The 5th ISNM Forum on Manufacturing Paradigm III (5th FMP3): Roundtable Discussion
The 5th Forum on Manufacturing Paradigm III (5th FMP3), organized by the International Society for Nanomanufacturing (ISNM), sponsored by the International Academy of Engineering and Technology (AET), and hosted by The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, was held in Hong Kong from 22 to 25 May 2026. The forum brought together more than 160 experts and scholars from various countries and regions.
Participants agreed that Manufacturing Paradigm III goes beyond the further improvement of machining accuracy. Its essence lies in the controllable removal, migration, and addition of materials at the atomic and close-to-atomic scale, opening up a fundamental technological route for transformative improvements in the functionality and performance of future products. Its engineering development must therefore advance in parallel with progress in measurement, efficiency, scalability, artificial intelligence, standardization, and international collaborations.
The forum focused on frontier topics including atomic and close-to-atomic scale manufacturing (ACSM), ultra-precision machining and measurement, digital twins, artificial intelligence, and the integration of advanced manufacturing applications. FMP3 continues to explore a more fundamental question: when manufacturing technology advances to the atomic and close-to-atomic scale (ACS), how will its objects, theories, methods, standards, and industries change? Manufacturing Paradigm III is regarded as a key framework for answering this question, serving as a common research framework that connects fundamental theory, key processes, advanced instruments, intelligent systems, and major applications.
From “Smaller Scale” to “Basic Unit”: the Scientific Meaning of Manufacturing Paradigm III
The presentations and roundtable discussions over the three-day forum focused on Manufacturing Paradigm III. Participants noted that its core is to orient manufacturing goals and processes toward atoms themselves. By controlling the removal, migration, and addition of materials at the atomic and close-to-atomic scale (ACS), manufacturing can establish a direct link between atoms and final products. This shift goes beyond a further improvement in manufacturing precision; it represents a fundamental change in the basic unit of manufacturing action. Manufacturing mechanisms therefore need to be understood more deeply through interatomic interactions, quantum effects, and atomic-scale material behavior.
During the roundtable discussion, F. Fang from University College Dublin pointed out that precision and ultra-precision manufacturing have traditionally been evaluated mainly by geometric indicators such as dimensions, form, and surface quality. As Manufacturing Paradigm III develops, however, researchers and engineers need to pay much closer attention to the integrity of specific atomic layers, particular atomic arrangements, and the states of atomic interfaces. Atoms and atomic layers will directly determine the functionality and performance of products. The absence or alteration of even a few key atoms may cause abrupt changes in performance. Accordingly, the logic of manufacturing evaluation will expand from continuous geometric error control to the coordinated characterization of discrete structures, interface states, and functional reliability.
Regarding the definition of ACSM, participants suggested that, at the early stage of this emerging field, its concepts should remain open and inclusive while gradually developing workable technical boundaries. J. Li from Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics argued that the involvement of atoms alone is not enough to define manufacturing; manufacturing must ultimately be directed toward usable products or functional carriers that can enter an industrial system. H. Zhang from Beijing University of Technology argued that ACSM should not simply be understood as the next step in the size progression from millimeters to micrometers to nanometers. Because it deals with the basic units of matter, the meanings of scale, precision, and manufacturing need to be clarified, and standardized definitions should be gradually established. M. Lai from Tianjin University noted that Manufacturing Paradigm III shifts the research object from geometric dimensions to atomic layers, atomic wires, and individual atoms, bringing together physics, chemistry, materials science, and manufacturing-related research into a broader concept of “manufacturing” oriented toward functional products.
J. Sun from Dalian University of Technology further proposed that using atomic mechanisms to explain machining processes is not the same as actively modifying atomic structures to generate macroscopic functions. ACSM truly acquires its meaning only when controllable changes at the atomic level become a necessary pathway for achieving product functions. Y. He from University College Dublin emphasized, from the perspective of experimental processes, that atomic-scale machining should consider not only the parts removed or added, but also the final structures that remain. More importantly, probabilistic atomic migration, addition, and removal must be transformed into stable, repeatable, and deterministic manufacturing processes.
ACSM is the Fundamental Technology, while Intelligence and Digitalization are the Important Technologies in Enhancing its Effectiveness
Regarding the relationship between Manufacturing Paradigm III and ACSM, the roundtable discussion reached an important consensus: Manufacturing Paradigm III is broader and more inclusive in scope, while ACSM constitutes its fundamental and decisive enabling technology. To illustrate this relationship, participants used the metaphor of “1” and “0s”. ACSM, as the technology that directly determines the core functionality and performance of future products, serves as the leading “1”. Supporting technologies such as digitalization, artificial intelligence, intelligent control, and sustainable manufacturing can improve efficiency, reduce costs, and expand the scale of application; in this sense, they function as the “0s” that follow. Without the core capability of controllable atomic-scale manufacturing, even the most advanced algorithms and integrated systems would struggle to deliver products meeting performance requirements in atomic-level precision, atomic-scale structures, and controllable defect densities.
On this relationship, J. Zhang from City University of Hong Kong argued that Manufacturing Paradigm III is an overarching theoretical framework, while specific technologies such as ACSM are implementation pathways toward products. Engineering implementation must resolve the tension between extremely small removal units and macroscopic machining volumes in terms of efficiency and scalability. X. Li from Tsinghua University proposed that large-scale atomic-level manufacturing also requires cross-scale precision positioning, as well as coordination among processing, inspection, and materials design. L. Ye from Harbin Institute of Technology noted that artificial intelligence can accelerate simulations of atomic-scale processes and support complex process design from an integrated perspective covering materials, processes, and inspection. L. Peng from the Chinese Academy of Sciences emphasized that establishing an evaluation system suited to atomic-scale processing is essential for promoting proactive inspection and the integration of processing and inspection, and that only through such efforts can the controllability and verifiability of ACSM be guaranteed.
From Definitional Debate to Action Roadmap: Diverse Perspectives at the Roundtable Discussion
On how Manufacturing Paradigm III can develop into a sustainable academic and engineering direction, the roundtable discussion presented multi-level perspectives. W. Zhang from University College Dublin viewed Manufacturing Paradigm III as a manufacturing development trend naturally formed under the pull of emerging demands, while ACSM reflects a pathway through which researchers actively introduce methods from physics, chemistry, computer science, and artificial intelligence to achieve their goals. C. Li from Tianjin Sino-German University of Applied Sciences proposed, from the perspective of engineering practice, that the engineering requirements of ACSM should be systematically identified for specific application fields, and that standards and evaluation systems should be established on the basis of clear definitions. H. An argued that a process should not be directly classified as atomic-scale manufacturing simply because it involves atoms. It is also necessary to examine whether the object of action reaches the level of individual atoms, atomic clusters, or single atomic layers, and whether the underlying mechanism reflects discreteness. He also proposed that AI for Science can facilitate the modeling and processing of atomic-scale data.
In the closing summary, Forum Chair B. Cheung emphasized that the theoretical system of Manufacturing Paradigm III and ACSM should not be developed solely by the traditional mechanical manufacturing community. In the future, more experts from materials science, chemistry, artificial intelligence, quantum science, and physics should be involved. Through the development of technology roadmaps and broader international exchange, this emerging field can bring together collective strength for continuous breakthroughs.
Turning Frontier Concepts into Collaborative Innovations
G. Wang from the Chinese Mechanical Engineering Society (CMES) shared insights based on the Society’s long-standing experience in advancing mechanical engineering and manufacturing. He emphasized that precision manufacturing, ultra-precision manufacturing, and atomic and close-to-atomic scale manufacturing will play an important role in strengthening the future advances of the manufacturing industry.
G. Wang’s on-site remarks added a new dimension to the forum. For Manufacturing Paradigm III to evolve from an academic frontier into industrial capability, it will require not only breakthroughs in fundamental theory and key processes, but also sustained joint efforts from professional societies, international platforms, universities, research institutions, and industry.
The FMP3 forum fully reflected the exchange of views and ideas among experts from different countries and disciplinary backgrounds. E. Savio, President of ISNM, systematically explained the deep integration of digital twins and metrology in advanced manufacturing, emphasizing that Manufacturing Paradigm III, as an inherent law of manufacturing development, will bring profound changes to the field. W. Guo, a member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, connected ACSM and new manufacturing paradigms with natural intelligence and the hydrovoltaic effect. He proposed the frontier concept of “hydrovoltaic intelligence”, broadening the imagination for new functional devices driven by the synergy of intelligence and energy. Ö. S. Ganiyusufoglu, a member of the German Academy of Science and Engineering, argued that traditional manufacturing technologies are approaching their physical limits, while the continued miniaturization of electronic products and the rise of quantum computing have created new requirements for ACSM. The emergence of Manufacturing Paradigm III is therefore an inevitable trend in the development of manufacturing technology. These diverse reports and perspectives demonstrate the growing international influence and interdisciplinary cohesion of the FMP3 forum. They also show that the forum is gradually becoming an important international bridge connecting manufacturing science, intelligent technology, energy innovation, and related fields, providing continuous impetus for the future direction of manufacturing.
Summary
From observing atoms to deterministically manufacturing functional products, many challenges remain in theory, processes, equipment, standards, efficiency, and industrialization. The message conveyed by this FMP3 forum was clear and firm: Manufacturing Paradigm III is concerned not only with achieving higher manufacturing precision, but also with a profound transformation in the logic by which future product functions are formed and in the fundamental theories of manufacturing. With ACSM as the core, measurement and characterization as safeguards, artificial intelligence and digitalization as amplifiers, and international cooperation and young talent as sustained driving forces, the new manufacturing paradigm is accelerating from scientific vision toward engineering practice and industrial reality.
(Prepared by Y. Guo, C. Gu, P. Cao, H, An, N. Yu, Y. Yang)