PITAC Update: Computational Science

Document Sample
PITAC Update: Computational Science Powered By Docstoc
					      PITAC Update:
   Computational Science
               Dan Reed
     Chancellor’s Eminent Professor

              Director, RENCI
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
             Duke University
     North Carolina State University

Vice Chancellor for Information Technology
 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
                                Renaissance Computing Institute
Current PITAC

           Renaissance Computing Institute
                PITAC Overview
• Three PITAC sub-committees
  – health (report issued)
     • www.hpcc.gov/pitac/meetings/2004/20040617/20040615_hit.pdf
  – security (underway)
  – science and engineering (launched)
     • Dan Reed (chair)
• Recent PITAC meeting
  – June 17, Washington DC
  – computational science charter
     • www.hpcc.gov/pitac/20040609_compsci_charge.pdf
  – speaker slides and agenda
     • www.hpcc.gov/pitac/meetings/2004/20040617/agenda.html

                                              Renaissance Computing Institute
  Computational Science Charter
• How well is the Federal government targeting the right research
  areas to support and enhance the value of computational
  science? Are agencies’ current priorities appropriate?
• How well is current Federal funding for computational science
  appropriately balanced between short term, low risk research and
  longer term, higher risk research? Within these research arenas,
  which areas have the greatest promise of contributing to
  breakthroughs in scientific research and inquiry?
• How well is current Federal funding balanced between
  fundamental advances in the underlying techniques of
  computational science versus the application of computational
  science to scientific and engineering domains? Which areas have
  the greatest promise of contributing to breakthroughs in scientific
  research and inquiry?

                                             Renaissance Computing Institute
    Computational Science Charter
•   How well are computational science training and research
    integrated with the scientific disciplines that are heavily
    dependent upon them to enhance scientific discovery? How
    should the integration of research and training among
    computer science, mathematical science, and the biological
    and physical sciences best be achieved to assure the effective
    use of computational science methods and tools?
•   How effectively do Federal agencies coordinate their support
    for computational science and its applications in order to
    maintain a balanced and comprehensive research and training
•   How well have Federal investments in computational science
    kept up with changes in the underlying computing
    environments and the ways in which research is conducted?
    Examples of these changes might include changes in
    computer architecture, the advent of distributed computing,
    the linking of data with simulation, and remote access to
    experimental facilities.
•   What barriers hinder realizing the highest potential of
    computational science and how might these be eliminated or
                                            Renaissance Computing Institute
Computational Science Subcommittee
• Subcommittee members
  –   Ruzena Bajcsy, UC-Berkeley
  –   Manny Fernandez, SI Ventures/Gartner
  –   José-Marie Griffiths, Pittsburgh
  –   Randy Mott, Dell
  –   Dan Reed, UNC/NCSU/Duke
       • subcommittee chair

• Two external members being added
  – people you will know and trust 
  – rationale: balance and additional expertise

                                        Renaissance Computing Institute
                 June 17 Hearing
• Computational science testimony
  – Arden Bement, Director, NSF
     • written testimony accessible at www.nsf.gov
  – Eric Jackobsson, Center for Bioinformatics and
    Computational Biology, NIH
     • for Elias Zerhoni, Director, NIH
  – Michael Strayer, DOE
     • for Ray Orbach, DOE Office of Science
  – Ken Kennedy, Rice
     • former PITAC co-chair
• Kennedy’s testimony
  – retrospective on PITAC and agency responses
                                               Renaissance Computing Institute
         1999 PITAC Principal Finding
  • Drift away from long-term fundamental research
       – agencies pressed by the growth of IT needs
            • IT R&D budgets have grown steadily but not dramatically
            • IT industry has accounted for over 30 percent of the real GDP
              growth over the past five years, but gets only 1 out of 75 Federal
              R&D dollars
            • problems solved by IT are critical to the nation
                 – engineering design, health and medicine, defense
       – Most IT R&D agencies are mission-oriented
            • natural and correct to favor the short-term needs of the mission
  • This trend must be reversed
       – continue the flow of ideas to fuel the information economy and society

Source: Ken Kennedy                                      Renaissance Computing Institute
     1999 PITAC Recommended Remedy
   • Increase the Federal IT R&D investment
        – by 1.4 billion dollars per year
            • ramp up over five years
        – focus on increasing fundamental research
   • Invest in key areas needing attention
        – software
        – scalable Information Infrastructure
        – high-end computing
        – social, economic, and workforce Issues
   • Develop a coherent management strategy
        – establish clear organizational responsibilities
        – diversify modes of support
Source: Ken Kennedy                            Renaissance Computing Institute
 1999 PITAC Funding Recommendations
  • Increase current funding for IT R&D as follows

        Fiscal Year     2000   2001   2002       2003            2004
        Software        112    268    376         472             540
        Scalable II      60    120    180         240             300
        High End        180    205    240         270             300
        HE Facilities    90    100    110         120             130
        SEW              30     40     70          90             100
        Total           472    733    996        1202            1370

Source: Ken Kennedy                          Renaissance Computing Institute
                    PITAC vs NITRD




                                NITRD Funding

                               PITAC Recommendation

                FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004
                                  Fiscal Year

                                                       Renaissance Computing Institute
                  Kennedy Observations
  • PITAC 1999 message: focus on long-term research
       – think big and make it possible for researchers to think big
       – increase the funding and the funding term
           •   unique responsibility of the Federal Government
  • Positive result: funding has increased
       – most of the measurable growth has gone to NSF
       – modes of funding diversified
       – new programs initiated
  • Concerns
       – HPC software still not getting enough attention
           •   amounts and nature of funding
       – Is the leadership and management adequate?
       – Are we returning to an era of short-term thinking?

Source: Ken Kennedy                                       Renaissance Computing Institute
                     What’s Next
• Subcommittee work starts in earnest
  – meetings, workshops, one-on-one interviews
  – agency discussions and information gathering
• Report target
  – February 2005
• How can you help?
  – talk to committee members informally
  – share position documents
     • issues, needs, opportunities, …
  – start community discussion

                                         Renaissance Computing Institute

Shared By: