Error 404: A Look At Digital Decay

Ranked: Which Countries Build the Most AI Models?

The global race to develop artificial intelligence is overwhelmingly concentrated in two countries: the United States and China.

This visualization uses analysis from the World Bank’s World Development Report 2026, based on Epoch AI’s model dataset from May 2026, to show where AI models are being developed.

Which Countries Develop the Most AI Models?

The following table ranks economies by their share of AI models, according to the World Bank’s analysis of Epoch AI data.

The U.S. leads with 50%, followed by China at 24%. The UK is a distant third at 5.2%, while Canada ranks fourth at 3.1%. No other individually listed economy exceeds 2.3%.

Why Does the U.S. Dominate AI Development?

America’s advantage comes from its combination of venture capital, leading technology companies, research talent, and computing infrastructure.

Companies including OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic benefit from an established cloud ecosystem and access to advanced semiconductors. Federal research funding and policies supporting domestic chip production have also strengthened this environment.

The country’s leadership extends beyond developing models to operating some of the world’s most widely used AI chatbots.

Is China Closing the AI Gap?

China’s 24% share trails America’s substantially, but model quantity does not necessarily indicate technological capability. Chinese developers including DeepSeek and Alibaba have narrowed the performance gap with leading American systems, particularly through lower-cost and open-weight models.

Although China has considerable influence over the critical minerals powering AI infrastructure, access to advanced chips, computing capacity, and capital remains crucial.

Why Is Europe Falling Behind?

Europe’s relatively small shares reflect challenges including fragmented capital markets, fewer large-scale technology investors, and limited access to computing infrastructure. Regulatory uncertainty may also complicate investment, although Europe’s position cannot be attributed simply to skepticism about AI.

Falling behind in model development could increase dependence on American and Chinese providers, potentially limiting Europe’s control over AI infrastructure and future innovation.

Nevertheless, the World Bank emphasizes that countries can capture substantial economic benefits by adapting existing AI systems rather than developing expensive frontier models themselves.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

To explore how the two leading AI powers compare beyond model counts, see Comparing U.S. vs. Chinese AI Model Performance on Voronoi.

Which Popular Smartphones Have the Highest Radiation Levels?

Every smartphone uses radiofrequency waves to communicate with cellular networks, but the amount of energy absorbed during standardized testing can vary significantly between devices.

Using data from Germany’s Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS), this visualization ranks 15 popular smartphones by their maximum head Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), measured in watts per kilogram (W/kg).

These measurements offer a standardized way to compare phones, but higher SAR readings do not necessarily indicate greater health risks. Smartphone radiofrequency waves are non-ionizing, unlike higher-energy radiation such as X-rays, and health authorities have not established that exposure from mobile phones within applicable safety limits causes adverse health effects.

Ranking Smartphone Radiation Levels

SAR measurements can differ depending on whether a phone is tested at the ear or near the body. The table below compares both measurements for 15 popular smartphones, ranked by their maximum head SAR values.

Apple occupies the top two positions, with the iPhone 17 and iPhone 16e separated by just 0.01 W/kg.

Samsung’s Galaxy Z Fold7 follows at 1.40 W/kg, ahead of the Galaxy S26 at 1.21 W/kg. At the other end of the ranking, the Galaxy A16 5G records 0.38 W/kg, the lowest reading among the 15 devices.

Head and Body Measurements Tell Different Stories

A smartphone’s position in the ranking can change depending on whether SAR is measured at the head or near the body.

Motorola’s Razr 60 ranks 11th for head SAR at 0.84 W/kg, but its body SAR of 1.39 W/kg is tied for the fourth-highest reading among the 15 devices.

Google’s Pixel 9 shows a similar pattern, with a body SAR of 1.40 W/kg compared with a head SAR of 0.99 W/kg. Apple’s iPhone 17, meanwhile, measures 1.49 W/kg in both tests.

These measurements come from different standardized testing configurations and do not represent typical daily exposure.

Why Radiation Levels Vary Across Smartphone Brands

SAR readings do not necessarily follow a consistent pattern based on brand, price, or smartphone generation.

Google’s Pixel 9 and Pixel 10 both record a maximum head SAR of 0.99 W/kg. Xiaomi’s Poco X7 Pro and Xiaomi 17 also share the same reading, at 1.00 W/kg.

Motorola’s three featured devices fall within a relatively narrow range, from 0.84 W/kg for the Razr 60 to 0.95 W/kg for the Edge 60.

Factors such as antenna design, operating frequencies, and testing conditions can influence SAR measurements. Because these readings are specific to individual devices, they cannot be used to characterize an entire smartphone brand.

Smartphones also differ in the materials and components used in their construction. Our visualization of the critical metals inside a smartphone looks at the resources used to manufacture modern mobile devices.

Does Higher Smartphone Radiation Mean Greater Health Risk?

Not necessarily. SAR measures the maximum rate at which radiofrequency energy is absorbed by tissue during standardized testing. It does not measure a person’s cumulative exposure throughout a typical day.

The amount of radiofrequency energy a phone transmits varies with signal strength and other network conditions. Keeping the phone away from your head, such as by using speakerphone or headphones, can also reduce exposure.

Unlike ionizing radiation, radiofrequency waves do not have enough energy to directly ionize atoms or damage DNA in the way that X-rays can.

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the weight of scientific evidence has not linked cellphone radiofrequency radiation with health problems. Research and safety monitoring continue.

Ultimately, these rankings compare maximum SAR measurements under laboratory conditions, not which smartphones are safer or more dangerous to use.

Learn More on the Voronoi App

If you enjoyed this visualization, check out The Percentage of Internet Users by Country on the Voronoi app.