1. 1 Cyberinfrastructure: A Campus Perspective on What it is and Why You Should Care Peter M. Siegel CIO and Vice Provost Educause Live! Webcast August 2, 2007

2. 2 Cyberinfrastructure: A Campus Perspective on What it is and Why You Should Care What is it? Why do we care? What do we do about it now? Peter M. Siegel CIO and Vice Provost Educause Live! Webcast August 2, 2007

3. 3 Definitions - Cyberinfrastructure (CI)  Coined by the National Science Foundation (NSF) to characterize infrastructure based upon distributed computer, information, and communication technology, the newer term cyberinfrastructure was later popularized by the NSF Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure.  Report of the American Council of Learned Societies’ Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for Humanities and Social Sciences.

4. 4 Definitions - Knowledge Economy  “The term infrastructure has been used since the 1920’s to refer collectively to the roads, power grids, telephone systems, bridges, rail lines, and similar public works that are required for an industrial economy to function. Although good infrastructure is often taken for granted and noticed only when it stops functioning, it is among the most complex and expensive things that society creates.  The newer term cyberinfrastructure refers to infrastructure based upon distributed computer, information and communication technology.

5. 5 Definitions - Knowledge Economy  “The term infrastructure has been used since the 1920’s to refer collectively to the roads, power grids, telephone systems, bridges, rail lines, and similar public works that are required for an industrial economy to function. Although good infrastructure is often taken for granted and noticed only when it stops functioning, it is among the most complex and expensive things that society creates.  The newer term cyberinfrastructure refers to infrastructure based upon distributed computer, information and communication technology.  “If infrastructure is required for an industrial economy, then we could say that cyberinfrastructure is required for a knowledge economy.” Revolutionizing Science and Engineering through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure, (Atkins Report), 2003.

6. 6 Definitions - Education, Commerce, Social Good  “The emerging vision is to use Cyberinfrastructure to build more ubiquitous, comprehensive digital environments that become interactive and functionally complete for research communities in terms of people, data, information, tools, and instruments and that operate at unprecedented levels of computational, storage, and data transfer capacity. Increasingly, new types of scientific organizations and support environments for science are essential, not optional, to the aspirations of research communities and to broadening participation in those communities. They can serve individuals, teams, and organizations in ways that revolutionize what they can do, how they can do it, and who participates.

7. 7 Definitions - Education, Commerce, Social Good  “The emerging vision is to use Cyberinfrastructure to build more ubiquitous, comprehensive digital environments that become interactive and functionally complete for research communities in terms of people, data, information, tools, and instruments and that operate at unprecedented levels of computational, storage, and data transfer capacity. Increasingly, new types of scientific organizations and support environments for science are essential, not optional, to the aspirations of research communities and to broadening participation in those communities. They can serve individuals, teams, and organizations in ways that revolutionize what they can do, how they can do it, and who participates.  “This vision also has profound broader implications for education, commerce, and social good.” Executive Summary, page 2, Revolutionizing Science and Engineering through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure, (Atkins Report), 2003.

8. 8

9. 9 Definitions - All areas of Inquiry  “Cyberinfrastructure (CI) enables and supports scientific research through online digital instruments, emerging sensor and observing technologies, high- powered computers, extensive data storage capabilities, visualization facilities, and networks for communication and collaboration. The report of the Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure (the “Atkins Report”) signals that the sum of these changes constitutes “a new age” which “has crossed thresholds that now make possible a comprehensive ‘Cyberinfrastructure’ on which to build new types of scientific and engineering knowledge environments and organizations and to pursue research in new ways and with increased efficacy.” Science and engineering are being transformed by Cyberinfrastructure.

10. 10 Definitions - All areas of Inquiry  “Cyberinfrastructure (CI) enables and supports scientific research through online digital instruments, emerging sensor and observing technologies, high- powered computers, extensive data storage capabilities, visualization facilities, and networks for communication and collaboration. The report of the Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure (the “Atkins Report”) signals that the sum of these changes constitutes “a new age” which “has crossed thresholds that now make possible a comprehensive ‘Cyberinfrastructure’ on which to build new types of scientific and engineering knowledge environments and organizations and to pursue research in new ways and with increased efficacy.” Science and engineering are being transformed by Cyberinfrastructure.  This is just as true of the social, behavioral, and economic (SBE) sciences as of the physical, natural, engineering, and biological sciences. Francine Berman and Henry Brady, SBE/CISE Workshop on Cyberinfrastructure for the Social Sciences, May 2005.

11. 11 Definitions - Culture of Collaboration  Campus cyberinfrastructure is not just about the technology. We need to understand and engage the research community, bridge the cultures, enhance the collaborative relationships on campuses and between campuses, and learn from each other. Ken Klingenstein, Kevin Morooney, Steve Olshansky. Final Report: A Workshop on Effective Approaches to Campus Research Computing Cyberinfrastructure. April 25-27, 2006 Arlington, VA.

12. 12 NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery “Final Version” March 2007

13. 13 NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery  “NSF will play a leadership role in the development and support of a comprehensive cyberinfrastructure essential to 21st century advances in science and engineering research and education”

14. 14 NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery  Five Areas  Call for Action (Vision for 2006-2010)  HPC  Data, Data Analysis, and Visualization  Virtual Organizations for Distributed Communities  Learning and Workforce Development

15. 15 NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision The Mission  Develop human-centered CI driven by research and education opportunities  Provide world-class CI tools and services in all five key areas  Promote a CI that broadens participation and strengthens the nation’s workforce in all areas of science and engineering  Provide a sustainable CI- secure, efficient, reliable… that [is] an essential national infrastructure  Create a stable but extensible CI environment

16. 16 Learning and Workforce Development NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery March 2007.

17. 17 Cyberinfrastructure Functions and Resources Instrumentation Security Control Data Generation Computation Analysis Simulation Program Security Management Security and Access Authentication Access Control Authorization Researcher Control Program Viewing Security 3D Imaging Display and Visualization. Display Tools Security Data Input Collab Tools Publishing Human Support Help Desk Policy and Funding Resource Providers Funding Agencies Campuses Search Data Sets Storage Security Retrieval Input Schema Metadata Data Directories Ontologies Archive Education And Outreach Training Russ Hobby, Internet2

18. 18 Russ Hobby, Internet2 Instrumentation Security Control Data Generation Computation Analysis Simulation Program Security Management Security and Access Authentication Access Control Authorization Researcher Control Program Viewing Security 3D Imaging Display and Visualization. Display Tools Security Data Input Collab Tools Publishing Human Support Help Desk Policy and Funding Resource Providers Funding Agencies Campuses Search Data Sets Storage Security Retrieval Input Schema Metadata Data Directories Ontologies Archive Education And Outreach Network Training The Network is the Backplane for the Distributed CI Computer

19. 19 Cyberinfrastructure Players Medicine Discipline Groups* Biological Science. Physical Science Grid Orgs* National Regional International Supercomputer Sites* Computation Storage Software Development Discipline Support Campus IT Security ID Mgmt Network Data Center Researchers* Staff Grad Students Faculty Network Providers* National Regional International Security/ Access Coordinators* National Regional International Collections Organizations* Discipline Groups PublishersLibraries Policy*/ Leadership*/ Funding Federal Agencies Educational Organizations OGF Other Disciplines Russ Hobby, Internet2* University Consortia & Systems

20. 20 University of California IT Guidance Committee  Multi-campus models for cyber-infrastructure planning

21. 21 EDUCAUSE Cyberinfrastructure Summit 1. SUPPORT FOR RESEARCH - While most definitions of CI are broad, implying applications beyond the research community, research will be the driving force and engine for investment. There is rapid expansion of demand for a robust CI on campus to support research. 2. LEADERSHIP - Central IT organizations need to play a leadership role in the strategic planning for a robust CI on campus. 3. PRIORITY and FUNDING - Most central IT organizations did not see CI coming to the extent it has. Most institutions have not anticipated and planned for such a big shift. 4. STRATEGIES LONG TERM - A significant social problem with cyberinfrastructure is that it is predicated on sharing, interoperability, coordination, and (some) consolidation. Incentives and reward systems have to be explored and developed and encouraged. 5. STRATEGIES SHORT TERM - Much of the effort around cyberinfrastructure is looking for a consensus, when the reality is that there are competing approaches. 6. EDUCAUSE INVOLVEMENT - How can we help each other?

22. 22 Some issues to ponder  At what level should cyberinfrastructure services be provided?  What is the appropriate campus role and investment in cyberinfrastructure?  What is the appropriate role at the college level? At the research group level? In the multi-institutional research communities?  How do you create the right incentives for collaborative behavior?  What about cyberinfrastructure services?  In what ways should a university support its researchers and students in the context of very large data management?  What is the role of cyberinfrastructure planning beyond the research arena?  How do we increase federal (and state) attention to the investment needs for cyberinfrastructure at the campus level?

23. 23 Before I tell you the issues…  First, how did I come up with these?  Did I make them up?  No!  We had to talk to the faculty!  But how?  We had a cyberinfrastructure workshop

24. 24 Before I tell you the issues…  First, how did I come up with these?  Did I make them up?  No!  We had to listen to the faculty!  But how?  We had a cyberinfrastructure workshop

25. 25 Listening to the faculty…  Let me recap our CI Days at UC Davis  Our view of ourselves  We have great scientists, scholars, engineers,…  Our investments are behind where we want them  We aren’t smarter, richer (!), more innovative  Nor did we stay in a Holiday Inn Express  But we do actively involve our faculty on a growing basis in CI planning

26. 26 Cyberinfrastructure Days Program CENIC Brian Court EDUCAUSE Mark Luker Internet2 Ken Klingenstein Open Science Grid John McGee  TeraGrid Scott Lathrop  UC Davis Information and Educational Technology Rodger Hess Dave Zavatson  UC Office of the President David Walker  Russ Hobby

27. 27 CI Days- Areas of Major Findings  Data Access and Use  Awareness and Community Building  Personnel and Technical Support  Infrastructure: Space and Power  Infrastructure: Networking  Financial Support and Funding

28. 28 Modified by PMS for a “researcher view”. Source: P. Weill & M. Broadbent Leveraging the New Infrastructure: How Market Leaders Capitalize on IT, Harvard Business School Press, June 1998. Cited in Brad Wheeler, IT Governance. Information Technology Components Cyberinfrastructure and Community Dynamics Local Applications Agile, high innovation, Often high risk Shared and Standard IT Applications Phase Transition Moderately stable, Moderate to low risk Policies, Cost-sharing, Incentives Common CI Components Institutional Hurdles Institutional Hurdles Shared IT Services Less agile, solid, low risk Research Group DMZ Campus/College

29. 29 Modified by PMS for a “researcher view”. Source: P. Weill & M. Broadbent Leveraging the New Infrastructure: How Market Leaders Capitalize on IT, Harvard Business School Press, June 1998. Cited in Brad Wheeler, IT Governance. Information Technology Components Cyberinfrastructure and Community Dynamics Local Applications Agile, high innovation, Often high risk Shared and Standard IT Applications Phase Transition Moderately stable, Moderate to low risk Policies, Cost-sharing, Incentives Common CI Components Institutional Hurdles Institutional Hurdles Shared IT Services Less agile, solid, low risk TIMETIME Research Group DMZ Campus/College

30. 30 How do we increase federal (and state) attention to the investment needs for cyberinfrastructure at the campus level?  While funding agencies have worked wonders with their strong investments in information technologies at the research group and research community levels (within and among universities), their dollars go farther if they provide incentives for campus investment through seed money, cost- sharing requirements, and so on.  How do we build consensus between funding agencies, campus administration, campus IT leadership, and the research community nationwide on the role of each group in supporting campus cyberinfrastructure investments?

31. 31 Some issues to ponder

32. 32 Some issues to ponder  At what level should cyberinfrastructure services be provided?  What is the appropriate campus role and investment in cyberinfrastructure?  What is the appropriate role at the college level? At the research group level? In the multi-institutional research communities?  How do you create the right incentives for collaborative behavior?  What about cyberinfrastructure services?  In what ways should a university support its researchers and students in the context of very large data management?  What is the role of cyberinfrastructure planning beyond the research arena?  How do we increase federal (and state) attention to the investment needs for cyberinfrastructure at the campus level?

33. 33 Conclusions  CI is about “high end” services that are now basic, but it’s much more than that  It’s a range of technologies and services  It’s not just the researchers’ problem, it’s everyone’s problem  CI solutions will be built through collaboration, but must acknowledge unique requirements  CIOs will be measured by what we do in this space

34. 34 Conclusions  CI is about “high end” services that are now basic, but it’s much more than that  It’s a range of technologies and services  It’s not just the researchers’ problem, it’s everyone’s problem  CI solutions will be built through collaboration, but must acknowledge unique requirements  CIOs will be measured by what we do in this space  Let’s roll!

35. 35 Thank You

36. 36 Visualization in the KeckCAVES An interdisciplinary collaboration between physical scientists and computer scientists The project engages graduate students, faculty, researchers from multiple colleges Requires space and most importantly technical support Requires flexibility: the technical needs evolve as the project does Louise Kellogg, Chair, Geology, UC Davis

37. 37 The ANGSTROM group (http://angstrom.ucdavis.edu/) is located in the Chemistry Department at UCD and headed by Prof. Giulia Galli. Its research activity focuses on the development and use of quantum simulation tools to understand and predict the properties and behavior of materials (solids, liquids and nanostructures) at the microscopic scale.http://angstrom.ucdavis.edu/ Access to and management of robust and stable campus cyber- infrastructure are critical needs for the group. ANGSTROM Highlights: Proposal "Water in confined states" selected to receive a 2007 DOE-INCITE award. “Quantum Simulations of Materials and Nanostructures”: SciDAC grant awarded to UCD-led team in September 2006. “Materials by design: applications to thermoelectrics”: DARPA-PROM grant awarded to UCD-led team in January 2006. Agreement with IBM/Watson signed for use of BG/L supercomputer by Angstrom members “First principles simulations of dielectric properties in nano-silicon”: INTEL grant awarded in February 2006. Work of Prof Galli, described by Louise Kellogg, Chair, Geology, UC Davis

38. 38 Cyber Infrastructure and the Quality of Life S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director

39. 39 Genomics and Bioinformatics New Genome and Biomedical Sciences Facility $95 million, 225,000 square-ft building Cross-cutting, leading-edge research in genomics, bioinformatics, biomedical engineering, pharmacology and toxicology, and other areas. From Segal DS et al. "Structure of Aart, a Designed Six-Finger Zinc Finger Peptide, bound to DNA." J. Mol. Biol. Aug 2006 S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director

40. 40 Overlay Photos: IEEE Spectrum, October 2006 Cyber Infrastructure in Health Care and Telemedicine S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director

41. 41 Data Integration and Sensor Networks Management and Analysis of Environmental Observatory Data using the Kepler Scientific Workflow System, SDSC, UC Davis, OSU, CENS (UCLA), OPeNDAP standardize services for sensor networks, support multiple views, protocols COMET: Coast-to-Mountain Environmental Transect, UC Davis, Bodega Marine Lab, Lake Tahoe Research Center study how environmental factors affect ecosystems along an elevation gradient from coastal California to the summit of the Sierra Nevada CEOP/COMET CEO:P--COMET: Coast-to-Mountain Environmental Transect S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director CEO:P--Management and Analysis of Environmental Observatory Data Using the Kepler Scientific Workflow System CEOP/REAP

42. 42 OXC OLS router To Berkeley, Santa CruzTo Sacramento, Merced Davis Campus Research Network Testbed Virtual reality Cluster and Grid Computing 3 D visualization machine_1 Smart Classroom Imaging Re sol uti on Lo w Mid ium Hig h Ver y Hig h Indi vid ual bas epa irs S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director