The Experts below are selected from a list of 5028 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Shaowen Wang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
future directions of the Cyberinfrastructure for sustained scientific innovation cssi program
arXiv: Computers and Society, 2020Co-Authors: Ritu Arora, Shaowen Wang, Bonnie L Hurwitz, Daniel Fay, Dhabaleswar K Panda, Edward F Valeev, Shirley Moore, Sunita Chandrasekaran, Ting Cao, Holly M BikAbstract:The CSSI 2019 workshop was held on October 28-29, 2019, in Austin, Texas. The main objectives of this workshop were to (1) understand the impact of the CSSI program on the community over the last 9 years, (2) engage workshop participants in identifying gaps and opportunities in the current CSSI landscape, (3) gather ideas on the Cyberinfrastructure needs and expectations of the community with respect to the CSSI program, and (4) prepare a report summarizing the feedback gathered from the community that can inform the future solicitations of the CSSI program. The workshop brought together different stakeholders interested in provisioning sustainable Cyberinfrastructure that can power discoveries impacting the various fields of science and technology and maintaining the nation's competitiveness in the areas such as scientific software, HPC, networking, cybersecurity, and data/information science. The workshop served as a venue for gathering the community-feedback on the current state of the CSSI program and its future directions.
-
cybergis enabled decision support platform for biomass supply chain optimization
Environmental Modelling and Software, 2015Co-Authors: Tao Lin, Luis F Rodriguez, Shaowen Wang, Yan LiuAbstract:Biomass supply chain optimization aims to facilitate large-scale production of biofuels by improving the efficiency and effectiveness of biomass feedstock provision. Most existing models are not web based, limited by the accessibility for real-world applications. A CyberGIS-enabled biomass supply chain decision support platform was developed to improve model accessibility and computational performance. The platform includes four major components: BioScope optimization model, GISolve middleware, high-performance Cyberinfrastructure, and an interactive web interface. The workflow and functions of each component are provided to illustrate the development and usage of the platform. Case studies and associated system performance have been evaluated to demonstrate the utility of the CyberGIS-enabled decision support platform. Through leveraging Cyberinfrastructure resources and interactive web-based interface, the platform enables solving complex biomass supply chain optimization problems. The improved computational performance could provide responsive decision support for group-based applications. A CyberGIS-enabled decision support platform was developed for biomass analysis.The platform includes web interface, middleware, model, and Cyberinfrastructure.The platform integrates data, modeling and analysis, and result visualization.The platform improves computing performance for complex problem solving.
-
the emergence of spatial Cyberinfrastructure
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2011Co-Authors: Dawn J Wright, Shaowen WangAbstract:Cyberinfrastructure integrates advanced computer, information, and communication technologies to empower computation-based and data-driven scientific practice and improve the synthesis and analysis of scientific data in a collaborative and shared fashion. As such, it now represents a paradigm shift in scientific research that has facilitated easy access to computational utilities and streamlined collaboration across distance and disciplines, thereby enabling scientific breakthroughs to be reached more quickly and efficiently. Spatial Cyberinfrastructure seeks to resolve longstanding complex problems of handling and analyzing massive and heterogeneous spatial datasets as well as the necessity and benefits of sharing spatial data flexibly and securely. This article provides an overview and potential future directions of spatial Cyberinfrastructure. The remaining four articles of the special feature are introduced and situated in the context of providing empirical examples of how spatial Cyberinfrastructure is extending and enhancing scientific practice for improved synthesis and analysis of both physical and social science data. The primary focus of the articles is spatial analyses using distributed and high-performance computing, sensor networks, and other advanced information technology capabilities to transform massive spatial datasets into insights and knowledge.
-
simplegrid toolkit enabling geosciences gateways to Cyberinfrastructure
Computers & Geosciences, 2009Co-Authors: Shaowen Wang, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, Yan Liu, Stuart MartinAbstract:Cyberinfrastructure science and engineering gateways have become an important modality to connect science and engineering communities and Cyberinfrastructure. The use of Cyberinfrastructure through gateways is fundamental to the advancement of science and engineering. However, learning science gateway technologies and developing science gateways remain a significant challenge, given that science gateway technologies are still actively evolving and often include a number of sophisticated components. A geosciences gateway must be designed to accommodate legacy methods that geoscientists use in conventional computational tools. The research described in this paper establishes an open-source toolkit-SimpleGrid for learning and developing science gateways based on a service-oriented architecture using a component-based approach that allows flexible separation and integration of the components between geocomputation applications and Cyberinfrastructure. The design and implementation of SimpleGrid is based on the National Science Foundation TeraGrid-a key element of the U.S. and world Cyberinfrastructure. This paper illustrates our experience of using SimpleGrid and a spatial interpolation method in a tutorial to teach TeraGrid science gateways.
-
Coupling Cyberinfrastructure and Geographic Information Systems to Empower Ecological and Environmental Research
BioScience, 2008Co-Authors: Shaowen Wang, Xin-guang ZhuAbstract:evolving subject of research. Both the individual components of Cyberinfrastructure and their interactions are highly complex. To manage this complexity and thus assure the usability of Cyberinfrastructure for scientific discovery, science and engineering gateways to Cyberinfrastructure are being designed to provide customizable and seamless access to Cyberinfrastructure through problemsolving environments tailored to the
Craig A. Stewart - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
assessment of non financial returns on Cyberinfrastructure a survey of current methods
IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science, 2019Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, David Lifka, Nicholas Berente, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Amy Apon, Thomas R Furlani, A Sill, Thomas E Cheatham, Shawn D SlavinAbstract:In recent years, considerable attention has been given to assessing the value of investments in Cyberinfrastructure (CI). This paper focuses on assessment of value measured in ways other than financial benefits - what might well be termed impact or outcomes. This paper is a companion to a paper presented at the PEARC'19 conference, which focused on methods for assessing financial returns on investment. In this paper we focus on methods for assessing impacts such as effect on publication production, importance of publications, and assistance with major scientific accomplishments as signified by major awards. We in particular focus on the role of humans in the loop - humanware. This includes a brief description of the roles humans play in facilitating use of research cyberinfratructure - including clouds - and then a discussion of how those impacts have been assessed. Our conclusion overall is that there has been more progress in the past very few years in developing methods for the quantitative assessment of financial returns on investment than there has been in assessing non-quantitative impacts. There are a few clear actions that many research institutions could take to start better assessing the non-financial impacts of investment in Cyberinfrastructure. However, there is a great need for assessment efforts to turn more attention to the assessment of non-financial benefits of investment in Cyberinfrastructure, particularly the benefits of investing in humans and the benefits to humans who are involved in supporting and using Cyberinfrastructure, including clouds.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
your good health is a workforce issue
Proceedings of the Practice and Experience on Advanced Research Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Marion KrefeldtAbstract:The high performance computing (HPC), Cyberinfrastructure, and research and academic information technology communities are small - too small to fulfill current needs for such professionals in the US. Members of this community are also often under a lot of stress, and with that can come health problems. The senior author was diagnosed with Stage IV cancer in early 2017. In this paper, we share what we have learned about health management in general and dealing with cancer in particular, focusing on lessons that are portable to other members of the HPC, Cyberinfrastructure, and research and academic information technology communities. We also make recommendations to the National Science Foundation regarding changes the NSF could make to reduce some of the stress this community feels on a day-in, day-out basis.The key point of this report is to provide information to members of the Cyberinfrastructure community that they might not already have - and might not receive from their primary care physicians - that will help them live longer and healthier lives. While our own experiences are based on one of the author's diagnosis of cancer, the information presented here should be of general value to all in terms of strategies for reducing and detecting long-term health risks. Our hope is that this information will help you be as healthy as possible until you reach retirement age and then healthy during a well-deserved and long period of retirement!
-
the community software repository from xsede a resource for the national research community
Proceedings of the Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing 2017 on Sustainability Success and Impact, 2017Co-Authors: Johnpaul Navarro, Lee Liming, David Lifka, Craig A. Stewart, Richard Knepper, Maytal DahanAbstract:The Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE) connects Cyberinfrastructure (CI) resources, software, and services. One of XSEDE's primary goals in supporting US research generally is to "advance the ecosystem" - making use of XSEDE's leadership position to create software, tools, and services that lead to an effective and efficient national Cyberinfrastructure. Software enables this endeavor in two very distinct ways: enabling the operation of XSEDE as a distributed yet integrated Cyberinfrastructure resource; and by providing access to a wide variety of software of value to end user researchers and students, operators of campus Cyberinfrastructure resources, and to those considering to propose new Cyberinfrastructure resources to the National Science Foundation (NSF). The Community Software Repository (CSR) provides transparency about how XSEDE operates and provides access to software of use and value to the US research community generally. The CSR provides access to use cases that describe needs expressed by the research community, capability delivery plans that describe how XSEDE meets those needs, and the actual software that meets those needs. Software is delivered in a variety of forms and formats. The CSR also includes mechanisms for interaction between XSEDE staff, software developers, and the end user community to accelerate meeting of community needs and aid software developers in finding audiences for their software. XCI's long term goal is that the XSEDE Community Software Repository will be widely used and valuable to the national research community.
Winona Snappchilds - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
Nancy Wilkinsdiehr - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the professionalization of Cyberinfrastructure personnel
Proceedings of the Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing on Rise of the Machines (learning), 2019Co-Authors: Nicholas Berente, Stan Ahalt, James B Bottum, Dana Brunson, Joel Cutchergershenfeld, James Howison, John Leslie King, Henry Neeman, John Towns, Nancy WilkinsdiehrAbstract:Cyberinfrastructure (CI) personnel are critical to next-generation scientific research. Although funding agencies and universities increasingly realize this, enabling resources do not grow as fast as the need for the CI skills and capabilities. There are two main issues with respect to CI personnel: CI personnel are scarce and Cyberinfrastructure is different from traditional information technology ("IT"). A potential answer to these issues is to professionalize the CI field. In this article, we draw on organization science to argue that a strong form of professionalization does not make sense for the CI workforce. However, we do encourage the development of standardized roles for CI personnel, and we recommend starting with three such roles: system facing, software facing, and researcher facing CI roles. A credentialing effort around these three roles could strengthen the field as well. We conclude with a discussion of directions forward.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
authoring a science gateway cookbook
International Conference on Cluster Computing, 2013Co-Authors: Suresh Marru, Marlon Pierce, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, Sudhakar Pamidighantam, Rion Dooley, Mark A Miller, Julie WernertAbstract:Over the last fifteen years, science gateways have proven to be fertile ground for Cyberinfrastructure research, while at the same time dramatically increasing the usage and accessibility of Cyberinfrastructure to scientists and educators. Gateway developers, however, still face many challenges in building and operating these complex infrastructures that address the dynamic and emerging challenges of computational infrastructure. Through the XSEDE Science Gateway Program, we propose to solicit information on the knowledge, experience, and software from widely used science gateways. We will compile the information into a “Science Gateway Cookbook” which will democratize the experiences in developing, operating, and sustaining science gateways. We hope this will be a good literature reference and also avoid some repetition in the development process.
-
Cyberinfrastructure usage modalities on the teragrid
IEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing Workshops and Phd Forum, 2011Co-Authors: Daniel S Katz, Johnpaul Navarro, John Towns, Von Welch, Chris Jordan, David Hart, Amit Majumdar, Warren Smith, Nancy WilkinsdiehrAbstract:This paper is intended to explain how the Tera Grid would like to be able to measure "usage modalities." We would like to (and are beginning to) measure these modalities to understand what objectives our users are pursuing, how they go about achieving them, and why, so that we can make changes in the Tera Grid to better support them.
Julie Wernert - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
assessment of non financial returns on Cyberinfrastructure a survey of current methods
IEEE International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science, 2019Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, David Lifka, Nicholas Berente, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Amy Apon, Thomas R Furlani, A Sill, Thomas E Cheatham, Shawn D SlavinAbstract:In recent years, considerable attention has been given to assessing the value of investments in Cyberinfrastructure (CI). This paper focuses on assessment of value measured in ways other than financial benefits - what might well be termed impact or outcomes. This paper is a companion to a paper presented at the PEARC'19 conference, which focused on methods for assessing financial returns on investment. In this paper we focus on methods for assessing impacts such as effect on publication production, importance of publications, and assistance with major scientific accomplishments as signified by major awards. We in particular focus on the role of humans in the loop - humanware. This includes a brief description of the roles humans play in facilitating use of research cyberinfratructure - including clouds - and then a discussion of how those impacts have been assessed. Our conclusion overall is that there has been more progress in the past very few years in developing methods for the quantitative assessment of financial returns on investment than there has been in assessing non-quantitative impacts. There are a few clear actions that many research institutions could take to start better assessing the non-financial impacts of investment in Cyberinfrastructure. However, there is a great need for assessment efforts to turn more attention to the assessment of non-financial benefits of investment in Cyberinfrastructure, particularly the benefits of investing in humans and the benefits to humans who are involved in supporting and using Cyberinfrastructure, including clouds.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
return on investment for three Cyberinfrastructure facilities a local campus supercomputer the nsf funded jetstream cloud system and xsede the extreme science and engineering discovery environment
IEEE ACM International Conference Utility and Cloud Computing, 2018Co-Authors: Craig A. Stewart, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, David Y Hancock, Julie Wernert, Matthew R Link, Therese Miller, Kelly Gaither, Winona SnappchildsAbstract:The economics of high performance computing are rapidly changing. Commercial cloud offerings, private research clouds, and pressure on the budgets of institutions of higher education and federally-funded research organizations are all contributing factors. As such, it has become a necessity that all expenses and investments be analyzed and considered carefully. In this paper we will analyze the return on investment (ROI) for three different kinds of Cyberinfrastructure resources: the eXtreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment (XSEDE); the NSF-funded Jetstream cloud system; and the Indiana University (IU) Big Red II supercomputer, funded exclusively by IU for use of the IU community and collaborators. We determined the ROI for these three resources by assigning financial values to services by either comparison with commercially available services, or by surveys of value of these resources to their users. In all three cases, the ROI for these very different types of Cyberinfrastructure resources was well greater than 1 - meaning that investors are getting more than $1 in returned value for every $1 invested. While there are many ways to measure the value and impact of investment in Cyberinfrastructure resources, we are able to quantify the short-term ROI and show that it is a net positive for campuses and the federal government respectively.
-
authoring a science gateway cookbook
International Conference on Cluster Computing, 2013Co-Authors: Suresh Marru, Marlon Pierce, Nancy Wilkinsdiehr, Sudhakar Pamidighantam, Rion Dooley, Mark A Miller, Julie WernertAbstract:Over the last fifteen years, science gateways have proven to be fertile ground for Cyberinfrastructure research, while at the same time dramatically increasing the usage and accessibility of Cyberinfrastructure to scientists and educators. Gateway developers, however, still face many challenges in building and operating these complex infrastructures that address the dynamic and emerging challenges of computational infrastructure. Through the XSEDE Science Gateway Program, we propose to solicit information on the knowledge, experience, and software from widely used science gateways. We will compile the information into a “Science Gateway Cookbook” which will democratize the experiences in developing, operating, and sustaining science gateways. We hope this will be a good literature reference and also avoid some repetition in the development process.
