Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
ADVANCED RESEARCH INSTRUMENTATION AND FACILITIES
Committee on Advanced Research Instrumentation
Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING, AND INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu
OCR for page R2
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
Support for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-09701-0
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-09701-7
Available from the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001; 202-334-2807; Internet, http://www.nationalacademies.org/cosepup.
Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R4
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R5
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED RESEARCH INSTRUMENTATION
MARTHA KREBS (Chair), Director,
Energy R&D Division, California Energy Commission, Los Angeles, California
DAVID BISHOP, President,
New Jersey Nanotechnology Consortium; Nanotechnology Research VP, Lucent Tech–Bell Labs, Murray Hill, New Jersey
MARVIN CASSMAN, Independent Consultant,
San Francisco, California
ULRICH DAHMEN, Director,
National Center for Electron Microscopy, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California
THOM H. DUNNING, JR., Director,
National Center for Supercomputing Applications;
Professor of Chemistry and Distinguished Chair for Research Excellence,
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
MARILYN L. FOGEL, Staff Member,
Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC
LESLIE KOLODZIEJSKI, Professor of Electrical Engineering,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
ALVIN KWIRAM, Professor of Chemistry, Vice Provost for Research Emeritus,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
WARREN S. WARREN, Ralph W. Dornte Professor of Chemistry,
Princeton University;
Director,
New Jersey Center for Molecular and Biomolecular Imaging, Princeton, New Jersey
DANIEL F. WEILL, Retired,
Eugene, Oregon
Principal Project Staff
DEBORAH STINE, Study Director
RACHEL COURTLAND, Research Associate and Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellow
NEERAJ P. GORKHALY, Senior Program Assistant
SHADEEQUA MILLER, Program Assistant
RICHARD YEH, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellow
KELLY KROEGER, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Graduate Fellow
NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Senior Editor
OCR for page R6
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND PUBLIC POLICY
MAXINE F. SINGER (Chair), President Emerita and Senior Scientific Advisor to CASE,
Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC
UMA CHOWDHRY, Vice President,
Central Research and Development, DuPont Company, Wilmington, Delaware
RALPH J. CICERONE (Ex officio), President,
National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC
R. JAMES COOK, Interim Dean,
College of Agriculture and Home Economics, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington
HAILE DEBAS, Executive Director,
Global Health Sciences,
Maurice Galante Distinguished Professor of Surgery,
University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California
HARVEY FINEBERG (Ex officio), President,
Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC
MARYE ANNE FOX (Ex officio), Chancellor,
University of California, San Diego, California
ELSA GARMIRE, Professor,
School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire
M.R.C. GREENWOOD (Ex officio), Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs,
University of California, Oakland, California
NANCY HOPKINS, Amgen Professor of Biology,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
WILLIAM H. JOYCE (Ex officio), Chairman and CEO,
Nalco, Naperville, Illinois
MARY-CLAIRE KING, American Cancer Society Professor of Medicine and Genetics,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
W. CARL LINEBERGER, Professor of Chemistry,
Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado
RICHARD A. MESERVE, President,
Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC
ROBERT M. NEREM, Parker H. Petit Professor and Director,
Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia
ANNE PETERSEN, Senior Vice President,
Programs, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, Michigan
CECIL PICKETT, President,
Schering-Plough Research Institute, Kenilworth, New Jersey
OCR for page R7
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
EDWARD H. SHORTLIFFE, Professor and Chair,
Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York
HUGO SONNENSCHEIN, Charles L. Hutchinson Distinguished Service Professor,
Department of Economics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
SHEILA E. WIDNALL, Abby Rockefeller Mauze Professor of Aeronautics,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
WM. A. WULF (Ex officio), President,
National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC
MARY LOU ZOBACK, Senior Research Scientist,
Earthquake Hazards Team, US Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California
Staff
RICHARD BISSELL, Executive Director
DEBORAH STINE, Associate Director
LAUREL HAAK, Program Officer
MARION RAMSEY, Administrative Coordinator
CRAIG REED, Financial Associate
OCR for page R8
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R9
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
Preface
Forty years ago, Congress asked the National Academies Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP)—the only joint policy committee of the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine—to look at the relationship between basic research and national goals. That request, from the House Committee on Science and Astronautics in 1964, resulted in the report Basic Research and National Goals.1 One essay in the report pointed out that a side effect of heavy investment in large research facilities is the large cost of operation and maintenance. Another essay addressed the issue of rising cost:
The costs of scientific research are steadily increasing. It is true that, with the efficient instruments we now have, problems that appeared very formidable many years ago can be solved in a matter of days instead of years, and thus much more cheaply. But we are concerned today with much more difficult problems. These require the full efforts of our investigators aided by the most modern instrumentation. It is the solution of the easy problems and the necessity for facing more difficult ones that makes research more expensive each year.2
1
Kaysen, C. Allocating federal support for basic research. In Basic Research and National Goals. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1965, pp. 147-167.
2
Kistiakowsky, G. B. Allocating support for basic research—and the importance of practical applications. In Basic Research and National Goals. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 1965, pp. 169-188.
OCR for page R10
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
Remarkably little has changed since that time, as COSEPUP now responds to a 21st century congressional request for guidance on the issue of instrumentation.
This study is in response to a request from Congress in Section 13(b) of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Authorization Act of 2002, which reads as follows:
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ASSESSMENT ON INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND ADVANCED INSTRUMENTATION CENTERS.
Assessment—Not later than 3 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences to assess the need for an interagency program to establish and support fully equipped, state-of-the-art university-based centers for interdisciplinary research and advanced instrumentation development.
Transmittal to Congress.—Not later than 15 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate the assessment conducted by the National Academy of Sciences together with the Foundation’s reaction to the assessment authorized under paragraph (1).
A wide array of universities have expressed concerns to Congress in recent years as to the challenge of investing in and finding support for advanced instrumentation used in scientific, engineering, and medical research. The universities highlighted an interest in and a need for the centralization of research equipment on their campuses, but they lacked the resources for that. The desire for concentrating resources has grown as advanced research instrumentation and facilities (ARIF) has grown more powerful, has required additional support, and has been increasingly used by researchers in many fields. Another concern of universities is the potential for direct federal allocation of funds to particular institutions, regions, and fields due to the lack of federal ARIF programs, which can lead to federal support for facilities that are not peer-reviewed and not cost effective.
In January 2004, NSF contacted COSEPUP about conducting this study. Staff of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House Committee on Science were consulted, and they agreed that a committee addressing the issue should respond to the following questions:
What are the current programs and policies of the major federal research agencies for advanced research instrumentation?
What is the current status of advanced midsized research instrumentation on university campuses? How are such instruments currently designed, built, funded, operated, and maintained?
OCR for page R11
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
What challenges do federal agencies and universities identify regarding such instruments?
Would an interagency program to fund midsized advanced research instruments that are used by researchers funded by many agencies help respond to these challenges? If so, what should be the components of such a program?
Are sufficient federal programs available to provide the intellectual and financial resources necessary to develop new midsized instruments that respond to research community needs?
What federal policies could be put into place to enhance the design, building, funding, sharing, operations, and maintenance of mid-sized advanced research instruments?
The committee would propose policies, if needed, to make the most effective use of federal resources to fund such instruments. The instruments are and would be in a broad spectrum of academic institutions.
COSEPUP appointed the Committee on Advanced Research Instrumentation to respond to the call from Congress. The charge to the committee defines ARIF as instrumentation and collections of instrumentation that are supported by neither the NSF Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) program nor the NSF Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) account. By that definition, ARIF is distinguished by capital costs ranging from $2 million to several tens of millions of dollars. A more comprehensive definition of ARIF is put forth by the committee in Chapter 2 of this report. The committee includes all scientific and engineering research fields—including the physical sciences, life sciences, engineering, and social sciences—within the scope of the study.
This study is intended to complement a request in Section 13(a) of the NSF Authorization Act of 2002 for NSF to “conduct a review and assessment” of the MRI program. The MRI program largely excludes support of the instrumentation discussed in this report, although it is capable of partially funding ARIF. NSF is involved in a 5-year effort to design and implement a method for collecting data on science and engineering research instrumentation as part of its study.
The present report also complements two other recent COSEPUP reports that address related issues. Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported by the National Science Foundation3 examined NSF’s MREFC account and recommended that the National Science Board (NSB) oversee a process whereby NSF
3
National Research Council. Setting Priorities for Large Research Facility Projects Supported by the National Science Foundation. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2004.
OCR for page R16
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
LOUISA KOCH, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
JOHN H. MARBURGER, Director, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
MICHAEL MARRON, Associate Director, Division of Biomedical Technology, National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health
WILLIAM OLBRICHT, Professor, Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Cornell University
RAY ORBACH, Director, Office of Science, Department of Energy
NATHANIEL PITTS, Director, Office of Integrative Activities, National Science Foundation
DONALD TENNANT, Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff, New Jersey Nanotechnology Consortium and Lucent Technologies
We would also like to thank those we interviewed (in alphabetical order):
RICHARD A. BEHNKE, Section Head, Division of Atmospheric Sciences, National Science Foundation
WILLIAM O. (BILL) BERRY, Acting Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Department of Defense
DRAGANA BRZAKOVIC, Staff Associate, Office of Integrative Activities, National Science Foundation
PETER A. FREEMAN, Assistant Director, Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering, National Science Foundation
PAUL HERTZ, Assistant Associate Administrator for Science, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
DAVID LAMBERT, Program Director, Instrumentation and Facilities, National Science Foundation
MICHAEL MARRON, Associate Director, Division of Biomedical Technology, National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health
ANN MORIMIZU, Director of the Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation in Science and Technology, Department of Homeland Security
MURIEL E. POSTON, Deputy Director, Division of Biological Infrastructure, National Science Foundation
ROBERT M. ROBINSON, Program Manager, Division of Atmospheric Sciences, National Science Foundation
DAVID RUST, Program Planning Administrator, US Department of Agriculture
GERALD B. SELZER, Program Director, Division of Biological Infrastructure, National Science Foundation
OCR for page R17
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
MARJORIE TINGLE, Health Scientist Administrator, National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health
THOMAS A. WEBER, Director, Division of Materials Research, National Science Foundation
ROBERT M. WELLEK, Division of Chemical and Transport Systems, Directorate for Engineering, National Science Foundation
Thanks go to institutions that responded to the survey (in alphabetical order):
Arkansas, Little Rock, University of
Arkansas, University of
Auburn University
Boston College
Boston University
Brandeis University
Brown University
California, Berkeley, University of
California, Irvine, University of
California, Los Angeles, University of
California, Riverside, University of
Carnegie Institution of Washington
Cincinnati, University of
Colorado, Boulder, University of
Dartmouth University
Idaho State University
Illinois, Chicago, University of
Iowa State University
Kansas Center for Research, University of
Kansas University Medical Center
Lehigh University
Loma Linda University
Maine, University of
Marquette University
Maryland, Baltimore County, University of
Maryland, College Park, University of
Massachusetts, Boston, University of
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Michigan State University
Minnesota, University of
Nevada, Las Vegas, University of
OCR for page R18
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
New Mexico State University
New York, State University of
North Carolina, Greensboro, University of
Northern Illinois University
Oakland University
Ohio State University
Pennsylvania State University
Princeton University
Purdue University
Rice University
Rutgers University
San Diego State University
Syracuse University
Tennessee, University of
Texas A&M-Health Science Center
Texas, Austin, University of
Washington State University
Washington University, St. Louis
Wayne State University
Wisconsin-Madison, University of
We also thank the following national laboratories and research centers for their informative responses to our survey:
Ames Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Center for Microanalysis of Materials, Frederick Seitz Materials Research Laboratory
Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
Laboratory of Membrane Biochemistry and Biophysics, National Institute on Alcohol and Alcoholism, National Institutes of Health
National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory
Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
OCR for page R19
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
In addition, we thank the disciplinary societies that responded to our survey. Note that staff from some of the disciplinary societies responded to the survey as individuals with a broad view of the status and needs of their field and not as representatives of their society. The disciplinary societies are (in alphabetical order):
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Physical Society
Division of Condensed Matter Physics
Division of Particles and Fields
American Political Science Association
American Society for Mass Spectrometry
American Society of Plant Biologists
Federation of Materials Societies
The committee also thanks the individual researchers who responded to our survey. Without their input in addition to the input from institutions, this report would not have been possible.
Next, we would like to thank the reviewers of this report. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Academies’ Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Jerry Bridges, Johns Hopkins University; Richard Carlson, Carnegie Institution of Washington; Deborah Estrin, University of California; David Featherman, University of Michigan; Timothy Krabach, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Mark Lively, Wake Forest University; William Olbricht, Cornell University; Mark Oreglia, University of Chicago; Manijeh Razeghi, Northwestern University; and Alfred Redfield, Brandeis University.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Pierre Hohenberg, New York University, and R. James Cook (Retired), Washington State University. Appointed by the National
OCR for page R20
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
Academies, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
We thank Maxine Singer, the chair of COSEPUP, and W. Carl Lineberger, chair of the guidance group that oversaw this project, which included
W. CARL LINEBERGER (Guidance Group Chair), Professor of Chemistry, University of Colorado
ELSA M. GARMIRE, Professor, Dartmouth College
GERALD M. RUBIN, Vice President for Biomedical Research, Howard Hughes Medical Institute
MAXINE SINGER, President Emeritus, Carnegie Institution of Washington
Finally, we thank the staff for this project, including Deborah Stine, Associate Director of COSEPUP and study director, who managed the project; Rachel Courtland, research associate and Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow, who helped to turn the committee’s thoughts into words; Neeraj P. Gorkhaly, senior program assistant, who provided project support; and Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellows Richard Yeh and Kelly Kroeger, who helped to provide research and analytic support for the committee.
OCR for page R21
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
Contents
SUMMARY
1
1
INTRODUCTION
7
Historical Roots,
7
How Is Instrumentation Different Today in Its Use?,
12
Overview of Report,
13
Findings,
13
2
INTRODUCTION TO INSTRUMENTATION
15
What Is Instrumentation, and Why Is It Important?,
15
What Is “Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities”?,
16
Examples of ARIF,
19
Imaging Technologies: From Physics to Biology,
20
High-Speed Sequencers and the Human Genome Project,
24
Cybertools,
28
Distributed Advanced Research Instrumentation Systems,
32
Tools for Integrated Circuits,
34
Nanotechnology,
35
Tools for Space Exploration,
39
Findings,
39
Recommendations,
40
OCR for page R22
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
3
INSTRUMENTATION AND UNIVERSITIES
41
Investing in Instrumentation in Universities,
41
Management of Instrumentation in Universities,
44
Cost of Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities,
45
Operation and Maintenance Costs,
47
Space,
48
PhD-Level Technical Research Support Staff,
50
Centralized University Facilities,
50
Instrumentation Funding,
53
Survey Results,
55
Findings,
60
Recommendations,
61
4
FEDERAL AGENCY AND INTERAGENCY PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
63
Historical Overview of Federal Funding of Instrumentation,
63
National Science Foundation Programs and Activities,
64
National Science Board Findings on National Science Foundation Support for Infrastructure,
64
The Major Research Instrumentation Program,
65
The Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction Account,
68
Support for Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities,
69
The Instrumentation for Materials Research– Major Instrumentation Projects Program,
69
Geosciences Support for Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities,
70
National Institutes of Health Programs and Activities,
71
Department of Energy Programs and Activities,
73
Department of Defense Programs and Activities,
74
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Programs and Activities,
74
Department of Homeland Security Programs and Activities,
75
US Department of Agriculture Programs and Activities,
76
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Programs and Activities,
77
Interagency Activities,
77
Federal PhD-Level Technical Research Support Staff Career Development and Support Programs,
80
Summary and Analysis,
80
Findings,
83
Recommendations,
86
OCR for page R23
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
5
OVERVIEW OF CONCLUSIONS, FINDINGS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
89
General Findings,
89
Congressional Charge,
90
Response to Charge Questions,
91
Summary,
97
APPENDIXES
A Biographical Information on Members and Staff of Committee on Advanced Research Instrumentation
101
B Charge to the Committee
106
C Summary of Institutional Survey Results
108
D Summary of Researcher Survey Results
128
E Summary of Disciplinary Society Survey Results
148
F Summary of National Laboratory Survey Results
162
G Selected Bibliography
174
OCR for page R24
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
Boxes, Figures, and Tables
BOXES
NMR Spectrometer,
22
Magnetic Resonance Imager,
23
X-ray Crystallography,
25
Proteomics,
26
Beamlines,
27
Cyberinfrastructure,
28
Gaussian and the Nobel Prize,
29
Political Science Instrumentation,
30
Earth and Ocean Science Sensor Systems,
32
Composite Instruments,
34
National Nanofabrication Users Network,
36
Electron Microscope,
37
Telescopes and Global Sensors and Infrastructure,
38
Instrumentation and the Challenge of User Fees,
43
Costs and Requirements Associated with an 800 MHz NMR with Cryoprobe,
45
What Are Facilities and Administrative Costs?,
54
OCR for page R25
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
FIGURES
1-1
National Science Foundation Tools, Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC), and Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) budgets, FY 2004-2006,
11
2-1
Historical capability of NMR spectrometers,
21
3-1
Midsize materials science facility operating budgets,
49
3-2
Accumulation of operating costs for a transmission electron microscope,
49
3-3
Number of ARIF reported by institutional survey respondents,
56
3-4
ARIF at institutions, by field,
57
3-5
Major challenges that institutions face with regard to ARIF,
58
3-6
Number of funding sources specified,
58
3-7
Frequency of ARIF capital cost sources of support,
59
3-8
Itemized ARIF, by capital cost,
59
4-1
Major Research Instrumentation program FY 2004 awards by directorate,
67
4-2
Frequency of ARIF capital cost sources of support,
81
4-3
Total ARIF capital cost support, by source,
84
TABLES
1-1
NSF Future Infrastructure Needs, FY 2003-2012,
9
2-1
Examples of ARIF, by Field,
20
4-1
Major Research Instrumentation Program Proposals and Awards,
66
4-2
Federal Agency Programs and Practices for the Support of Instrumentation,
81
OCR for page R26
Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities
This page intentionally left blank.
