Why investors are backing Applied Brain Research’s on-device voice AI approach.
Updated
January 14, 2026 1:38 PM
Plastic model of a human's brain. PHOTO: UNSPLASH
Applied Brain Research (ABR), a Canada-based startup, has closed its seed funding round to advance its work in “on-device voice AI”. The round was led by Two Small Fish Ventures, with its general partner Eva Lau joining ABR’s board, reflecting investor confidence in the company’s technical direction and market focus.
The round was oversubscribed, meaning more investors wanted to participate than the company had planned for. That response reflects growing interest in technologies that reduce reliance on cloud-based AI systems.
ABR is focused on a clear problem in voice-enabled products today. Most voice features depend on cloud servers to process speech, which can cause delays, increase costs, raise privacy concerns and limit performance on devices with small batteries or limited computing power.
ABR’s approach is built around keeping voice AI fully on-device. Instead of relying on cloud connectivity, its technology allows devices to process speech locally, enabling faster responses and more predictable performance while reducing data exposure.
Central to this approach is the company’s TSP1 chip, a processor designed specifically for handling time-based data such as speech. Built for real-time voice processing at the edge, TSP1 allows tasks like speech recognition and text-to-speech to run on smaller, power-constrained devices.
This specialization is particularly relevant as voice interfaces become more common across emerging products. Many edge devices such as wearables or mobile robotics cannot support traditional voice AI systems without compromising battery life or responsiveness. The TSP1 addresses this limitation by enabling these capabilities at significantly lower power levels than conventional alternatives. According to the company, full speech-to-text and text-to-speech can run at under 30 milliwatts of power, which is roughly 10 to 100 times lower than many existing alternatives. This level of efficiency makes advanced voice interaction feasible on devices where power consumption has long been a limiting factor.
That efficiency makes the technology applicable across a wide range of use cases. In augmented reality glasses, it supports responsive, hands-free voice control. In robotics, it enables real-time voice interaction without cloud latency or ongoing service costs. For wearables, it expands voice functionality without severely impacting battery life. In medical devices, it allows on-device inference while keeping sensitive data local. And in automotive systems, it enables consistent voice experiences regardless of network availability.
For investors, this combination of timing and technology is what stands out. Voice interfaces are becoming more common, while reliance on cloud infrastructure is increasingly seen as a limitation rather than a strength. ABR sits at the intersection of those two shifts.
With fresh funding in place, ABR is now working with partners across AR, robotics, healthcare, automotive and wearables to bring that future closer. For startup watchers, it’s a reminder that some of the most meaningful AI advances aren’t about bigger models but about making intelligence fit where it actually needs to live.
Keep Reading
HKU professor apologizes after PhD student’s AI-assisted paper cites fabricated sources.
Updated
January 8, 2026 6:33 PM
.jpg)
The University of Hong Kong in Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong Island. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
It’s no surprise that artificial intelligence, while remarkably capable, can also go astray—spinning convincing but entirely fabricated narratives. From politics to academia, AI’s “hallucinations” have repeatedly shown how powerful technology can go off-script when left unchecked.
Take Grok-2, for instance. In July 2024, the chatbot misled users about ballot deadlines in several U.S. states, just days after President Joe Biden dropped his re-election bid against former President Donald Trump. A year earlier, a U.S. lawyer found himself in court for relying on ChatGPT to draft a legal brief—only to discover that the AI tool had invented entire cases, citations and judicial opinions. And now, the academic world has its own cautionary tale.
Recently, a journal paper from the Department of Social Work and Social Administration at the University of Hong Kong was found to contain fabricated citations—sources apparently created by AI. The paper, titled “Forty Years of Fertility Transition in Hong Kong,” analyzed the decline in Hong Kong’s fertility rate over the past four decades. Authored by doctoral student Yiming Bai, along with Yip Siu-fai, Vice Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and other university officials, the study identified falling marriage rates as a key driver behind the city’s shrinking birth rate. The authors recommended structural reforms to make Hong Kong’s social and work environment more family-friendly.
But the credibility of the paper came into question when inconsistencies surfaced among its references. Out of 61 cited works, some included DOI (Digital Object Identifier) links that led to dead ends, displaying “DOI Not Found.” Others claimed to originate from academic journals, yet searches yielded no such publications.
Speaking to HK01, Yip acknowledged that his student had used AI tools to organize the citations but failed to verify the accuracy of the generated references. “As the corresponding author, I bear responsibility”, Yip said, apologizing for the damage caused to the University of Hong Kong and the journal’s reputation. He clarified that the paper itself had undergone two rounds of verification and that its content was not fabricated—only the citations had been mishandled.
Yip has since contacted the journal’s editor, who accepted his explanation and agreed to re-upload a corrected version in the coming days. A formal notice addressing the issue will also be released. Yip said he would personally review each citation “piece by piece” to ensure no errors remain.
As for the student involved, Yip described her as a diligent and high-performing researcher who made an honest mistake in her first attempt at using AI for academic assistance. Rather than penalize her, Yip chose a more constructive approach, urging her to take a course on how to use AI tools responsibly in academic research.
Ultimately, in an age where generative AI can produce everything from essays to legal arguments, there are two lessons to take away from this episode. First, AI is a powerful assistant, but only that. The final judgment must always rest with us. No matter how seamless the output seems, cross-checking and verifying information remain essential. Second, as AI becomes integral to academic and professional life, institutions must equip students and employees with the skills to use it responsibly. Training and mentorship are no longer optional; they’re the foundation for using AI to enhance, not undermine, human work.
Because in this age of intelligent machines, staying relevant isn’t about replacing human judgment with AI, it’s about learning how to work alongside it.