Final Report of the Indiana University Cyberinfrastructure Research Taskforce

The Cyberinfrastructure Research Taskforce met during the 2004-05 academic year to consider Indiana University’s (IU) needs for shared cyberinfrastructure investments. In particular, the charge to the taskforce asked scholars to focus on needs that could help support a doubling of IU’s externally funded research by 2010-2011. This report to the IU Vice President for Research & Information Technology conveys 10 specific recommendations. It recognizes both current progress in cyberinfrastructure development while also proposing new directions for cyberinfrastructure needs and opportunities. In summary, the recommendations affirm a continuity of investment in the core IT infrastructure that is the foundation for advanced cyberinfrastructure. Developing deep capabilities for serving the complete research data lifecycle emerged as a clear and pervasive theme across many disciplines. The recommendations provide guidance for storage capacity; data movement across networks; collection, annotation and provenance; and data publishing, curation, and custodianship. The taskforce advocated “continuing without pause” renewed investment in IU’s High Performance Computing (HPC) systems and visualization facilities and strongly advocated HPC as a competitive necessity for data-intensive scholarship. Beyond the technology investments, the taskforce gave considerable analysis to scholars’ needs in making productive use of cyberinfrastructure. The taskforce recommends investments in an array of subsidized and chargeback consulting services, complexity-hiding interfaces, and training programs that each are discipline-facing in their orientation rather than a homogenized one-size-fits-all. Finally, developing and sustaining advanced cyberinfrastructure will be impossible with only university sources of funding. The taskforce strongly advocates aggressive partnerships and leadership at the state, national, and international levels to compete for all forms of external funding to continue incremental evolution of IU’s cyberinfrastructure. The report itself provides many more details beyond these recommendations. Diverse scholarly endeavors are evolving their use of cyberinfrastructure in different ways. Nevertheless, the themes and specific recommendations presented here represent a resounding consensus view across these disciplines for the shared cyberinfrastructure needs of IU’s scholars

Potential for leverage between the quality management and knowledge management professional communities : an intellectual capital mapping

This research describes the problems facing two important professional communities, Quality Management (QM) and Knowledge Management (KM), which face multiple challenges in their efforts to impact the organisations in which they operate and contribute significantly to their performance and financial results. The two communities are positioned at very different points in their maturity life cycle. While QM is an aging community that is trying to regain its relevancy, the KM community is still in its infancy, and is struggling to mature. Many practitioners and academics consider both to be "over promising and under delivering". The aim of this research is to explore how the two communities can enhance their effectiveness. As a theoretical framework the author used the concept of Intellectual Capital, which is usually used in the context of formal organisations, and applied it to the case of professional communities. The hypothesis states that the two communities have complementary Intellectual Capitals, i. e. that the intangible assets of each can be shared and exchanged through different patterns of interaction. An investigation was conducted into whether the flows of such intangible assets between Quality Management (QM) and Knowledge Management (KM) can increase their organisational effectiveness. The research surveyed the scientific as well as professional literature and classified the evidence on QM/KM interactions into twelve patterns that cover the spectrum, from complete ignorance of each other to full co-operation. Two case studies are explored, where explicit efforts to encourage flows of Intellectual Capital were demonstrated, one at a company level and the other at a national level. A unique methodology and visual tool, to map the Intellectual Capital of professional communities, was developed and used to draw a generic map of the complementary ICs of QM and KM and the potential flows between them, as perceived by a diverse body of experts from both communities. Finally, a series of (computer aided) focus groups were held with professionals. Based on triangulation of the data between the 14 expert interviews, 2 in-depth case studies, 68 focus group attendees and the literature, the following contributions to knowledge were identified: 0 Creation of a new scheme to classify interactions between professional communities. O The application of the Intellectual Capital concept to professional communities. Q New insights into the situation of QM and KM communities using the framework of Intellectual Capital, and the complementary nature of their intangible assets. Q New perspective on flows of Intellectual Capital between different entities (in this case professional communities) as a way to increase the effectiveness of both. QA new methodology to self-assess and map Intellectual Capital

An innovative engineering design model by the aid of TRIZ methodology and CAE technology.

This thesis presents research that advocates process, methods and new technology for performance related robustness improvements in product development. Rapid advances in technology in recent years have set new demands on product development. As a consequence, an increasing variety of products are built on heterogeneous technologies. Specialists from different engineering disciplines must cooperate to a greater extent than before in order to understand the products. Increased cooperation and heterogeneous technologies in products set high demands on rapid product development models in order to deliver products of high quality in short lead time, at low cost. One of the most important tasks in robust design is to select an appropriate system output response. The quality of this selection will greatly affect the effectiveness of the robust design project. Currently, this selection process is more like art than science. By using TRIZ Design principle, several new approaches to enhance robust design are developed. These approaches enable us to select the appropriate system output response in a systematic fashion. The approach developed in this paper was successfully applied and verified in two case studies in two different major automotive companies. This research consists of theory development, mainly in the field of engineering design, TRIZ and CAE. The research in the papers provides: (1) An approach to problem solving by combining design object analysis with TRIZ and FEA; (2) Two case studies carried out with the researcher actively taking part in practical problem solving. (Abstract shortened by UMI.) Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2005 .Y82. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 44-03, page: 1477. Thesis (M.A.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2005

Campus Bridging: Campus Leadership Engagement in Building a Coherent Campus Cyberinfrastructure Workshop Report

This report presents the discussions at and recommendations made at “Campus Leadership Engagement in Building a Coherent Campus Cyberinfrastructure,” a workshop held in Anaheim, California from October 10-12, 2010. The main goals for this workshop focused on gathering the thoughts, ideas and perspectives of senior university administrators. The resulting report covers the topics of: - The current state of campus bridging from the perspectives of the CIO and VP for Research. - Challenges and opportunities at the campus leader level for enablement of campus bridging in the university community. - The senior campus leadership advocacy role for promoting campus bridging.This workshop and preparation of this report and related documents were supported by several sources, including: National Science Foundation through grant #OCI-1059812 (Patrick Dreher PI; Craig A. Stewart; James Pepin; Guy Almes; Michael Mundrane Co-PIs) (Co-Principal Investigator) RENCI (the Renaissance Computing Institute, http://www.renci.org/) supported this workshop and report by generously providing the time and effort of Patrick Dreher and through underwriting of this effort by RENCI Director Stanley Ahalt Indiana University Pervasive Technology Institute (http://pti.iu.edu/) for funding staff providing logistical support of the task force activities, writing and editorial staff, and layout and production of the final report document. Texas A&M University (http://www.tamu.edu) supported this workshop and report by generously providing the time and effort of Guy Almes. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation, the Indiana University Pervasive Technology Institute, or Indiana University