ATLANTA — Artificial intelligence (AI) is everywhere — on our phones, in our inboxes, even proofreading this sentence. Vendors promise transformative gains and revolutionary insights. The need for new technologies is real: despite extensive work from producers and regulators, in 2025, the USDA issued four public health alerts and recalled over 5 million pounds of chicken product.
If AI-equipped inspection, monitoring, and analytics can reduce the frequency of these events, the industry stands to benefit considerably.
For poultry processors, the real opportunity is in targeted, incremental adoption of AI where it strengthens existing food safety systems, not replacing the fundamentals with a cure-all black box solution.
Investment in AI for food safety has accelerated, with startups, equipment manufacturers, and large technology providers entering the space. Approaches range from “smart” equipment and plantwide tools that plug into existing quality assurance programs to general “AI data platforms.”
Processors should ask: Which tools are mature enough for my facility? Where do they fit in my food safety plan? How do they augment my current monitoring practices?
Several near-term applications stand out. AI-driven foreign material detection technologies build on decades of computer vision research. Combining hyperspectral imaging, x-ray, and optical cameras with AI perception models can improve detection of plastics, bone fragments, and other foreign materials. Well-trained systems can adapt to natural product variability and changes in lighting or environment.
Beyond vision, AI models are adept at finding subtle patterns in multimodal data to drive process improvements. Language-based tools can help plants navigate regulations and policies and flag early signs of risk or non-compliance. Imagine securely querying your HACCP plans, regulatory documents, and training materials and getting clear, cited answers tailored for supervisors or new QA staff.
While these applications are promising, they are not plug-and-play solutions. A device being “AI-enabled” does not guarantee it will work robustly, and can pose a risk if applied improperly. Key considerations include data access and ownership, clear objectives, and training of personnel.
Data security is a major concern; many companies have leaked sensitive information through misconfigured AI tools. Retaining legal ownership of your data is not enough if third parties can access or learn from it. Distinguishing between truly local/on-premise tools and cloud-hosted services is critical; that choice can separate responsible AI use from a significant data leak.
Processors should also seek measurable impact from models: How will this tool affect yield, labor efficiency, audit performance, or risk reduction? What problem is it solving and how will you know it is working? No AI model is perfect. AI models are probabilistic and trained from historical data, so processors should maintain well defined fallback procedures to catch new errors and avoid over-reliance on automated decisions.
AI will not disappear; it will only become more capable and embedded in operations as it matures. Producers must understand what these tools can and cannot do and implement safeguards around data, cybersecurity, and governance when using them.
Regulators should work with industry to establish policies and guidelines that both protect consumers and support innovation.
AI technologies can either strengthen food safety or introduce new vulnerabilities. The outcome depends on how they are integrated: clear objectives, alignment with HACCP controls, robust cybersecurity, and a well-trained workforce.
As with any emerging technology, AI should be adopted deliberately, with careful testing and governance, to ensure it serves your organization’s food safety and business goals.
Reprinted from PoultryTech, a publication of the Agricultural Technology Research Program of the Georgia Tech Research Institute, a program conducted in cooperation with the Georgia Poultry Federation with funding from the Georgia Legislature. Walker Byrnes is a research engineer with the Georgia Tech Research Institute’s ATRP.
