AMAST Mail 1998
[Prev][Next][Index]

(fwd) Having an influence on funding for basic research in Framework 5

>Date: Fri, 13 Mar 1998 12:00:33 GMT
>Subject: Having an influence on funding for basic research in Framework 5
>From: "Don Sannella" <dts@dcs.ed.ac.uk>

Dear colleague,

Many of us have been moaning for a long time about inadequate ESPRIT
support for basic research (abbreviated below: BR), and with good
reason.  The future under Framework 5 looks pretty bleak, but it seems
that there is a chance of having some influence on what happens.  If
you are interested, read on.  This message has a Formal Methods slant
but the same goes for other areas at the theoretical end of Computer
Science.  Feel free to pass it on to your friends.

There's not much funding specifically for BR under Framework 5.  It
appears that the intention is that some BR may take place on the
fringe of projects that have a non-BR focus but that's about it.  The
plans for Framework 5 include funding for "Proactive Initiatives"
which are clusters of projects pursuing some common goal from
different angles.  It seems that there might be more chance for BR
under such initiatives.

The question is then what the topics of these proactive initiatives
will be.  The answer seems to be that the topics will emerge somehow
from the community in consultation with the Commission who will also
employ experts etc. as usual to help in coming to a decision.  An
electronic forum has been set up at
	http://www.research.ec.org/fet-forum
to support this consultation process.  The part that is most relevant
to my own interests in Formal Methods is the one entitled "Complex
Systems Engineering", at
	http://www.research.ec.org/fet-forum/dis5/index.html
The idea is that people from the scientific community put forward
proposals for initiatives and other people support these proposals or
tear them to shreds.  The Commission is keeping an eye on the
discussion and will extract the ideas that seem to be attracting wide
support for consideration as proactive initiatives.

So far so good.  The problem is that there is almost no discussion at
present.  If you go to the "Complex Systems Engineering" discussion
you will find two contributions from LFCS, one on "Global Computation"
and one on "A Theory of Program Testing".  Here they are (two pages
each):

  Global computation:
	http://www.newcastle.research.ec.org/fet-forum/dis5/msg00000.html
  but more readably in
 	http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/dts/global-computation.html

  A Theory of Program Testing:
	http://www.newcastle.research.ec.org/fet-forum/dis5/msg00001.html

These were submitted in Nov/Dec and so far there have been no comments
and no other proposals.  There is a recent contribution from David
Cornwell at the Commission on funding for theoretical computer science
that seems to deserve an energetic response.

This message is to encourage you all to contribute to the discussion.
There are lots of reasons why nobody is speaking up, for example the
fact that publicity has been poor, but that's beside the point.
Surely it is better for all of us if there is some kind of effective
consultation with the community.

You might want to start by saying publicly how wonderful our two
proposals are and how important progress in this area would be for the
quality of life and European industrial competitiveness etc.  Or say
why the proposals are rubbish.  Or send in some ideas of your own.  Or
react to what David Cornwell says about the role of theoretical
computer science.

Best regards,

Don Sannella
Director, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science
University of Edinburgh
http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/dts

P.S. See http://www.cordis.lu/esprit/src/istwork.htm for what I
believe is the current draft of the relevant part of the Framework 5
programme.
[ AMAST Mail 1998 | Latest Update | AMAST Mail Meta-Index | AMAST ]