[ut.supercomputer] SCS85 Conference Review

daemon@utcsri.UUCP (The devil himself) (12/25/85)

Conference Review:				    (97 lines)
------------------


   First International Conference on Supercomputing Systems
		      - SCS 85 -

   Tampa, Florida  December 16-20, 1985
   Sponsored by IEEE Computer Society


1) Altho billed as "international", the US was the main focus of this
   conference.	This was sometimes embarrassing during the plenary
   sessions when speakers urged the need for the US to regain its
   leadership in computer technology.

2) Supercomputing?  Many of the papers had nothing to do with
   supercomputing!  It seems that most of the papers were invited
   and the organizers were hard put to find enough papers on the
   subject!

3) Each day was encumbered by morning plenary sessions where leaders
   of (mainly US) technology and politics attempted to say something
   prophetic about supercomputing and high tech.  During the week,
   four speakers each gave an almost identical summary of the history
   of "supercomputing".  One speaker gave a state of the art summary
   of current architectures that so superficial it was silly!

   Most of the comments made by the VIP Captains of Industry
   were vacuous, and many of the more serious issues of
   funding, training, availability of supercomputers for research,
   etc. were overlooked.  There was no time for questions from the
   floor.  Dropout rate after the second day was quite noticeable.

4) Like so many conferences these days, at this one the (almost)
   complete proceedings were available at registration.  This practice
   tends to make actual attendance at the conference somewhat
   optional, because you can now read the papers at your leisure
   rather than sit thru a probably boring recital.  A better idea
   would be to either make the proceedings available a few weeks
   before the conference and allow more time for questions/comments,
   or to delay the printing until weeks after the conference to
   encourage participation in the sessions.

   As it turned out, there were some many papers crammed into the
   parallel sessions that there was usually no time for significant
   discussion and session moderators had their hands full maintaining
   time discipline.  Also, only 10 or 15 minutes was available to
   give each paper, so what in actuality was presented was a mere
   abstract of the paper.

5) At the Grand Banquet, over an hour was spent in an awards ceremony
   which was as ridiculous as it was unnecessary.  Everyone on the
   plenary panels received (dubious) awards for their participation.
   So did all the conference organizers.  This left everyone wondering
   who decided the awards in the first place.  It looked like the
   organizers were giving themselves awards!  The crowd did start
   getting restless and some of the tables were having a hard time
   keeping it together.  There was alot to be sarcastic about!
   (I almost passed out from laughter on an empty stomach during
   this Emperor's-new-clothes cerimony!)

6) By the last day of the conference, about 30% of the original
   attendees showed up.  This indicates that it was too long (without
   the plenary sessions, it could have been over with in 2.5 days
   rather than 4!  This would have been a significant savings for
   my employer!  One would have hoped to get a lot more out of a
   four day conference!

7) The technical sessions were clearly hardware oriented.  There
   were no papers or sessions on operating systems or compiler
   technology for supercomputers!  I believe these are the most
   significant problems for the industry right now, even more
   significant than architecture and chip design!  As far as I'm
   concerned, this oversight was tragic!!

8) Some useful information was obtained in spite of it all:
   a)  The NEC SX-2 is twice as fast as the CRAY X-MP (single
   processor ).  It has a 6 ns clock and 40 vector registers of 256
   elements each.  And its (FORTRAN) compiler is top class.
   b)  IBM's vector processor 3090 is a serious entry.  The 3090/200
   with 2 processors, and the 3090/400 with four, have 18.5 ns clock
   with measured megaflop speeds of 60 to 90 for real problems.
   It has a cached memory and this has caused them to redo the
   algorithms for FFT and LINPACK to accomodate this.

9) Overall, I'd give this conference a C+ grade.  There was too much
   splash and glitter and not enough substance.  I'd like to propose
   that someone organize a conference on compiler technology for
   super/parallel computers.  Perhaps a workshop rather than a
   conference would be more appropriate.  And it should be soon...
   Very soon!  It is really needed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Friedman:  Pacific - Sierra Research Corp.,
		   2855 Telegraph Ave., Suite 415, Berkeley CA 94705
		   (415) 540 5216
		   uucp: {hplabs,lll-crg,ptsfa}!well!rchrd