arvind@utcsri.UUCP (05/20/87)
Date: 13 May 1987, 15:50:47-PDT (Wednesday)
From: "Barbara B. Simons" <simons@ibm.com>
Subject: Panel on funding at STOC '87
The following is an announcement of a panel on funding that will be taking
place on Tuesday evening at STOC.
PANEL on FUNDING at STOC
Thomas Head, N.S.F. Brent Morris, N.S.A. Judy Sunley, N.S.F.
Ralph Wachter, O.N.R. Richard Karp Susan Landau
Michael Shub Robert Tarjan Paul Young
Moderator: Barbara Simons
May 26, 8:30 P.M. Grand Hyatt Hotel, Ballrooms C&D
____________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Thomas Head is program director for computer and computation theory at the
National Science Foundation.
Dr. Brent Morris is the director of the National Security Agency's
mathematical sciences program.
Dr. Judy Sunley is the deputy division director of the division of
mathematical sciences at the National Science Foundation.
Dr. Ralph F. Wachter is the scientific officer in the Computer Science
Division at the Office of Naval Research.
Professor Richard Karp is the former associate chair of the University of
California at Berkeley Computer Science Division, a Member of the National
Academy of Sciences, and a Turing Award winner.
Professor Susan Landau teaches computer science in the Mathematics Department
at Wesleyan University.
Dr. Michael Shub, a mathematician, is a research staff member at the IBM T. J.
Watson Research Center.
Professor Robert Tarjan is on the computer science faculty at Princeton
University a member of the technical staff at AT&T Bell Labs; he is also the
winner of both the Nevanlinna prize and the Turing Award.
Professor Paul Young is chair of the Computer Science Department at the
University of Washington and a member of the Computer Science Board.
Dr. Barbara Simons, a theoretical computer scientist, is a research staff
member at the IBM Almaden Research Lab, Vice-chair SIGACT, and chair of the
SIGACT Science Policy Committee.
*******************************************************************************
Below are two lists of questions that have been suggested to the panelists
as possible topics of discussion. No one is obligated either to discuss
these questions or two limit his/her remarks to them. After opening remarks
and some discussion among the panelists, we shall be taking comments and
questions from the floor.
Questions for Representatives of Federal Funding Agencies
1. How large is your agency's academic computer science (or math) budget? How
large is your agency's theoretical computer science budget? What is the per
capita figure for theoretical computer science (or math)?
2. How do these figures compare with last year's per capita figures? the
figures of 5 years ago? the figures of 10 years ago?
3. What is the procedure that is used to decide which proposals are funded?
4. What is the size of the average grant in academic computer science (or
math)? What is the size of the average grant in theoretical computer science?
How does this compare to the size of the average grant in non-theoretical
academic computer science?
For the NSF representatives: What is the size of the Presidential Young
Investigator award in your area? What percentage of your funding budget is
used for PYI awards?
5. In your experience, are there areas within theoretical computer science in
which funding is more easily obtained? If so, what are these areas, and why
does this occur?
6. In your experience, are there areas within theoretical computer science in
which funding is more difficult to obtain? If so, what are these areas, and
why does this occur?
7. If the answer to either 5 or 6 is yes, what general changes have you
observed over time? Please elaborate.
8. Are there potential restrictions on publication (e.g. prepublication
clearance)? If so, what are they and how are they determined? What is the
appeal procedure should an author wish to contest some restriction?
9. Are there other changes or trends in funding that you have observed over
time? Please elaborate.
10. What advice would you give to a graduate student or a recent Ph.D. who
wishes to obtain funding now or in the new future?
Questions for Panelists who are not representatives of funding agencies
1. What do you think is a reasonable level of (per capita) funding for
academic computer science (or math)? theoretical computer science? How close
to this level is current funding? Is there adequate funding for the current
theoretical computer science research population?
2. Should funding be spread more evenly among the various colleges and
universities, or should the money be concentrated at the institutions with the
most prestigious departments?
3. How important is peer review? Could peer review be abused? If so, how
could potential (or real) problems be eliminated?
4. Are there potential sources of funding that have not been tapped by the
academic computer science community? by the theoretical computer science
community? If so, what steps could be taken to access these funds? Should
there be professional society involvement? Why do you think that these funds
have not previously been tapped?
5. Is it your perception that funding has become more mission oriented in the
past year, 5 years, 10 years? If not, should it be? If so, is this
desirable?
6. To what extent should federal funding (in general, not just in theoretical
computer science) be determined by national economic needs? by national
defense needs?
7. Can funding affect a faculty member's standing in his/her department (e.g.
reduced teaching load, additional graduate students, possible tenure, grant
size)? If so, is this desirable?
8. Are graduate students able to choose the source of their funding? Should
they be able to do so?
9. Is the direction of research currently being affected by funding? Should
funding be used to affect the directions of research?
10. Might visitors and students who are not citizens of the United States be
affected by funding policy?
11. Should there be prepublication clearance? If so, for which areas of
research? How should this be implemented?
12. What is the proper role of professional societies in determining funding?
13. What is or should be the purpose of research funding?
14. What form should funding take, e.g. individual grants, large grants,
multidisciplinary grants, etc.?