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
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
What is it?
Why do we care?
What do we do about it now?
2
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.
3
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.
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.
 “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.
5
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.
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.
 “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.
7
8
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.
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.
 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.
10
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.
11
NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st
Century Discovery
“Final Version”
March 2007
12
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”
13
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
14
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
15
Learning and Workforce Development
NSF Cyberinfrastructure Vision for 21st Century Discovery
March 2007.
16
Cyberinfrastructure Functions and Resources
Instrumentation
Control
Help
Desk
Researcher
Security
Viewing
Data
Generation
Program
Security
Collab
Tools
Control
Training
Education
And
Outreach
Publishing
Policy and
Funding
Management
Security and
Access
Access
Control
Human
Support
Funding
Agencies
Authentication
Resource
Providers
Campuses
Authorization
Security
Security
Analysis
Simulation
Computation
Program
Input
Archive
Retrieval
Data Sets
Storage
Search
3D
Imaging
Display
Tools
Data
.
Input
Security
Display and
Visualization
Data
Directories
Schema
Metadata
Ontologies
Russ Hobby, Internet2
17
The Network is the Backplane
for the Distributed CI Computer
Training
Instrumentation
Help
Desk
Researcher
Control
Security
Data
Generation
Human
Support
Viewing
Program
Collab
Tools
Control
Education
And
Outreach
Publishing
Security
Policy and
Funding
Management
Security and
Access
Access
Control
Funding
Agencies
Authentication
Resource
Providers
3D
Imaging
Display
Security
Tools
Campuses
Authorization
Security
Security
Analysis
Simulation
Computation
Program
Input
Archive
Retrieval
Data Sets
Storage
Data
.
Input
Search
Data
Directories
Schema
Metadata
Ontologies
Network
Display and
Visualization
Russ Hobby, Internet2
18
Campus
IT
Network
Security
ID Mgmt
Cyberinfrastructure
Players
Faculty
National
Data
Center
Security/
Access
Discipline
Groups
Regional
Libraries
Publishers
Collections
Organizations*
International
Software
Development
Supercomputer
Sites*
Policy*/
Leadership*/
Funding
Medicine
Regional
Grid
Orgs*
Educational
Organizations
OGF
National
Computation
Storage
Staff
Federal
Agencies
Coordinators*
Network
Providers*
Discipline
Support
Grad
Students
Regional
International
National
International
Researchers*
Physical
Science
Biological
Science.
Other
Disciplines
Discipline
Groups*
19
* University Consortia & Systems
Russ Hobby, Internet2
University of California
IT Guidance Committee
 Multi-campus models for
cyber-infrastructure
planning
20
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?
21
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?
22
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
23
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
24
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
25
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 <rdhobby@Internet2.edu>
26
CI DaysAreas 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
27
Cyberinfrastructure and Community Dynamics
Research
Group
Local
Applications
DMZ
Shared and Standard
IT Applications
Agile, high innovation,
Often high risk
Phase Transition
Moderately stable,
Moderate to low risk
Campus/College
Shared IT Services
Institutional Hurdles
Information
Technology
Components
Common
CI Components
Policies, Cost-sharing,
Incentives
Less agile, solid, low risk
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.
28
Cyberinfrastructure and Community Dynamics
Research
Group
Local
Applications
DMZ
Shared and Standard
IT Applications
T
I
M
E
Agile, high innovation,
Often high risk
Phase Transition
Moderately stable,
Moderate to low risk
Campus/College
Shared IT Services
Institutional Hurdles
Information
Technology
Components
Common
CI Components
Policies, Cost-sharing,
Incentives
Less agile, solid, low risk
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.
29
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, costsharing 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?
30
Some issues to ponder
31
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?
32
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
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
 Let’s roll!
34
Thank You
35
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
36
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.
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
37
Cyber Infrastructure
and the Quality of Life
S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director
38
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
39
Cyber Infrastructure in Health Care
and Telemedicine
Overlay Photos: IEEE Spectrum, October 2006
S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director
40
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
CEO:P--COMET: Coast-to-Mountain
Environmental Transect
CEO:P--Management and Analysis of
Environmental Observatory Data
Using the Kepler Scientific Workflow
System
CEOP/REAP
CEOP/COMET
S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director
41
Re
sol
uti
on
Davis Campus Research Network Testbed
3D
visualization
machine_1
Virtual
reality
Lo
w
Mid
ium
Imaging
Hig
h
Ver
y
Hig
h
Cluster and Grid
Computing
OXC
Indi
vid
ual
bas
epa
irs
OXC
OLS router
OLS router
Smart Classroom
To Berkeley, Santa Cruz
OXC
To Sacramento, Merced
42
S.J. Ben Yoo, ECE, UC Davis, UC Davis CITRIS Director