Blits.ai
Meet Blits.ai at Singapore FinTech FestivalNovember 18 to 20, 2026 · Singapore · Stand 3-SK-30
Book a 1:1 →

Data report

State of AI Use Cases

What 1921 documented AI deployments across 313 use cases say about where AI runs, how far it acts on its own, and how often organizations prove the result.

Computed live from the library on 12 November 2026. By Len Debets.

1921
Deployments
1581 organizations in 80 countries
61%
Disclose an outcome
Of 1921 public deployments, a measurable result
63%
Agentic
Of 1921 public deployments, the AI completes work itself
313
Use cases
Canonical pages, each with evidence and a playbook

Finding 1: most AI results are claimed, few are proven

61% (n=1921) of public deployments disclose a measurable outcome. Of the 1241 reported metrics, 53% come from vendors and 47% from the deploying organization itself.

Who made the claim (reported metrics)
  • Vendor
    654
  • Organization
    581
  • Independent
    5
  • Regulator or auditor
    1
Evidence grade of deployment records
  • Grade C
    1138
  • Grade B
    774
  • Grade A
    6
  • Grade D
    3

Finding 2: AI is moving from answering to acting

63% (n=1921) of public deployments belong to use cases where the AI completes work itself (a supervised or autonomous agent, or an agentic workflow), rather than only assisting a person.

Use cases by autonomy level
  • Supervised agent
    127
  • Copilot
    100
  • Assist
    66
  • Autonomous
    20
Deployments by stage
  • Production
    1208
  • Scaled
    379
  • Pilot
    222
  • Announced
    97
  • Paused or rolled back
    15

Finding 3: where the evidence is

Public deployments by industry of the deploying organization, with the share that disclosed an outcome, and by region.

Public deployments by industry
Public deployments by region
  • North America
    842
  • Europe
    532
  • Asia Pacific
    219
  • Middle East
    131
  • Global
    109
  • Latin America
    48
  • Africa
    40

Finding 4: the building blocks

The AI patterns use cases are built from, and how the EU AI Act classifies them.

Use cases by AI pattern
Use cases by EU AI Act tier
  • Depends on design
    145
  • Minimal risk
    74
  • Limited risk (transparency)
    73
  • High risk
    21

The benchmarks with the most evidence

KPIs with at least three pooled public values across the whole library ("up to" values are listed on each KPI page, not pooled).

Benchmarks with the most public data points
KPIMedianReported rangeData pointsClaimed by
Cycle time reduction60%
7% to 97%
Not pooled: up to 70%, up to 70%, up to 70%, up to 60%, up to 30%, up to 20%
78plus 6 up to31 organization, 47 vendor
Productivity gain50%
8.7% to 336%
Not pooled: up to 90%, up to 90%, up to 87.5%, up to 85%, up to 80%, up to 30%, up to 20%, up to 16%
55plus 8 up to25 organization, 29 vendor, 1 independent
Containment rate70%
20% to 99.6%
Not pooled: up to 88.5%
56plus 1 up to23 organization, 33 vendor
Accuracy91%
42% to 100%
Not pooled: up to 99%, up to 90%
47plus 2 up to27 organization, 20 vendor
Automation rate75%
18% to 100%
Not pooled: up to 70%, up to 50%
45plus 2 up to17 organization, 28 vendor
Handling time reduction60%
8.2% to 97%
Not pooled: up to 85%, up to 67%, up to 50%, up to 20%, up to 5%
41plus 5 up to15 organization, 26 vendor
Cost reduction50%
2% to 95%
Not pooled: up to 70%, up to 70%
25plus 2 up to8 organization, 17 vendor
Employee adoption90%
30% to 100%
229 organization, 13 vendor

About this report

Every figure is computed from the public records in the library at the date above, using the rules on the methodology page. The underlying data is available as open data under CC BY 4.0. The sample reflects what organizations choose to publish, which skews toward large organizations and successful projects.