1. Lennart Johnsson's Panel
   1. Application Specific PSE's
2. Introduction
   1. *VanRosendale not here
   2. *Panel is Numerical Methods/Parallelism background
   3. *CATIA is an example PSE
   4. *Note finite element businesses are very proprietary and not open
      1. -ABACUS is open and this helps their success?
   5. *Can you build a business case for PSE's
3. L Johnsson -- Contd I
   1. *Why are many PSE's not out there?
      1. -Is it just that hardware only just becoming available?
   2. *Is Scalability important?
   3. *What are enabling technologies
   4. *What about testing and validation?
   5. *Is nature of required PSE's too multidisciplinary for academics?
4. L Johnsson -- Contd II
   1. *Who are users?
      1. -Note CATIA set up for use by teams
   2. *What should academia do
      1. -Set up standards
      2. -build prototypes, components
      3. -establish test and validation cases and procedure
5. Randall Bramley
   1. *Talked to users of (Mathworks) tools in research and teaching
   2. *PSE must allow user to intervene
      1. -at all levels of PSE
      2. -Monolithic systems not good
   3. *PSE's must be OPEN
   4. *Symbolic manipulation leads to unreadable unmodifiable sometimes inefficient code
6. Randall Bramley II
   1. *Users complain PSE's can't solve large problems
   2. *More efficient standard interfaces between PSE's
      1. -Microsoft OLE
   3. *Let users build their own application specific PSE's in terms of Meta-PSE systems
7. Gallopoulos from Illinois
   1. *Quicken and Tax Programs are well known PSE's
   2. *PSE's should use language of user domain
   3. *Compiler is a problem solving environment?
      1. -Yes as say HPF is specialized in terms of supported data structures
   4. *Illinois building MATLAB to F90 compiler
8. Marinescu from Purdue on PSE for Structural Biology
   1. *10-15 such groups nationwide
   2. *Commercial use down the road
   3. *Both computer science and biology issues
   4. *Likes adaptive algorithms which are self scheduling and make use of whatever machines are available.
   5. *Has system called Bond which is intelligent shell hiding details from user
   6. *Socrates is a spreadsheet like GUI to define problem
9. Questions to Panel I
   1. *Sherman(SCA) agrees that CORBA is not suitable for parallel implementations
   2. *Sewell agrees users want to modify code produced by PSE's -- Protran from IMSL (Sewell's work) used to produce unreadable code. *Build application specific PSE on top of general purpose PSE
10. Questions to Panel II
    1. *Analogy to specialized versus general purpose hardware
    2. *Can't start from scratch!
    3. *Sherman: must be able to certify code -- can't modify code used in real world so open-ness can be a liability
    4. *Are there two markets?
       1. -Engineering -- can't modify
       2. -Research -- must be able to modify
       3. -Also Users versus Developers
    5. *Note MATLAB and Maple combined succesfully!
11. Questions to Panel III
    1. *Boeing trying to get more and more software from the outside except in aeronautics
    2. *Boeing interested in PSE and agrees on legal issues brought up by Sherman
    3. *Academia can only help set standards as in most cases industry is solving real and much larger problems
    4. *Should tools for developing PSE's be in public domain?
       1. -Certainly should be available but Lennart is worried about standard problem that no incentive for commercial activities
    5. *John Rice agrees that PSE's need commercial support!
    6. *MATLAB contrated with ? to produce sparse MATLAB. ? is NAG?