Hearing on the Partnerships for Advanced Computational
Infrastructure Program (PACI)
Statement of
Dr. Neal Lane, Director
National Science Foundation
Before the Subcommittee on Basic Research
House Science Committee
April 9, 1997
Chairman Schiff and members of the committee, I am pleased to have
the opportunity to provide the committee with some
additional background on how the NSF Partnership for
Advanced Computational Infrastructure or PACI program
came about.
The predecessor to PACI, the NSF Supercomputer Centers
Program, was initiated in the mid 1980s with the formation
of five supercomputer centers. These centers, preeminent
for that time period, provided vector supercomputing
services and training for the research community.
After five years of initial NSF support, four of these
centers were approved for another five years. During
this second phase, there was a vigorous effort to
pursue parallel computing and to expand the outreach
efforts of the centers. These centers formed themselves
into a MetaCenter, sharing resources among themselves
and building linkages with industry.
So, Mr. Chairman, it was after ten years of a successful
program that, in October of 1994, the National Science
Board asked whether NSF should continue support for
the current supercomputing centers program or phase
out the existing program to make room for a new one.
To answer this question, I appointed a committee,
chaired by Ed Hayes, Vice President for Research at
Ohio State University. The Hayes Task Force was comprised
of high performance computing experts from academia,
industry and government with exceptional talent and
breadth of experience.
From January to September 1995, the Hayes Task Force
evaluated the success of NSF's existing program and
examined the future needs of the research community
for high performance computing. As part of its background
research, the Task Force utilized the 1993 Report
of the NSF Blue Ribbon Panel on High Performance Computing,
chaired by Lewis Branscomb, and the 1995 National
Research Council's report entitled, "Evolving the
High Performance Computing and Communications Initiative
to Support the Nation's Information Infrastructure."
The Task Force also gathered substantial input from
industry, academia, government, and government laboratories.
Over 500 people replied to its survey on the effectiveness
of the current program and the future of U.S. supercomputing.
The extensive participation by the community indicates
clearly the importance and impact of the NSF Centers
Program. Thus, when the Task Force concluded that
leading edge computing had made significant contributions
to the advance of U.S. science and engineering leadership
and strongly recommended that a new program be established,
the research community was not surprised.
Dr. Hayes presented the Task Force findings to the
National Science Board in October 1995, and the Board
approved the PACI program in December 1995. The Hayes
Task Force Report's vision of the future of U.S. supercomputing
proposed that leading edge sites that maintain the
highest end computational systems build partnerships
with selected research centers. In order to realize
this vision, the Task Force proposed that NSF announce
a new competition for a restructured High Performance
Computing Centers program that would permit funding
of selected sites for a period of five years.
It recommended two major, and interrelated, changes
to the old NSF Supercomputer Centers Program. First,
a new program should support national "leading-edge
sites" with a balanced set of high-end hardware and
software capabilities, coupled with appropriate staff
needed for continued rapid advancement in computational
science and engineering. Second, each leading-edge
site should be partnered with experimental facilities
at universities, NSF research centers, and/or national
and regional high performance computing centers. Finally,
it urged that the "new " program (PACI) should support
the needs of the national computational science community
through leading edge sites and their partners, rather
than through independent basic research.
Mr. Chairman, the report emphasized that the computational
capability of the leading edge centers should be one
or two orders of magnitude beyond what is available
at leading research universities. To achieve such
economies of operation and to maintain the very high
end capability, it was clear that a reduction in the
number of sites would likely be necessary. The Task
Force stated clearly, and I quote,
These recommendations were designed to set the
Centers program on a new course that builds on
its past successes, yet shifts the focus to the
present realities of high-performance computing
and communications, and provides flexibility to
adapt to changing circumstances. It is our expectation
that at current NSF budget levels and absent new
outside resources, there will be a reduction in
the number of leading-edge sites to effect the
benefits of the Task Force recommendations.
My senior staff and I reviewed the Task Force recommendations,
carefully considering the potential implications of
the suggested improvements to the program. We believe
we are taking the right steps to ensure U.S. leadership
in high performance computing. In the words of Dr.
Diana Natalicio, Vice Chair of the National Science
Board, "We sometimes need to make the difficult choice
to stop doing something good to enable something great."
Mr. Chairman, as you and the other members of the
Subcommittee may recall from last year's hearing on
the NSF Supercomputer Centers Program, there has been
substantial support among the research community for
this new program. At last year's hearing, Dr. Hayes
expressed great pleasure at the manner in which the
National Science Foundation carried out the recommendations
of the Task Force.
Before I turn to Dr. Paul Young, who will provide
the details of how NSF carried out the Task Force
proposal, I want to emphasize to the Subcommittee
that the NSF Partnership for Advanced Computational
Infrastructure, or PACI, is not simply a continuation
of our expiring Supercomputer Centers Program. Rather,
in accordance with the recommendations of the Hayes
Task Force and the guidance provided by the National
Science Board, PACI goes well beyond the current paradigm
of supercomputing centers. It is carefully designed
to build the infrastructure needed for both the education
and training of future generations of world leaders
in science and technology and for the more effective
use of new parallel supercomputers by researchers
today.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to discuss
the extensive NSF review process that went into establishing
our new PACI program. I would be happy to respond
to any questions that you or other members of the
committee might have.
|
