Subject: RE: Special Action on GEM ITR Preproposal Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 07:34:39 -0500 Resent-From: Geoffrey Fox Resent-To: p_gcf@npac.syr.edu Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:18:48 -0500 From: "Roscoe Giles" To: "Geoffrey Fox" CC: "Ilona Lappo" * One Pager/5 Pubs CV attached. *Some comments on the draft (more later): Basically looked great in motivating the application and linking CS issues in. It definitely looked application driven however (rather than driven by CS research issues). Which category will the proposal be in? HPCC? There is an overarching theme that is the immersion of the earthquake community in an information infrastructure that transcends the time and distance scales of the case studies. Perhaps the CS discussions in section 4 could reflect this as a driving theme more explicitly. For example, in discussing distributed object technology in section 4.1 we might add that spanning these scales is a test of existing/proposed technologies as well as a design goal of our work. Sec 3.2: the figure needs more explanation (especially emphasizing the time scale). Sec 3.3: perhaps the HPCC section should include the idea that we have access to supercomputers already (not asking ITR to do PACI like stuff). All is on the information systems aspects... Are the methods discussed in section 4.2 new algorithms or algorithms newly applied in the earthquake framework. This may affect whether this area maps to ITR's HPCC focus. We might want to try to workup a timeline for the project that would put the components in perspective... -- best, Roscoe --------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: One Page 5 Pubs Roscoe.doc One Page 5 Pubs Roscoe.doc Type: Winword File (application/msword) Encoding: base64