ACCI TASK FORCES Update

1. ACCI TASK FORCESUpdate CASC September 22, 2009

2. Task Force Introduction • Timeline 12-18 months or less from June 2009 • Led by NSF Advisory Committee on Cyberinfrastructure • Co-led by NSF PD’s (OCI) • Membership from community • Include other agencies: DOE, EU, etc • Workshop(s) • Program recommendations • We then go back and develop programs

3. Task Force Leads • Chair – Jim Bottum • Consultant – Paul Messina • NSF – Ed Seidel, Carmen Whitson, Jose Munoz

4. Task Forces & ACCI Leads • Campus Bridging • Craig Stewart, Indiana University • Software Infrastructure • David Keyes, Columbia University • Data & Visualization • Shenda Baker, Harvey Mudd College • HPC • Thomas Zacharia, U of Tennessee, ORNL • Grand Challenge Communities • Tinsley Oden, U of Texas • Learning & Workforce Development • Diana Oblinger, EDUCAUSE

5. Coordination • TF are functionally interdependent • TF leaders talk regularly with each other, NSF • Monthly conference calls with TF chairs, co-chairs, Paul M, NSF team • TF Chairs and ACCI members: please work with ADs! This is NSF wide! • Wiki site • Public; anyone can contribute to this • NSF team will cycle through each TF • Joint workshops between TFs encouraged

6. Software Infrastructure Charge • Identify specific needs and opportunities across the spectrum of scientific software infrastructure • Design responsive approaches • Address issue of institutional barriers

7. Campus Bridging Charge • Identification of best practices for • general process of bridging to national infrastructure • interoperable identification and authentication • Dissemination of and use of shared data collections • Vetting and sharing definitive, open use educational materials • Suggest common elements of software stacks widely usable across nation/world to promote interoperability/economy of scale • Recommended policy documents that any research university have in place • Identify solicitations to support this work

8. Data & Visualization Charge • Examine the increasing importance of data, its development cycle(s) and their integral relationships within exploration, discovery, research engineering and educations aspects • Address the increasing interaction and interdependencies of data within the context of a range of computational capacities to catalyze the development of a system of science and engineering data collections that is open, extensive and evolvable • Emphasis will be toward identifying the requirements for digital data cyberinfrastructure that will enable significant progress in multiple fields of science and engineering and education – including visualization and inter-disciplinary research and cross-disciplinary education

9. HPC Charge • To provide specific advice on the broad portfolio of HPC investments that NSF could consider to best advance science and engineering over the next five to ten years. Recommendations: • should be based on input from the research community and from experts in HPC technologies • should include hardware, software and human expertise • encompass both • infrastructure to support breakthrough research in science and engineering and • research on the next-generation of hardware, software and training.

10. Grand Challenge Communities Charge • Which grand challenges requireprediction and which do not • What are the generic computational and social technologies that belong to OCI and are applicable to all grand challenges • How can OCI make the software and other technical investments that are useful and cut across communities • What are the required investments in data as well as institutional components needed for GCC’s • How can we help communities (outreach) work effectively that do not yet know what they need or how to work together.

11. Grand Challenge Communities Charge (2) • How to conceive of and enable grand challenge communities that make use of cyberinfrastructure. • What type of CI is needed (hardware, networking, software, data, social science knowledge, etc.). • How to deal with the issues of data gathering and inoperability for both static and dynamic, real time problems. • What open scientific issues transcend NSF Directorates • Can we develop a more coherent architecture including data interoperability, a software environment people can build on, applications to be built on this environment, common institutional standards, etc.

12. Learning & WorkforceDevelopment Charge • Foster the broad deployment and utilization of CI-enabled learning and research environments • Support the development of new skills and professions needed for full realization of CI-enabled opportunities; • Promote broad participation of underserved groups, communities and institutions, both as creators and users of CI; • Stimulate new developments and continual improvements of CI-enabled learning and research environments; • Facilitate CI-enabled lifelong learning opportunities ranging from the enhancement of public understanding of science to meeting the needs of the workforce seeking continuing professional development; • Support programs that encourage faculty who exemplify the role of teacher-scholars through outstanding research, excellent education and the integration of education and research in computational science and computational science curriculum development; • Support the development of programs that connect K-12 students and educators with the types of computational thinking and computational tools that are being facilitated by cyberinfrastructure.

13. Status • Task force charges and membership reviewed at June ACCI meeting • NSF staff leads assigned to each TF (staffing still ramping up over summer) • Workshops held or being planned • GCC and Software Infrastructure TFs drafting a recommendation regarding CS&E program