Technology Transfer and the Role of Grand Challenge Teams

The approximately 50 Grand Challenge teams have been correctly set up as collaborations between computer scientists and application types. This can help the particular computer scientists if the application uses, evaluates and motivates further development of their personal technology. I have seen this is in many grand challenges and have concerns because this is important, but only half the story. Thus, we also need to understand and develop the best computer technologies in the world for this application. From this point of view, we have the application and not computer science driving the technology. This identifies another role for the computer science members of the grand challenge team. They should act as a window (educational/knowledge source) into the best HPCC technology that one can bring to bear on the application. One needs applications to act as testbeds for new HPCC technologies. However, in the grand challenges, I suggest that an application pull is most appropriate, and that in general other (funding) mechanisms be used for the application testbeds (computer science pull) which are also definitely needed, especially at the initial stages of technology development.

We have embodied this concept into the model for technology transfer in InfoMall, which is illustrated from two points of view in Figures 2 and 3. We have a world wide customer (application) pull (on right side of figures) that feeds from a world wide pool of HPCC technologies (left side of figures). These are fed through the ``window'' discussed above into a software capitalization (InfoTech) process that produces usable prototype systems, which can be commercialized at lower risk than raw technologies. Key to this InfoMall engine is the entrepreneur or ISV (Independent Software Vendor) who takes InfoTech products, and with traditional economic development support, produces the HPCC products brought to the customer by the marketing and system integration components of InfoMall. InfoMall offers to ISV's the special high technology support (Table 8) needed for an entrepreneur in HPCC. This includes both access to facilities and educational resources, as mentioned earlier in context of our mid-Hudson project.

: InfoMall Process for Technology Development. (RAP) Reusable Application Pieces (RTP) Reusable Technology Pieces

: InfoMall bridges the gulf between technology developers and consumers in a number of steps. Traditional technology transfer models make one big leap.

  
Table 1: Simulation Opportunities for HPCC in Industry

  
Table 2: Simulation Opportunities for HPCC in Industry (contd.)

  
Table 3: Information Analysis---``Data Mining''---Opportunities for HPCC in Industry

  
Table 4: Information Access: InfoVision---Information, Video, Imagery and Simulation on Demand---High Performance Multimedia Computing and Communications

  
Table 5: Information Integration Opportunities for HPCC

  
Table 6: Abbreviations used in Tables 1--4

We believe that major efforts should be made to increase the role of all parts of industry in the HPCC program. This should include the users with realistic estimates of the time scale on which HPCC will be useful technology---as illustrated in Section 2, this will certainly vary from case to case. However, the ISV's are also critical for there can be no HPCC hardware or systems business, and no significant user base, without ISV's linking them. We see at least three ways how the HPCC program could encourage the HPCC software industry.

1. Encourage federal proposals that use commercial rather than home grown software systems. I am reminded of a story of one computer vendor who complained that computer scientists could not buy their system because the commercial systems software was too good---one could only get federal funding to build software for systems where the existing commercial offerings were poor. Instead, we should encourage research that builds on top of existing commercial software. We should encourage the latter to offer open interfaces enabling this strategy.

2. Change the funding of MPP to explicitly encourage purchase of software, as well as hardware---recently, I was told that HPCC systems software companies were nonviable. One couldn't sell HPCC software unless it was bundled with an expensive piece of hardware. That's why we have so many MPP companies.....

3. Examine federal funding of software and structure it so that it encourages ISV's. This would include funding explicit software capitalization (InfoTech) activities. Secondly, one needs to ensure that federal projects enhance rather than compete with commercial activities. We need open (free) interfaces and not necessarily free software.

The above picture is that of a virtual corporation with products built of interoperable multiuse modules---each module in principle built by a separate organization, which are linked together in InfoMall to give a complete product. The HPCC national endeavor offers the possibility of a far larger and more exciting and important virtual corporation. This will only be possible when greater encouragement is given for software and user industries to participate in and benefit from HPCC.

: Runtime Software Support for Tables 1 to 5

: What Does HPCC Small Software Systems Business Need?