The Missing Sense in Robotics: Tactile Intelligence for Physical AI

You've literally visualized touch world has completely changed once vision was digitized. We focused on a vision of being the ubiquitous tactile intelligence company. I think we're basically at the tipping point. We're almost there. My guest today runs a company trying to digitalize the sense of touch. GelSight started as a camera-based sensor invented at MIT. Press it against the surface and it reads the geometry down to a single micron. fine enough to see a fingerprint. For years that lived in industrial inspection, checking aircraft skins and machined parts where a flaw isn't an option. Youssef Benmokhtar took over as CEO in 2021. He's not a roboticist. He came from imaging and optics Magic Leap OmniVision STMicroelectronics. A career spent turning sensors into businesses. His bet is that touch is the missing sense in robotic and GelSight's job is to become the tactile intelligence layer, not just the sensor. Today, we're going to talk about what it takes to give a machine a sense of touch, who pays for it, and where the value lands. Youssef, welcome to the show.

Welcome, Youssef. Super excited to have you on. Thank you, Michelle. We're glad to be on. So you came from imaging and optics, Magic Leap, OmniVision, STMicroelectronics. What did you see in tactile sensing back in 2021?

You know, I always been in tech. I love tech. I'm curious by nature. Uh always loved innovation since my first uh role at STMicroelectronics. And when I got the privilege of meeting the uh GelSight co-founders, I had one of those other moments of, wow, this is so cool. Uh you've literally visualized touch and you digitize human touch. That realization, you know, just got me so excited about the potential of what you can do once you digitize human touch. I think the the decision to join the team and try to do something with the founders was u a natural decision. It was very fast. I was really attracted by the possibility to grow a business around digital touch. The potential for me is enormous because I had in mind based on my imaging background a really clear understanding of how the world has completely changed once vision was digitized. And you can say the same thing about when audio was when sounds right was digitized. It basically changed the way we live. It created a trillion dollar plus economies. It allowed for you know cameras to be embedded into phones into uh a bunch of things. You know we're we're talking through one of those digital cameras

right now. And when I met the team here, I thought maybe we can do the same thing with touch because really literally at the time you know before GelSight technology was invented there was no real digital touch out there. There were a lot of analog touch you know solutions but not a real digital touch and being vision based you know visual tactile sensor you know for me was more um you know even made it more attractive right because I I understand vision and I understand how the world has learned to leverage images and videos to create you know additional value through the analysis of those of that data and I thought you know having a digital based tactile sensor we'll be able to leverage that existing baseline of talent out there that knows how to use computer vision and AI to analyze data. It was a really easy decision to join in 21.

Yeah, I can definitely see that connection of the dots there from vision to a vision based tactile sensor when you took over a CEO seat in 2021. In order to commercialize GelSight further from a lab technology to various applications, what changes did you need to make from how the company think about customers, what to focus on and what to build next?

Yeah, I think when I joined the company, what we had at the time was technology validation. We knew the technology worked. This was the work that was started at MIT and continued and refined at GelSight by the founders and a small team they had at the time. I knew I didn't have to do anything about proving the technology works. What we definitely needed to do is where is the product market fit? Where is the technology can be applied today. There's always been this this love story with robotics since the very beginning because obviously when you think about digitizing touch the first thing that comes to mind is well can I use that now to have make machines more intelligent and more capable you know handling objects and doing things like that. But the reality is digital touch has a lot of potential and the initial traction that we saw was more on the industrial market where our technology was a really good fit for uh surface metrology. So our focus initially was okay in order to pay the bills we have to grow this industrial market. We basically started to move towards confirming product market fit in industrial market. that has proven to be successful and now we're more into that growth phase where you know we have a real product, real customers, growing demand and that's that's going really well. Now our our love for robotics has not gone away and I know we're going to

talk about it at length today but we launched GelSight Mini and we collaborated with Meta on DIGIT exactly because we do believe that tactile sensing has a major role to play in robotics and especially for humanoid robotics and you know we had to find a way to be an actor in a very nascent industry. When you look at when GelSight Mini was launched, there were not all the big companies we talk about today in the human world that are raising, you know, insane amounts of money. We had to think about a strategy there in robotics as well, even if at the end of the day, what pays the bills more the industrial business. Yeah, for sure. You guys are definitely in a very unique position where you have that baseline covered with the industrial application and this is a wedge that you guys have always owned and then now there's this new wave in terms of robotics and humanoid robots that are rapidly taking up these demand for tactile sensors. In 2022, you reframe GelSight as a platform to digitalize touch. So four years on, what does that look like as a business? Who are your customers today?

Yeah, we spent a lot of time really thinking about who we want to be. Many people in your audience are having the same kind of thoughts. We focused on a vision of being the ubiquitous tactile intelligence company. And what I mean by that is we know that referring back to what I said about digitization of vision and audio, the digital of touch is really something that's going to allow us to be present in many many markets and not only the industrial market we're in today. It includes robotics, it includes medical applications and includes future consumer applications.

So to do that, you have to start thinking about everything that you do needs to be aligned with that long-term vision of ubiquity. And you know why the tactile is because obviously we're you know that's our core expertise and we have to continue to be innovating on the pure sensing technology piece and the intelligence piece is where the platform came in because we ultimately do not want to be a sensor only company. We want to be able to offer value on top of our sensors and almost you know making the sensor not something our customers think about. what they think about is what is the value that you bring with your product you know are you solving my problem as a customer and that's what we've been doing on the industrial market and that's what we want to do in the future in robotics as well so the term platform was basically saying okay how do we basically build everything that we do starting with hardware which is not typically something you think about as a platform but by having a product that itself has this kind of modular aspect that it becomes a platform Chrome itself and this is where we launched the Modulus product last year because it is a product that is modular by design. It is something that evolves very quickly which is unusual for a hardware product and we do the same thing on the software side of things. We basically provide full applications that can run on top of the hardware. This is what we want to do in

the future in other industries like robotics. We want to take advantage of being kind of the first movers into the digital touch space that's not own only the sensor piece but let's also own the solution piece and when you think about the how to become ubiquitous where is the durable advantage do you see that is the optics the software or even the data side of things we have very very good understanding about how to make the sensing work uh we have very strong um IP around it but to your point I think At the end of the day, when it comes to the ubiquity, it's going to be more about the data and what you do with it. The challenge is how do you provide as much data as you can but still be the one that know how to use the data the best. There's kind of this weird balance that you have to find. If you look at, for example, what we're doing today, whether it's DIGIT or mini, it was purposely a strategy of let's just make the hardware easily available and easy to use so that people can develop whatever they want on it. The idea here being that if you're interested in tactile sensing, if you're interested in dexterity, if you're interested in object manipulation, we want people to think GelSight first. So, we had to make it very easy for that to happen, right? So, a small sensor, just USB cam, right? Plug it in, you're ready

to go. You can develop your your code.

You can use Python libraries, for example, on DIGIT and GelSight Mini that were developed by Meta. But long term, we don't want to stay there. We want to keep doing that but we also want to offer software solutions on top of our sensor including in robotics that would make to provide that solution like you know hey let me give you anti-slip solution that's working best with the GelSight software versus something you might do open source let me give you libraries to do force estimation in the best possible way with GelSight you don't have to invent it yourself use it and then build something on top of it as a customer that's even better that's where we're heading in the future we have some things you know going on right now in um the development of our next generation sensor that are going to be basically prepping for that to happen where we're not going to be only selling the sensor, we're going to start sending libraries and other things to help people develop really valuable applications on top of the sensing. Yeah, that that'll be really powerful because when it comes to tactile data is not just like visual or audio where tactile is like there's so many data like there's so many aspects of data that is streaming through like every single second. So making sense of it will be really helpful and to have various libraries to help people make sense of and how to make decisions based on these data will be very powerful and

works straight out of the box when you create that. So you brought a couple people on the board when you joined GelSight like Rony Abovitz from Magic Leap, Elliot Katzman from SolidWorks. What were you importing with those two and how did it change the company's direction? Yeah. So, Rony, um, you know, I had the honor to work with him at Magic Leap. Actually, we've known each other for a while. What I really like about Rony, he's a visionary. So, he's someone that has this incredible ability to see the future and be able to articulate it in a way that makes sense to a lot of people. So, by bringing him on board, he really helped to define what the future of GelSight should be.

He was one of the first proponents I've ever heard use the term physical AI you know way before it became famous to these days and he was he kept telling me he said you are the necessary sensing technology physical AI how can we have physical AI without a sensor that is understanding the physicality of the world this was something that was really helpful in helping us to frame what we should be working on in the future and he's been very instrumental in thinking about it in this way brought a different type of value for the company he's somebody that you know every time I talked to him, he was sitting in front of me in this office and he was telling me Youssef, you're not thinking about data enough. You're not thinking about data enough. You have to think about data. And you know, initially, honestly, it was a very hard conversation because I said, but but Elliot Katzman, you know, the core of our technology is hardware. And he said, I understand. I don't care. It should be ultimately about data. In his mind, he thought about Onshape and he thought about how you can reinvent CAD software thinking about how do you approach it you know CAD software through the cloud and shared a lot of his experiences at SolidWorks he was really instrumental in in helping us define the intelligence piece do not focus only on the sensing you know that's great you're already good at that keep you know stay ahead but how do you leverage the data that's coming out of your sensors to bring that extra value

and that extra value cannot be local. It has to be something that's available on the cloud. You know, something that a lot of people can take benefit from whether it's within a company or within a community. So that's probably what I would how I would summarize how Elliot Katzman helped to shape some of our roadmap. Yeah, that's an really important piece in the strategy, right? where how do you evolve from being a hardware solution to I guess you alluded upon like having the data going to the cloud and then also like informing the decisions for the customers helping them work smarter helping the robots work smarter let's talk about Meta DIGIT right so you've talked about open sourcing basic tactile intelligence walk me through the logic so what does open sourcing do for GelSight.

Yeah. So to be fair, the open sourcing strategy came more from Meta than from GelSight. We supported it because we were aligned in terms of of vision when DIGIT was launched in commercially distributed by us. Again, you're talking about the infancy of tactile sensing and the use in robotics. And at the end of the day, if you believe in in the value that this technology brings that these products bring in the fields of robotic, you need to make it accessible and open sourcing made sense. This is what you want to encourage people in the community, these all these smart people that work in academia and corporate research groups to basically consider using these types of sensors in their work. Our vision has not been a commercial one when it comes to robotics. there has been more of a let's seed the market and let's make that seeding as easy as possible. The more people smart people use these sensors, the more they're going to want to use them in the future and they going to want to base products on them. So that was the logic and the rationale behind the open source support I think from us and I think the strategy from the Meta DIGIT side. Yeah and definitely see that working in you know when you look at a lot of these research on tech sensing in the academic field most of these papers

use gels site or DIGIT in some ways so definitely see a lot of traction there to seed the markets when it comes to you know what stays open and what what stays patent and trade secrets where do you draw the line it's a great question and I'm not sure Michelle I have the answer yet I think we're basically at that tipping point, right, where the industry is, you know, initially, honestly, I've heard so many times, this is cool tech. I'm not sure we can use it even from these big companies that, you know, we all know these days. In a couple of years ago, two or three years ago, if you asked any of them, what do you think about adding touch to your hands, right, to your your robotic hands, most of them say, no, we don't need that yet. And if you really look at the at the use cases was mainly pick and place you know warehousing type of things and so on. So we had a lot of push back to be honest you know people will say I want to play with it but I don't have any plans look at it today almost all of the key players in the humanoid field are basically all about dexterity and digital touch and adding sensing capabilities to the hand. So look how quickly things change and I think the strategy we had on open source not only us I think other folks in academia as well is really helped to accelerate the integration of these kind of technologies and products but then to answer your question so that what does

it mean for us are we now back stuck into we're only going to be potentially a sensing provider and not one that provides value on top of the sensor and I think this is the work that we're doing right now prior to our future launch is to think about What else are we going to be offering on top of the sensor and what we still want to have offered as open source? I don't think we have the answer yet to be honest, but we're going to have to find some kind of a hybrid model. I don't think that a fully closed system is going to be good for the industry or for us. But I also think that if we just leave it fully open, then we might be leaving value on the table for GelSight.

Yeah, for sure. And the industry is moving so quickly right now that kind of needs to evolve with their market. Right. So you mentioned a really interesting point where a couple years ago most robotics companies are not ready to use touch in their their work and with dexterity dexterous hands coming onto the market a lot like that actually open up the market for touch as well. So it seems that this is a very interesting we're at this inflection point where there's more and more demand for what you guys are doing. So the strategy needs to be adjusted real time as well. Yeah, absolutely. You know, three years ago at CES, I remember when you walked the floor in the robotic section, you had mainly arms or, you know, humanoids doing flips and other fancy, you know, things like that.

This year it was mainly about hands.

there of course there were more you know humanoid robots doing you know you know cool things but the number of companies ex you know showing hands it did not exist three four years ago and today's it was all about that now I'm definitely biased maybe that's what I'm interested in so that's what I looked but those companies were not there three years ago they are absolutely were there this year and I suspect that next year we'll see even more presence around this very important challenge of dexterity and object manipulation and and all those uh interesting topics. Things have changed for sure and we're going to have to figure out our play our place also in that in the I want to talk a bit about data. So you touch upon that as well. So vision had ImageNet and touch has nothing like that yet. Is the bottleneck in manipulation now the hardware or the absence of tactile data at scale? I think it's a bit of both because there's definitely no model that seems to be the standard in tactile sensing. I think the industry is still looking for winner I would say for the sensing technology and then to develop the the right models from it. There are some things that have been published by uh by academia you know especially when it comes to simulation tools you know Taxim and things like that from Carnegie Mellon and MIT

has done some really interesting things. I think we're getting there I think we are getting there. We're not there yet. But you know just the fact for example that sim-to-real is possible on Isaac from NVIDIA you can if you want to simulate a GelSight sensing capability on your on your robotic hands and use their platform to do some sensorial work. I think when you have players like that really starting to deploy resources and offer solutions it just shows that we're almost there. We're almost there. It's moving really really fast right now. But you're right. There is no model today that I know of that would people would say that's the that's the equivalent of ImageNet for touch. But there are a lot of people working on it.

Yeah. And with touch there's also this challenge where the tactile data is not standardized. Right. When we first t got in touch, we talked about standardizing the tactile data and that seemed to be also that bottleneck where how do you make sense of so much of these various data that's coming from the tactile sensors, there's optics, there's magnetic sensors. So how do you go from the sim-to-real transition and correctly model the the behavior in real life?

Yeah. And and I think it's also you know touch is a lot more complex than vision I think because even if you think about human touch capability right our fingers have a lot more sensitivity to touch than you know the the top of our hands or other parts of our body you know 100% of our body is a touch sensor but it doesn't have the same you know resolution you know when we talk in terms of vision terms so I think it's part of the challenge because some of these other technologies not vision based technologies like we have I think have a really good place in the in the robotics market. You know, whenever you're going to need lower resolution touch, there are, you know, piezo approaches or other type of approaches that will be just perfectly fine. But at the end of the day, when you're trying to build these models, right, you base it on one output at the end from all these different sensing technologies.

You know, if it's GelSight, it's going to be more of an image, so image based, so it's going to be very rich, a lot of data. Others might be a lot lower, but it's not the same type of data. So, I think the industry is still I think it's trying to do everything as a single model and I'm not sure that's going to work. I think it's going to be probably, you know, you might need different types of models, you know, one that is really for maybe your generic touch type of application, low resolution, simple, fast, you know, that have different objectives. And then for really fine fine dexterity, super high resolution might be a very different model. But trying to do everything at once, I don't know. Maybe one day we'll get there. But to me today, it feels like, you know, we're trying to um oversimplify the problem maybe.

Yeah. And do you see that GelSight is more occupying the the part of the market that is more high resolution touch for today? for sure just because of what we offer today as a vision based tactile sensor. It has so much information on every every touch that we're definitely on the high resolution side. That makes sense today. Yeah. And so I want to talk a bit about your recent project with the US Air Force where you guys had this small business innovation research grants that is developing a compact tactile fingertip sensor. So tell us more about that and how do you see defense playing in the development of the markets in robotics.

Yeah. So so this grant is going to help us basically miniaturize you know our current GelSight Mini sensor. It's also going to be you know something that's going to help improve the overall performance of the sensor by a significant factor. The interest basically is how do you get as close as possible to mimicking human touch and it's and human resolution you know in the air force and as well as many groups that do their own uh you know aircraft maintenance or you know rotorcraft maintenance a lot of the task are still done today by hand and I mean by hand is really feeling things uh feeling imperfections and and things of that nature. are other obviously solutions and and we offer it through our industrial products to to replace this kind of a lot of old way of doing things. However, you know the dream is if you now have humanoids one day doing the maintenance on an aircraft, wouldn't it be nice if they can have the same or better than human resolution and then they can do things as they're manipulating things around an aircraft.

So that's the long-term vision is like how do I bring that kind of capability to have superhuman resolution in a tactile sensor. So that the human can not only use tactile to perform tasks, assemble, disassemble parts and so on, but also to characterize its texture, you know, to measure an imperfection, to, you know, don't need a ruler or a caliper, just use your your finger and it tells you how wide something is and how deep something is. So that's kind of the the long-term vision behind this development. So it'll be a even smaller version of GelSight Mini and that that fits in the fingertips of a humanoid hand. That's the hope.

Cool. And do you have like a timeline when it comes to that? How is that development going so far? It's going well. You know, we are not at the liberty to give an exact timeline. The objective from the Air Force is really more of a more of a prototype objective, but we as a company are are have the ambition to take it not only to prototype but to actual production. We're using the public funds really as a catalyst to get the program going, but our objective is to actually have commercial product at the end. So, it's coming soon. We need a little more time. That's uh exciting. So we've seen that tactile sensor cost collapsing in the past year and a lot of players are also vertically integrating into building hands themselves. So where do you see GelSight sitting when it comes to you know there are all these price competitors coming down from underneath and how do you avoid being commoditized?

Yeah. So you know I think you and I discussed uh before this challenge that we have in the industry that there's no standard right. So you know when it comes to tactile sensing every humanoid company we've talked to had different requirements whether it's mechanical requirements electrical requirements performance requirements and I think that makes it really really hard for independent you know uh sensor developers to be a one-size-fits-all kind of uh you know provider. So that's why we chose the path with mini and I think even the one that we're developing now we're trying to make it so that it fits most of what we know but I also already know it's not going to fit all because I'm sure some people have different are developing hands that will have other constraints that we that we're not aware of. So I think there are two parts to your question. One is the question about commoditization and then the other one is how do you basically become also an actor with the people developing their own solution. So on the commoditization part, you know, I would say, you know, what one thing is you can't stand still. I would be really worried if we didn't have anything in the pipeline. We do have something in the pipeline. So I think as long as we offer that more value than what others might be coming up with, we should be good. We're also designing it in a way that if we hit large volumes, the price

can easily go down. We also have you know very strong you know IP around at least the you know the visual tactile sensing technology that we have today. So there's you know there's kind of a defensive or offensive stance you can have if needed on that front you know compared to others that might be doing offering sensors in the space. But the most interesting thing honestly is really more how to work with these uh companies that have the interest and the means to develop these high-end hands that they're interested in. And I think our technology has the advantage of being super flexible in terms of form factor and performance but still using the overall same concept from a technology perspective that I think it makes us ultimately I think a better fit for those that are looking for rich tactile sensor data in their hands.

Again, I'm not claiming that we'll be the solution for all of their sensing needs, you know, touch sensing needs. But if you really want rich tactile sensing data output from sensors, you know, we are going to be the company that hopefully will be attractive for them to work with so that we can provide them with that solution instead of them having to develop it internally and kind of reinvent the wheel. We've been doing this for 15 years. Most of them, if not all of them, did not exist 15 years ago. We know what we're doing. we have the right team, the right expertise to be able to bring value to these actors um in the robotics field. You know, we definitely will be looking for uh more, you know, partnership and collaboration opportunities with those companies just like we had with Meta a couple years ago.

Yeah, 15 years is a long time especially where a lot of these players are coming into the space like you know in the past year. So what one thing that you touch upon just now is there are so many different form factors and every hand might have a different requirement. So how often are you seeing when it comes to on boarding a new customers that GelSight team is adjusting the form factor or creating a bespoke solution to a specific customer. You know, so far we've been really trying hard to develop, I would say, a standard product, just to go back to your earlier question, a product that can satisfy the needs of most and we are using the data that people are willing to share with us openly to basically find the best solution for that. And that's really where we're focusing today. Now, we are having conversation with different companies that are saying, well, your standard product, even your future standard product might not be exact fit for what I need. So are you willing to have a conversation with us on a custom sensor and we are having those conversations as long as the business case makes sense for both parties right so you can imagine that there are some conversations but not I would say an enormous number of conversations because

the threshold to make sense you know business-wise is pretty high we are um still relatively nimble company so we cannot pursue all of the opportunities in front of us the threshold we've put in to engage on custom development is pretty high. Yeah. And I assume that these type of bespoke engagement would be asking for prototype units to start with which is super high cost and a lot of uh development resources from you guys as well on the technical side. So that would take up a lot of resources. You mentioned a lot about you know displacement and robots in law enforcements where you are against these type of things. Where did those convictions come from for you and how has it evolved over the years? This is something that was way before GelSight.

You know, we me personally uh I I'm hoping that the products that we develop are going to be helping humans for the good and that's something that's just part of my personal values and I'm trying to make sure the whole company is going to be operating under the same kind of values. So having robots that are going to be, you know, doing maintenance on aircrafts and things like that I don't have a problem with. But having, you know, robots that, you know, say, "Hey, I need I need tactile sensing technology to be able to, you know, pull a trigger on the machine gun. H, no, I I don't want to be part of of killing other humans." It's just something that we put as a as a moral bar, I would say.

And we're trying to do that. It's not easy. You don't always know, by the way, what the the end application is. But my hope is that everything that we do is to make at the end of the day, you know, people on this planet have better lives, not not worse lives. So, I'm more about, you know, trying to find ways to augment people's capabilities with these uh tools and and sensors. And if we really need to have a robot to do the job is because we can't find the right skill set anymore for that job or you know or those jobs are not easy jobs and you know people should be doing things that are more fun and and those jobs we can leave to machines to do. That's what's driving us at least from a moral perspective or trying to.

Yeah, that's super important. And if we think about various applications that robots can already better human lives like helping with elder care or remote surgery use cases that you mentioned and even like lifting heavy objects or working in dangerous conditions. These are a lot of applications that can very quickly contribute to like our well-being. And you also pointed out that it's not easy for you guys to you know when you sell the tactile sensors it's hard to really know what the humanoid robot end up doing and sometimes they might have shifts their strategies inhouse and they might go after things that you don't know that they you may not be aligned to. So there's I can see that there's some internal challenges there when it comes to hey this is the belief and how do there's also things that are out of your control.

Yes. Correct. Yeah. But you know we have customers with our industrial solutions in the nuclear energy right and when you basically take down a nuclear plant and you have to do maintenance you know time frame is very small it's a very dangerous environment. Today it's mainly people doing this. I mean there are starting to be some you know automated systems and vehicles and things like go do some things in those situations but these are typical cases where it would be a lot better for a machine to go do this you why would you want to send people in radioactive environments and dangerous environment where they have to time themselves right because they can't stay more than x minutes in the environment these are the kind of things where if we had a robot that can go to pipe open a valve check something and close it right that's something that I can a lot of value of a humanoid doing and if we can bring that kind of capability to allow those those tasks that would be great and then if you use our surface inspection metrology to even verify that you know how much corrosion you have and uh if there's a a dent or a crack you can characterize that in the same time it's even better definitely what is the moment that you're waiting for that tells you tactile intelligence has arrived I think we're almost there I think we're almost there because Again I when you see the the number of papers that are

being published around this topic and when you look at the videos that are being produced the panels where the CTOs of these companies are talking about their next challenges that topic of tactile sensing you know or or dexterity or object manipulation it comes in different forms it's just happening more and more and more so I think we're almost there we're almost at that tipping point where it's becoming the challenge that the industry has to solve for the next step. I think it already has shown that it's pretty good at, you know, if you want to move boxes around, if you want to do move parts around in a factory, it's able to do that. A lot of different companies are offering those kind of of services these days. But if you want to do things that are a lot more complex, you're going to need to add that dexterity. And I think everybody's realizing it today. And I'm seeing a lot more interest, a lot more at trade shows, at conferences, number of papers published. So, we're almost there. I don't think we're there yet. I think we're probably still six to 12 months from being being there, but it's soon.

Yeah, six to 12 from is uh very soon. And five years out, is GelSight the sensor company, the platform company, or a data company by then? I hope we're also a data company in five years. That would be where we want to be. You know, the sensing company we already are will be continuing to develop and introduce new products. I I mentioned our Modulus platform. We we introduce a new hardware once or twice a year now, which is pretty nice cadence, you know, for hardware introduction. But really the holy grail for us is maximize the installed base and then start leveraging the data from the installed base. So five years from now definitely data amazing.

That's our hope. Well, thank you so much. It's great to have you on and uh I'm excited to see the upcoming new models coming into the market. Yes, abs I I definitely appreciate Michelle the invitation and the opportunity to chat with you today and uh yeah, stay tuned. It's coming soon.