Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Funding Opportunities at NSF

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Funding Opportunities at NSF"— Presentation transcript:

1 Funding Opportunities at NSF
Almadena Chtchelkanova Program Director Computing & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Directorate Computation and Communication Foundations (CCF) Division Computing Processes and Artifacts (CPA) Cluster

2 National Science Foundation
Office of Cyber Infrastructure

3 CISE Mission CISE has three goals:
to enable the United States to remain competitive in computing, communications, and information science and engineering to promote understanding of the principles and uses of advanced computing, communications, and information systems in service to society to contribute to universal, transparent, and affordable participation in an information-based society CISE provides > 85% of all Federal support for computer science research

4 Crosscutting Emphasis Areas
CISE Organization Office of the Assistant Director Computing and Computer and Information and Communication Network Intelligent Foundations Systems Systems (CCF) (CNS) (IIS) EMT CPA TF Nets CSR CRI HCC III RI Crosscutting Emphasis Areas CT SoD ST-HEC BPC

5 Computing and Communication Foundations Division (CCF)
Emerging Models and Technologies for Computation (EMT) Computational biology; quantum computing; nano-scale computing; biologically inspired computing Foundations of Computing Processes and Artifacts (CPA) Software engineering; software tools for HPC; languages; compilers; computer architecture; design automation & VLSI; graphics & visualization Theoretical Foundations (TF) Computer science theory; numerical computing; computational algebra and geometry; signal processing and communication

6 Computer and Network Systems Division (CNS)
Computer Systems Distributed systems; embedded and hybrid systems; next-generation software; parallel systems Network Systems Networking research broadly defined plus focus areas Computing Research Infrastructure Equipment and infrastructure to advance computing research Education and Workforce IT workforce; special projects; cross-directorate activities (e.g., REU sites, IGERT, ADVANCE)

7 Information and Intelligent Systems Division (IIS)
Human-Centered Computing The study of unprecedented IT and their interface to humans: grid computing, wearable computing, agent technologies, multi-player games, multi-modal interfaces, affective computing, e-commerce Information Integration and Informatics Digital Government Digital Libraries and Archives Information, Data, and Knowledge Management Science and Engineering Information Integration and Informatics Robust Intelligence Computational understanding and modeling of the many human and animal capabilities that demonstrate intelligence and adaptability in unstructured and uncertain environments

8 NSF & CISE Budget in $M FY’05 to FY’07 (Requested)
CISE Divisions FY’05 FY’06 FY’07 CNS $132.39 $ (+7%) $ (+15%) CCF $91.41 $ (+15%) $ (+16%) IIS $92.54 $ (+12%) $ (+15%) ITR (not a division) $173.78 $ (-16%) $ (-16%) CISE Total (Research) $490.12 $ (+1%) $ (+6%) NSF Total $5,745 $5,605 (-2.4%) $6,020 (+7.4%)

9 CISE Budget 2003 – 2007 Dollars in Millions Fiscal Year 600 550 500
450 400 Dollars in Millions 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Fiscal Year

10 Competitive Awards in CISE
Funding Rate for Competitive Awards in CISE 7,000 100% 90% 6,000 80% 5,000 70% P N e u 60% 4,000 r m 50% c b 3,000 e e 40% n r 2,000 30% t 20% 1,000 10% 0% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Competitive Proposal Actions Competitive Awards Funding Rate

11 CCF Budget 2003 – 2007 Dollars in Millions Fiscal Year 120 110 100 90
80 Dollars in Millions 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Fiscal Year

12 Competitive Awards in CCF
Funding Rate for Competitive Awards in CCF 2,000 100% 1,800 90% 1,600 80% 1,400 70% P N e u 1,200 60% r m 1,000 50% c b e e 800 40% n r 600 30% t 400 20% 200 10% 0% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Competitive Proposal Actions Competitive Awards Funding Rate

13 CCF Cluster Budgets 2004 - 2006 Cross EMT CPA TF 04 Avail 04 CGI
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

14 Foundations of Computing Processes and Artifacts (CPA)
The CPA Cluster supports basic research and education projects aimed at advancing formalisms and methods pertaining to processes and artifacts for designing and building computing and communication systems Processes and artifacts range from formalisms, models, algorithms, theories, design principles and languages to hardware/software architectures, technology components and varieties of physical manifestations of implementations The CPA cluster funds a diverse portfolio of high-quality, high-payoff foundational research to meet the needs of the scientific and engineering community as well as society at large

15 Current CPA focus areas and Program Directors
Foundations of Computing Processes and Artifacts (CPA) Current CPA focus areas and Program Directors ACR Advanced Computation Research (Algorithms, Storage, I/O, HPC) Almadena Chtchelkanova (since 2005) CHS Compilers and High-performance Software CSA Computer System Architecture Timothy M. Pinkston (since 2006) DA Design Automation for Micro & Nano Systems (VLSI) Sankar Basu (since 2003) GV Graphics & Visualization Lawrence Rosenblum (since 2005) SEL Software Engineering & Languages Sol Greenspan (since 2003) Joseph Urban (since 2006) Each sub-area can have topics of specific interest, but clustering promotes cross-disciplinary research that may transcend programmatic/sub-area boundaries

16 CPA Proposal Solicitation
2005 CPA competition ~ 80 awards from ~ 530 proposals received (~ 15% success rate) ~ $30,000,000 total funds, for average of $125,000 over all awards 2006 CPA Solicitation Proposal due date: October 10, 2006, 5pm local time see Anticipated funding, number, and size of awards: $44,000,000 max. anticipated funds (could be much less) 80 to 120 awards, averaging $125,000/year for 3 years up to 5 awards of up to $500,000/year for 3 years for well-integrated projects of larger scope up to 2 collaborative multi-institutional awards of up to $250,000/year for 4 years for nanosystem topics having relevance to computing (i.e., NIRT-like awards) Submission limitations: Investigators may participate as PI, co-PI, or Senior Personnel on at most one proposal for this solicitation PIs must come from US universities or colleges

17 CCF Division’s CPA 2006 Solicitation 06-585
Proposal due date: October 10, 2006 Research topics include (but are not limited to) SW/HW systems: reliable and high-performance computing, parallelizing compilers, programming models, and run-time support for efficient resource allocation and scheduling Computer system architecture: processor marchitecture, memory, I/O subsystems, interconnection networks (including on-chip networks), reconfigurable and application-specific architectures; multicore, multithreaded, and SoC architectures SW/HW tools: design, simulation, benchmarking, performance measurement, evaluation and tuning

18 CISE Cross-Cutting Emphasis Areas
Characteristics cut across clusters and divisions (and directorates) address scientific or national priority FY 2006 Emphasis Areas Cyber Trust Science of Design Information Integration Broadening Participation in Computing FY 2007 Emphasis Areas Cyber Trust: December, 2006 Science of Design: January 17, 2007 Information Integration: Broadening Participation:

19 CISE Computing Research Infrastructure (CRI) annual
Infrastructure Acquisition. These awards have budgets up to $2,000,000. Community Resource Development. These awards have budgets from $300,000 to $2,000,000: medium from $300,000 to $800,000 and large over $800,000. Development projects create a resource for an entire CISE research community, such as a testbed for evaluating research results or a large data resource that contains problems a community is trying to solve (e.g., annotated speech data). Planning. These awards facilitate the preparation of a proposal for a medium or large infrastructure acquisition grant. They have budgets up to $50,000 for one institution or up to $100,000 if more than one institution is involved.

20 NSF-wide croscutting programs Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI)
FY2006 budget $90M The Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI) is designed to increase access to scientific and engineering equipment for research and research training in our Nation's organizations of higher education, research museums and non-profit research organizations. This program seeks to improve the quality and expand the scope of research and research training in science and engineering, and to foster the integration of research and education by providing instrumentation for research-intensive learning environments.  The MRI program encourages the development and acquisition of research instrumentation for shared inter- and/or intra-organizational use and in concert with private sector partners. 

21 NSF-wide croscutting programs Industry University Cooperative Research Program (I/UCRC)
Partnering Industries and Universities to Innovate. I/UCRCs stimulate highly leveraged industry/university cooperation by focusing on fundamental research recommended by Industrial Advisory Boards. I/UCRC develops long-term partnerships among industry, academic institutions, and government. The centers are catalyzed by a small investment from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and are primarily supported by center members, with NSF taking a supporting role in their development and evolution.

22 Observations on Proposal Preparation
1

23 Proposal Preparation Grant Proposal Guide Frequently Ask Questions
Regional Grants Conferences I should Mention that most Universities have an Office of Sponsored Projects that is responsible for submission regulations associated with the various competitions NSF has. Most routine questions should go to the local ORA office before being sent to a Program Director for clarification.

24 NSF Merit Review Process
Electronic Receipt of Proposal NSF Program Officer Peer Review Ad Hoc Panel Combination Award Merit Review Criteria Intellectual Merit Broader Impacts Higher Level Review Program Officer Recommendation (Award/Decline) Decline

25 NSF Review Criteria Criteria include:
What is the intellectual merit and quality of the proposed activity? What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

26 Intellectual Merit Potential Considerations:
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? Significance of expected results: incremental? high impact? high-risk, high-gain? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the research? Not necessarily track record in the specific field, but quality of prior work can be a consideration, as can preliminary results How creative, original are the concepts and ideas? Should be ground-breaking in some aspect(s) How well conceived, organized is the proposed activity? Well-articulated problem and well-structured research plan Is there sufficient access to resources? Ownership is not necessary, only access to equipment, facilities, etc.

27 Intellectual Merit Possible Ways of Assessing:
High impact means more than just good papers Does it change practice for the better? Funding is possible for high-risk, high-reward projects Even if some may not succeed Even if the “details” are not all worked out in advance Funding is unlikely for “flawless” projects that would “predictably” lead to only incremental results It’s expected that not all creative work is already done It’s okay if PI doesn’t know what the final solutions will be Reviewers and Program Manager look for Exciting, bold vision Articulation of challenging problem(s) Substantiated description and plan of proposed approach/solution Reasonable chance the PI can be successful with the requested funds

28 Broader Impacts Potential Considerations:
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training and learning? How well does the activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to other disciplines and society as a whole?

29 Panel and Ad Hoc Reviews
A minimum of 3 reviews/proposal (typically at least 4) A score of E, V, G, F, P is given to a proposal by each reviewer Comments on intellectual merit and broader impacts are given Typically, a recommendation to fund (or not) is also given Panel Review: Proposals are discussed and evaluated collectively Proposal summary is written—couple of sentences Intellectual merits are described: strengths and weaknesses Broader impacts are described: strengths and weaknesses Improvements may be suggested (optional) Panel recommendation: Competitive or Not Competitive Comments are intended to help unsuccessful PIs improve their proposals for the next competition

30 Seven Deadly Sins of Proposal Writing
Failure to focus on the problems and payoffs No persuasive structure: poorly organized No clear differentiation: competitive analysis Failure to offer a compelling value proposition: potential impact Key points are buried: no highlights, no impact Difficult to read: full of jargon, too long, too technical Credibility killers: misspellings, grammatical errors, wrong technical terms, inconsistent format, etc.

31 Ingredients for a Good Proposal
Educate the reviewers and Program Director What problem(s) does your work address? Why is this problem important? What will you do to contribute to a solution? What unique ideas/approaches do you have? Put in context. Why are you the best person to do this work? How will you evaluate your results? How will we know if you were successful or if you failed? How will you assure that the work has an impact?

32 Help from the Community
Send your best ideas to NSF Consistent with focus & goals of the program We want high risk / high reward proposals Suggest and encourage good panelists who can do justice to the proposals and our focus Volunteer to be a reviewer and panelist

33 Nuggets Convince the US public that research is worth paying for
Succinct, interesting vignettes Show a result, not an expense Layman’s language Graphics if possible NSF Uses the best ones Budget requests Performance reports Public relations

34 Concluding Remarks NSF’s role is fundamental to all areas of our society - the most basic future investment Computer science and related disciplines are very important in their own right and essential to advancement in all areas of S&E NSF and our field are facing unprecedented pressures that can only be overcome by concerted, cooperative action

35 NSF CISE Career Opportunities
Program Directors are sought for one- or two-year terms or for permanent positions in CNS, CCF, and IIS Divisions of CISE Currently available positions are in the CNS Division (call closes on 10/06/06): Network Systems (Nets) Cluster Computer System Research (CSR) Cluster Education and Workforce (EWF) Cluster Information about positions can be found at

36 Contact Information Almadena Chtchelkanova Program Director, CPA Cluster in CCF Division of CISE National Science Foundation (703) CISE Web Site:

37 Backups

38 Advanced Computational Research Almadena Chtchelkanova, achtchel@nsf
Advanced Computational Research Almadena Chtchelkanova, Hardware/software research and enabling technologies for advancing the state-of-the-art in computational science and engineering that require efficient computational algorithms, high throughput input/output (I/O) capabilities, large data storage capacities, and tools for efficiently organizing, locating, and moving data, possibly produced by different applications in numerous locations and in various formats.  design of multi-level (hierarchical, layered) parallel algorithms and libraries; scalable and latency tolerant computational/numeric algorithms; performance modeling of scalable algorithms; management of large-scale distributed file systems and data; novel storage devices, architectures, and middleware for high-throughput I/O; software and hardware processes and artifacts for design, simulation, benchmarking, tracing, performance measurement and tuning of I/O, file, and storage systems in high-performance computing environments.

39 HPC software and Compilers Almadena Chtchelkanova, achtchel@nsf.gov
Foundations in compilers  for enabling robust high-performance computer systems, automatic algorithm mapping, code and data transformation, translation to hardware description language (for reconfigurable architectures) and optimization (both static and dynamic), advanced analysis to verify program correctness and improve programmer productivity, compiler support for automating the exploitation of parallelism (i.e., parallelizing compilers), effective compiler support for automatically parallelizing single-threaded programs to fully utilize the potential of multicore processors and multiprocessor systems built from multicores. parallelizing compilers and infrastructure for optimizing compilers for multiple platforms; parallelization techniques for exploiting parallelism at multiple levels applicable to multiple programming models; software and compiler support for mapping and scheduling multiple threads on (possibly heterogeneous) multicore and multiprocessor systems; software and compiler techniques for managing on-chip communication, power consumption, temperature and fault tolerance in multicore architectures; compiler techniques to guarantee safety from potential deadlocks, memory leaks, race conditions and other forms of correctness in parallel programs.

40 Graphics & Visualization (GV) Larry Rosenblum lrosenb@nsf.gov
Sponsors integrated research and education projects to advance the scientific foundations and engineering practices/education that underlie the ability to perform visual information transfer, address models of physical events, develop mechanisms for image production, and utilize visualization to represent and explore information Focus is on the ability to model, render, and display data and to understand the forms of visualization that can best transfer particular types of information Seeks fundamental advances that will enhance the numerous activities that utilize computer graphics and visualization, including science, engineering, medicine, entertainment, education, commerce, and homeland security Multiresolution Subdivision Surfaces simplify the addition of sharp surface features onto surfaces [Zorin, NYU] Computer-generated lighting effects using flash photography [Durand, MIT]

41 Graphics & Visualization (GV) Larry Rosenblum lrosenb@nsf.gov
Topics of interest include: Mathematical models for representing geometric and non-geometric data Algorithms for the photorealistic and non-photorealistic rendering of geometry, lighting, and materials Physical-based modeling and graphical simulation Animation techniques Multi-resolution algorithms for graphics modeling and applications Visibility algorithms Scientific visualization algorithms and systems Visualization aspects of visual analytics Visualization aspects of location-aware computing Virtual and augmented reality Novel hardware for graphics processing Graphics issues in computational photography and video Innovative multidisciplinary proposals that join visualization with other computer-science domains The nanoManipulator system enables scientists to directly see and touch nanometer-scale objects [Taylor et al., UNC] The steps of the Virtual Colonoscopy: CT scan of patient’s abdomen; automatic segmentation and reconstruction; real-time volume rendering [Arie Kaufman, SUNYSB]

42 Software Engineering and Languages (SEL) Sol Greenspan sgreensp@nsf
Software Engineering and Languages (SEL) Sol Greenspan Sponsors integrated research and education projects to advance scientific foundations and engineering practice/education that contributes to new understanding of software and software development issues with an objective of significantly increasing productivity of software development and attaining the highest quality software-based products and services Relevant projects may concern any of the artifacts and processes involved in software engineering—including languages, theories, models, techniques, methods, tools and environments relating to requirements, specification, design, programming, verification, testing, maintenance, transformation, evolution and other activities of software development Proposals should emphasize lasting principles, robust theories, high-leverage tools and novel approaches with plans for validation through proofs of concept, empirical evaluation and/or other scientific methods

43 Software Engineering and Languages (SEL) Sol Greenspan sgreensp@nsf
Software Engineering and Languages (SEL) Sol Greenspan Topics of interests include: Programming language principles, design and implementation PL semantics to elucidate new features, e.g., aspects Advancing type theory to full theorem proving Software analysis and testing Test-case generation, fault localization Static and dynamic checking, model checking Monitoring and continuous testing of distributed systems Formal methods for program development – components and composition Assembling components to meet a specification, trusted components, behavioral interfaces Software development methodology Informal methods, integrated environments, processes, requirements, architectures, dependability, scaling up

44 Design Automation for Micro and Nano Systems
Sankar Basu Primary components: Design in silicon CMOS technologies All issues resulting from aggressive scaling including upto nano-meter length scales Design for Emerging nano-device/architectures CNTs, SETs, FiNFETs etc. Crossbar, CMOL etc. Design for heterogeneuos technologies Analog, mixed-signal, RF, MEMS etc.

45 Design automation (examples) Sankar Basu sabasu@nsf.gov
Silicon CMOS: physical design aspects, routing, layout etc. power optimization, interconnects system level design e.g., SOC, NOC etc. test, verification, validation etc. Nano design and architectures: novel approaches to parallelism that are more suitable to nanoscale electronics, besides the tried and true parallel computers of the past design of reliable systems from unreliable components – fundamental limits to such designs, defect/fault models, testing and verification strategies in this context

46 Computer System Architecture (CSA) Timothy Pinkston tpinksto@nsf.gov
processor architecture memory, I/O subsystems interconnection networks (including on-chip networks) reconfigurable and application-specific architectures multicore, multithreaded, and SoC architectures


Download ppt "Funding Opportunities at NSF"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google