchers contributing key expertise to the expanded smart manufacturing curriculum, Miller noted the partnership is “opening our eyes to what we can do with AI. We're going to start integrating that into our programs.”

Beyond AI and robotics, SRTC leadership identified a crucial gap in their program: training in precision machining, a skill that local manufacturers like Check-Mate Industries sorely needed. 

“If we want to attract new business and industry to Georgia, we need to be able to show them we can provide a skilled workforce,” said Miller. 

To address this missing piece, GTMI and Georgia AIM helped procure funding to acquire and refurbish precision-machining equipment from longtime partner Makino. Georgia AIM also supported the renovation and outfitting of two SRTC lab spaces with additional updated equipment. 

Last fall, SRTC launched its new Precision Manufacturing & Engineering and Manufacturing Engineering Technology programs, with instructors trained by GTMI faculty in precision manufacturing. The new program at SRTC is one example of the ways GTMI experts are working with communities across the state to expand access to training and new technology.

“Not a lot of technical colleges have this type of machinery,” said Marvin Bannister, SRTC precision machining and manufacturing program chair. Instructors like Bannister received specialized training at GTMI’s Advanced Manufacturing Pilot Facility to ensure they felt confident teaching students how to operate the machinery. “Not only is it something else to add to my skill set, but the most important thing is that I'll be able to train other students who desire to learn on a machine like this.”

Because of SRTC’s expanded offerings, the technical college has strengthened partnerships and developed new internship programs with local manufacturers. “We all want the same thing,” said Miller, “which is to grow industry partnerships and to create a talent pipeline for our state.”

GTMI and Georgia AIM also support STEM programs with Thomasville area schools and internship programs for K-12 teachers with local manufacturers such as Check-Mate. These efforts deepen the connections between students and manufacturers, opening doors to future careers in the sector.

“We’re here to connect the dots and enable these types of partnerships,” says Steven Ferguson, a principal research scientist with GTMI and co-director of Georgia AIM. “When teams and their networks come together to solve a challenge for just one manufacturer, the impact can reach across an entire region.”

After Jasmine Foriest was robbed at gunpoint in her hometown of Columbus, Ga., she took note of how much information about the crime fell through the cracks of the ensuing police investigation.

She said the police officer who interviewed her was dismissive and neglected to write down details that Foriest found significant. The deficient police report was picked up by local media, which led to news stories that inaccurately described the crime and left out important information.

Foriest said she learned from the incident that incomplete information doesn’t mitigate violence. The perspectives and stories of people who experience violence are essential to reliable data.

The incident guided Foriest as she committed to research that gathers complete and accurate data on multiple types of violence, including violent injury and homicide, intimate partner violence, gender-based violence, and suicide.

Foriest earned a bachelor’s in health science from Columbus State University. She also holds two master’s degrees: one in public health from the University of Southern California, and another in technology leadership and management from Agnes Scott College.

In 2021, Foriest started her Ph.D. in human-centered computing at Georgia Tech to understand how technology influences violence.

“I look at all types of violence as an outcome of how technology affects communication,” she said. 

One thing she discovered was that even though technology can amplify victims’ voices, it is often used to silence them.

“The same social dynamics that keep people from disclosing their violent experiences to formal reporting sources offline also happen online,” she said.

Bringing the Cardiff Model to the U.S.

Before arriving at Tech, Foriest worked for eight years as an injury prevention coordinator at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta. She implemented a trauma recovery center and Atlanta’s first hospital-based violence intervention program.

While in that position, she worked with the Cardiff Model for Violence Prevention, a public health approach to violence prevention developed by researchers at Cardiff University in Wales.

The Cardiff model’s philosophy is that violence prevention is best achieved when the healthcare and law enforcement sectors combine geographical data to determine where violence occurs in a community. 

“The Cardiff model taught Wales there was a lot about violence they didn’t know from police data alone,” Foriest said. 

One example is that researchers learned an alarming number of hospital patients were brought in from local taverns. This finding informed policymakers to implement new regulations, such as changing licensing requirements and serving alcohol in toughened glasses or non-glass vessels so they can’t be used as weapons.

In 2011, the city of Cardiff reported a 42% reduction in hospital admissions for hospital injuries. It wasn’t long before the researchers in the U.S. began importing the Cardiff model. In 2018, it became an official policy of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

The U.S. Department of Justice found in 2022 that 58% of violent crimes were not reported to law enforcement. Sixteen cities that make up the Cardiff Model for Violence Prevention National Networkare now gathering and mapping patient-reported violent injury data from hospitals to fill that data gap. 

Atlanta is one of the cities in that network, and Foriest has been an on-the-ground researcher collecting that data. Her work with the Cardiff model seamlessly integrated into her Ph.D. research as she sought ways to turn technology into a safe avenue of violence disclosure.

Working with Alex Godwin, a former Ph.D. student at Georgia Tech who is now an assistant professor at American University, she helped develop a user interface and mapping algorithm. The tool allows hospital patients who are violence victims to identify the location of the violent incident they experienced.

Foriest said, “Around the Covid-19 pandemic, we had challenges getting patients screened, and we thought we should explore different options.

“Our interface allows patients to tap down to the degree they’re comfortable on the geographic location where they were injured.

“It improved our ability to map data tremendously and decreased some of the risks patients face when disclosing violence.”

Foriest and Godwin's paper on the development of the interface tool earned an honorable mention for best paper at the 2025 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) in Yokohama, Japan.

Foriest also co-authored an award-winning paper at the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW). That paper examined how social media often silences violence victims.

Foriest is also a fellow for Data Science and Innovation at the CDC, where she continues her work on the Cardiff model. She also examines how news media coverage of suicides can often reinforce stigmas about the causes of suicide in that role.

Thriving at Tech

Foriest is entering her fifth year as a Ph.D. student, but before she came to Tech, she had no computing experience. She applied to numerous Ph.D. programs but was eventually persuaded that technology could complement her public health expertise and her goal of preventing violence.

“Tech was the only place where I could gain a new skill set while doing the things that I wanted to do in research,” she said. 

“That felt like the best fit for me, where I would get the most out of my training. I was encouraged by faculty and my peers to recognize that my perspective is valuable, and I can speak from that place and bridge my knowledge with HCI concepts.”

Hyunsun Park, assistant professor of Organizational Behavior at the Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business, never expected to attend graduate school. In fact, she was determined to avoid it. Two years into her job as an equity analyst for Bloomberg, her initial plan to get out of school fast and make money grew stale.  

“It felt really hollow,” Park recalled. “All we talked about was how much money we were making or losing. There was no conversation about how people were feeling, how they were working together, or whether they were satisfied.” 

Despite the prestige and pay, she walked away to pursue more meaningful work. She enrolled in a master’s program, fell in love with the field of organizational behavior, and eventually committed to a Ph.D. Today, Park’s research works to understand people and organizations.  

What fascinated Park most wasn’t just the study of organizations; it was the people within them. She became fascinated by a simple question: Why don’t employees speak up when they see something going wrong? Park soon discovered that this deceptively simple question was deeply complex in practice.  

Her research led down a path of discovery that would shape her doctoral research. Park homed in on a concept known as employee voice — the act of speaking up with concerns, suggestions, or warnings. But she wasn’t interested in the obvious cases. She wanted to understand what happens when the threat isn’t clear. What happens when the warning signs are ambiguous, and the danger is uncertain? 

“In American culture, we value speaking up,” she said. “But in the workplace, it’s not that easy. People worry about how their managers will react. Will they look foolish? Will they be punished or even lose their job?” 

Her research, published in the "Journal of Applied Pyschology", revealed a troubling pattern. Employees are least likely to speak up when they face ambiguous threats. Through interviews, field studies, and experiments involving over 1,400 participants, Park found that cognitive overload and a deep-rooted reliance on managerial judgment often silenced employees. “When the signals are unclear, people freeze,” she explained. “They assume someone else — usually a manager — will figure it out.” 

One quote from her interviews stood out: 

“I noticed something was off with the readings, but I wasn’t sure if it was serious. I didn’t want to raise a false alarm, so I stayed quiet.” 

This hesitation, Park argues, can be dangerous. “These are the moments when employees should speak up the most,” Park explained. “They’re on the front lines. They notice things first. But ironically, this is when they’re least likely to say anything.” 

It turns out, managers are often just as confused by ambiguous signals. This creates a dangerous silence — one where early signs of trouble go unaddressed until it’s too late. In industries like chemical engineering or electronics — where she conducted many of her interviews — early warning signs can mean the difference between a minor issue and a major disaster. 

Park’s work doesn’t just diagnose the problem. She offers a path forward. She advocates for organizations to build a culture of “preoccupation with failure.” This is a mindset where employees are trained and encouraged to notice and speak up about potential issues, even when they’re not sure. Companies like Netflix, she noted, are already investing in training programs to help employees analyze early warning signs and feel confident raising concerns. 

Park hopes her research will empower employees to trust their instincts and speak up sooner. “Employees should realize the kind of power that they have, and they should feel free to challenge leadership and management and the decisions that are being made. Their voices are critical when they see signs of a problem.” 

Your voice matters, even when you’re not 100% certain. Park’s research shows that moments of ambiguity are when your voice is needed most.

Read More: Harvard Business Review