← All speakers

Bio, Work & Ideas

Ian Ballantyne

Conference affiliation: Google DeepMind · 2026

Ian Ballantyne is a senior developer relations engineer at Google DeepMind who helps developers deploy the Gemma family of open models on phones, laptops, and other infrastructure they control. His work makes advanced AI practical within real constraints: limited memory, operating costs, sensitive data, and the need to inspect what autonomous software actually does.

From Google APIs to open models

Ballantyne was already working on Google’s AdWords API team in 2017, supporting developers building against its advertising platform. His public projects include Google Ads Java tooling, Google Shopping samples, and subsequent experiments with Gemini and generative AI on edge hardware.

He coauthored the Gemma 3n developer guide, contributed to the Gemma 3 technical report, and is among the authors of EmbeddingGemma research. His work on Google’s mobile-actions dataset concerns lightweight models that translate requests into actions on mobile devices. In 2026, he and Omar Sanseviero published a DiffusionGemma developer guide examining parallel text generation, bidirectional context, and deployment across different GPU configurations.

  • Open-model ownership has operating costs. Local inference can reduce dependency on hosted services and exploit hardware an organization already owns, particularly for token-intensive coding, translation, and document processing. Ballantyne emphasizes that those benefits must be weighed against electricity, maintenance, uptime, memory, and whether a workload requires immediate responses or can run in the background.
  • Hardware fit depends on memory architecture. His Gemma work explains how per-layer embeddings can reside outside scarce accelerator memory, making models more practical on constrained devices. Parameter counts alone cannot establish deployability; quantization, activated parameters, available memory, and the specific task also matter.
  • On-device AI can take concrete actions. Through AI Edge Gallery and related work on mobile function calling, Ballantyne demonstrates models selecting skills, opening applications, retrieving local information, and producing small programs directly on a phone.
  • Local agent orchestration should remain inspectable. He has demonstrated locally hosted models distributing translation and SVG-generation work among subagents, and coding agents building and debugging browser games. His Antigravity demonstration emphasizes implementation plans, browser inspection, execution traces, and human intervention. For Ballantyne, task-specific model evaluation matters more than generic benchmark standings: the relevant question is whether a particular model completes a particular workflow within its actual infrastructure constraints.

Read the topics behind these talks

3 conference talks

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Follow video analysis, a bookshelf app, a book-to-media pipeline, and local Gemma agents through working results, failed assumptions, and live repairs.

  • From scientific Python to model infrastructure
    0:15 ↗
  • Which constraints will survive the next model?
    4:42 ↗
  • A toolbox of inputs, outputs, and application surfaces
    8:07 ↗
  • Turn a dinosaur video into a grounded table
    11:51 ↗
  • Bounding boxes versus a verification loop
    17:42 ↗
  • Specify an account-linked bookshelf catalog
    21:04 ↗
  • Change language while sharing a screen
    23:53 ↗
  • Explore a world generated as pixels
    28:56 ↗
  • Recognition succeeds before persistence does
    35:07 ↗
  • Choose the media model for the job
    43:11 ↗
  • Prepare a book-to-media pipeline
    51:27 ↗
  • Select the API surface and retain useful context
    54:20 ↗
  • Replace implicit image history with explicit references
    58:09 ↗
  • Animate the scene, then score the chapter
    1:03:01 ↗
  • Create distinct characters with two configured voices
    1:07:53 ↗
  • Convert the notebook without hiding the workflow
    1:13:40 ↗
  • Composition limits, service tiers, and capacity
    1:18:40 ↗
  • Fit the model to hardware you control
    1:24:26 ↗
  • Run skills and small coding loops on a phone
    1:29:42 ↗
  • Serve one local model to an agent workload
    1:32:47 ↗
  • Connect OpenCode, then test the generated game
    1:36:54 ↗
  • A game inside a game, and a screenshot into HTML
    1:44:43 ↗
  • Map language onto robot and development tools
    1:51:00 ↗
  • The final test is an interaction
    1:52:45 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

A live Antigravity game-building demo opens a discussion of the infrastructure behind agents: shared workspaces, quotas, tracing, skill evaluation, and code review.

  • Give the agent a specification—and inspect what happens next
    0:16 ↗
  • Extend the harness beyond coding
    4:32 ↗
  • The game starts, but verification is still work
    6:40 ↗
  • Scale starts with controlling demand
    7:49 ↗
  • Find the step where the agent went wrong
    13:06 ↗
  • Make research stages collaborators
    14:36 ↗
  • Expert skills need task-specific tests
    17:22 ↗
  • A quota notification is not task completion
    20:06 ↗
  • Close the loop with review
    22:24 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Owning a model changes where data can go, which tasks are economical, and who operates the system. Gemma 4 illustrates those choices from phone skills to local translation agents.

  • When proprietary data cannot leave
    1:31 ↗
  • What the effective sizes mean
    2:18 ↗
  • Active computation, total weights, and useful capability
    3:42 ↗
  • Enough capability for the task
    4:59 ↗
  • Licensing is part of operational independence
    7:03 ↗
  • Four thresholds for offloading agent work
    9:38 ↗
  • From phone input to a defined action
    12:45 ↗
  • Local inference changes the operating budget
    13:56 ↗
  • A local orchestrator fans out translation work
    16:08 ↗
  • Change the endpoint, then evaluate the workflow
    18:14 ↗
  • The responsibilities that come with control
    19:20 ↗

References