tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post2251644625784486345..comments2024-03-10T05:26:42.148-04:00Comments on My Biased Coin: NSF Expeditions, ComplexityMichael Mitzenmacherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06738274256402616703noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-12966746664459711202008-08-22T11:41:00.000-04:002008-08-22T11:41:00.000-04:00Sanjeev (and others) --If I somehow mistakenly gav...Sanjeev (and others) --<BR/><BR/>If I somehow mistakenly gave the impression that I somehow thought that the theory proposal was somehow unworthy, or even less worthy, than the other three, let me correct that impression. Nothing could be better for core theory than to have a theory expedition of this kind, focusing on fundamental research, and again, just based on the people involved on the co-PI list, I'm sure there will be great things coming out. <BR/><BR/>My specific point, regarding my reading of the blurbs, remains. Other blurbs were very specific about clear goals that were being aimed for, and/or what the "new direction" was. The theory blurb did not, and that stood out to me. I do disagree with commenters who do not acknowledge that point.<BR/><BR/>This seems to me to be a common hard problem in theory grants -- it's hard to describe what exactly will be done, and what the deliverables will be. I would be curious to hear more about the proposal, which I imagine contains more detail on this point, and/or provides other ways to convince others of the end value of the work.Michael Mitzenmacherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02161161032642563814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-58305964132659497662008-08-21T18:15:00.000-04:002008-08-21T18:15:00.000-04:00Somebody sent me a link to this discussion. As Mic...Somebody sent me a link to this discussion. As Michael knows, I am also the chair for the Sigact committee for advancement of TCS, and our efforts are also leading to expansion of funding for theory in general. <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately (or fortunately) the trend towards giving larger grants seems irreversible, and there is no way for a specific field to "opt out" of such a cross-cutting program in exchange for increases in that field only. <BR/><BR/>If we hadn't got this grant, some other group in CS would have. It is not the same pot of money.<BR/><BR/>Our proposal was actually quite specific and broke up the larger complexity/algorithms agenda into short and medium term goalposts. (By the way, this is an important part of writing theory grants for cross-cutting programs; I'm happy to talk to anybody who plans to apply to such programs about and needs some tips).<BR/><BR/>"Business as usual"...<BR/><BR/>Believe me, we got a lot of grilling over this at all stages of this multistage process. There were almost no theory people on the final panel, and I am amazed that they were so receptive to our project. In fact, I think 3 out of 4 funded projects (out of 75 that entered the competition) are somewhat related to theory.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Sanjeev AroraAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-29793026111710032282008-08-20T16:26:00.000-04:002008-08-20T16:26:00.000-04:00When you give $10M to a dozen big-shot researchers...When you give $10M to a dozen big-shot researchers at big-name universities, what do they do with the money? The same thing they've been doing all along.<BR/><BR/>NSF: welfare for the Ivy League.<BR/><BR/>OTOH, maybe it is best to only have a dozen research universities in the US.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-81658910566071326992008-08-20T12:33:00.000-04:002008-08-20T12:33:00.000-04:00The Neighbor's Grass Is Always Greener! I am sure ...The Neighbor's Grass Is Always Greener! <BR/><BR/>I am sure the argument about business as usual (the project would be carried it out anyway) holds true just as much for any of the other grants. In fact, they are probably already working on it, and also other people in their community...<BR/><BR/>I suspect it sounds more impressive and exotic when you are less familiar with it. <BR/><BR/>Robi.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-83946699788047778572008-08-20T12:22:00.000-04:002008-08-20T12:22:00.000-04:00I have no absolutely no doubts this funding WILL h...I have no absolutely no doubts this funding WILL have significant results. And I it will actually benefit all of TCS, because it will free more money to other people, as I am sure the priceton, IAS, Rutgers, and NYU people would have gotten their share anyway. In addition, the new center will surely be beneficial for numerous people in the area.<BR/><BR/>The problem of showing results at the end is there with every grant, small or large, and it boils down to PR work (assuming of course people do the technical work). <BR/><BR/>Do you think the other grants (e..g comp-bio one) will attain the goals they suggested? In most likelyhood, the entire community will start working on this right now (if they did not already).<BR/>Not to mention that the computational sustainability sounds like a PR balloon, compared to the sincerity of the theory proposal.<BR/><BR/>BTW, I think this goes to show that theory achievements are perceived as valuable and LASTING, as in core science compared to a matter of fashion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8890204.post-14795334561336650662008-08-20T12:15:00.000-04:002008-08-20T12:15:00.000-04:00The project aims to develop tools and theories for...<I>The project aims to develop tools and theories for molecular programming--such as programming languages and compilers--that will enable systematic design and implementation of technological and biotechnological applications that require information processing and decision-making to be embedded within and carried out by chemical processes.</I><BR/><BR/>"Doesn't that sound, I don't know, just like business as usual? My concern is that it's probably important to the biomolecular computing community long-term for this Expedition to have some major concrete success attributed to it at the end of the day."<BR/><BR/>Fortunately, they are not claiming they're going to cure cancer with their Expedition grant, and the Princeton folks are not claiming they're going to resolve P vs. NP.<BR/><BR/>I don't really see the difference, unless you think that their proposal (developing tools to do the things they've already been trying to do) is just more impressive. In that case, I would invite you to actually look at what they can do; what's the killer application that will come out in 5 years?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com