If we calibrate the raw data going into the analysis to make it 10 or even 100 times better—as we’ve done—you can imagine how much easier it becomes for the AI to perform well with less data. The training process becomes faster, more efficient, and more predictable. Better data and AI go together. I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive at all.
Our premise is to start with better-quality, fundamental data—tighter data, better data, a calibrated baseline. We calibrate on both the X and the Y axes, and that gives us a stronger foundation. That’s how we fundamentally extract mass spectral accuracy—by calibrating on two axes, not just one. That’s where the core patterns lie, and it’s how we unlock performance. For example, Agilent’s newest system already includes Cerno directly.
What advice would you give to young analytical chemists just starting out in the field? Where should they focus their time and energy?
Wang: That's an interesting question. With all the buzz around AI, you might start thinking, “Oh, maybe I can skip the fundamentals. I don't need to go into the lab or run experiments anymore—the AI will just figure it all out for me.” But of course, our view is that the fundamentals still matter. They are the foundation that makes AI and other technologies work better.
For young scientists, my personal suggestion would be: understand the basics and get grounded in the fundamentals—but don’t be a fundamentalist. Stay open-minded about where you can take things. Think about how to make a bigger impact by combining a solid foundation with emerging technologies—machine learning, AI, all of it. You will be much stronger if you know both your fundamentals and how to use new tools. If you dive in blindly, without understanding where your data comes from, where the noise and error arise, and how to minimize them, then you will struggle to get good results.
Harrison Ford famously said in the Indiana Jones movie that archaeology is about facts, not truth. If you want truth, you go next door to my philosophy professor.
Because a fact is a choice plus error—that’s what you measure and observe. It’s not pure; it’s a choice combined with some perturbation and measurement error. Surprisingly, not many people understand this. They talk about facts as if they’re absolute truths, but they’re not. Facts are really a result of decisions and noise in.