Business+IT Asks Ogata About Japan’s Competitiveness in Physical AI

Business+IT published an exclusive interview on November 3, 2026, asking Waseda University Professor Ogata whether Japan can win in “physical AI.” The excerpt says Ogata is chairman of the AI Robot Association and a professor at Waseda University’s Faculty of Science and Engineering, but it does not provide his answers.

The article’s headline asks, “Can Japan really win in physical AI?” But the excerpt provided confirms only the interview’s theme and Ogata’s titles; it does not explain what “winning” means or how Ogata answered. The article therefore cannot be treated as an assessment showing that Japan has an advantage or disadvantage. The question posed and the basis for any answer must be considered separately. The excerpt also contains no specific details about technology, prices, market size or competitor comparisons, so generalities should not be added to fill in a conclusion. In terms of how this relates to other articles from this newspaper, Business+IT Reports on Bain’s Argument About Humanoids, dated October 12, 2026, covers an opinion piece that places Japanese companies’ path to success in a direction other than competing to build complete systems. Meanwhile, Business+IT Reports on EV Use in Disasters in Light of the Kumamoto Earthquake, dated September 3, 2026, discusses EV use through the specific applications of power and transportation during disasters. The former focuses on competitive positioning, while the latter addresses a social use case; their analytical measures differ from the question “Can Japan win?” posed in this interview. Rather than combining them into a single conclusion, the article’s full text should be checked to establish whether competitiveness is measured by finished products, component technologies or post-deployment operations. This distinction also raises the question of whether physical AI can be discussed as a single product sector. At least in the summaries of the related articles provided, competition in complete humanoid systems and the use of EVs during disasters concern different subjects. The phrase “Japan will win” alone does not specify the products, evaluation criteria or range of applications involved, and is insufficient for comparing competitiveness. When reviewing the full interview, Ogata’s views should not be conflated with the outlet’s question or headline; the examples and benchmarks cited as evidence should be identified. Three points warrant further scrutiny. First, which products, processes or markets does the article define as the arena in which Japan can “win”? Second, does it provide evidence on technology, competitor comparisons, prices or market size to support that judgment? Third, how does it distinguish competition in complete systems from strengths in components, operations and applications? These points cannot be confirmed from the excerpt, so no conclusion can be drawn at this stage.