Questions? Call 800-624-6242
|
|
|
|
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 5
1
The Charge to the Panel and the Assessment Process
At the request of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the National
Research Council (NRC) has, since 1959, annually assembled panels of experts from academia,
industry, medicine, and other scientific and engineering environments to assess the quality and
effectiveness of the NIST measurements and standards laboratories, of which there are now six,4
as well as the alignment of the laboratories’ activities with their missions. NIST requested that
three of its laboratories be assessed in 2011: the Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology
(CNST), the NIST Center for Neutron Research, and the Information Technology Laboratory.
Each of these was assessed by a separate panel of experts; the findings of the respective panels
are summarized in separate reports. This report summarizes the findings of the Panel on
Nanoscale Science and Technology.
For the fiscal year (FY) 2011 assessment, NIST requested that the panel focus on the
following criteria as part of its assessment:
1. Assess the degree to which laboratory programs in measurement science, standards,
and services achieve their stated objectives and fulfill the mission of the operating
unit (laboratory);
2. Assess the technical merits and scientific caliber of the current laboratory programs
relative to comparable programs worldwide; and
3. Assess the alignment between laboratory research and development (R&D) efforts
and those services and other mission-critical deliverables for which the laboratory is
responsible.
The context of this technical assessment is the mission of NIST, which is to promote U.S.
innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and
technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve the quality of life. The NIST
laboratories conduct research to anticipate future metrology and standards needs, to enable new
scientific and technological advances, and to improve and refine existing measurement methods
and services.
In order to accomplish the assessment, the NRC assembled a panel of 11 volunteers
whose expertise matches that of the work performed by the CNST staff.5 The panel members
visited the CNST facility at Gaithersburg, Maryland, for 2.5 days (March 7-9, 2011), during
which time they attended presentations, tours, and interactive sessions with CNST staff; they
also conducted interactive sessions with CNST managers. The panel met in closed sessions to
deliberate on its findings and to define the contents of this assessment report.
The approach of the panel to the assessment relied on the experience, technical
knowledge, and expertise of its members, whose backgrounds were carefully matched to the
technical areas of CNST activities. The panel reviewed selected examples of the technological
4
The six NIST laboratories are the Material Measurement Laboratory, the Physical Measurement
Laboratory, the Engineering Laboratory, the Information Technology Laboratory, the Center for Nanoscale Science
and Technology, and the NIST Center for Neutron Research.
5
See http://www.nist.gov/cnst/ for more information on CNST programs. Accessed April 7, 2011.
5
OCR for page 6
research covered by the CNST; because of time constraints, it was not possible to review the
CNST programs and projects exhaustively. The examples reviewed by the panel were selected
by the CNST in consultation with the panel chair and NRC staff. The panel’s goal was to
identify and report salient examples of accomplishments and opportunities for further
improvement with respect to the following: the degree to which the CNST programs achieve
their stated objectives and fulfill the CNST mission, the technical merit and scientific caliber of
the CNST work, and the alignment between CNST R&D efforts and CNST services and other
mission-critical deliverables. These examples are intended collectively to portray an overall
impression of the laboratory, while preserving useful suggestions specific to projects and
programs that the panel examined. The panel applied a largely qualitative rather than a
quantitative approach to the assessment, although it is possible that future assessments will be
informed by further consideration of various analytical methods that can be applied.
For its assessment, the panel relied primarily on presentations made by NIST and CNST
managers and staff and by other researchers associated with NIST projects and programs, and on
informational notes prepared by NIST and CNST staff for use by the panel. Posters by various
researchers involved with CNST activities were also presented to the panel during its visit to the
CNST. This report does not contain extensive citations of technical articles and reports. Other
documents and resources used by the panel are cited in the report, as appropriate.
The comments in this report are not intended to address each program within the CNST
exhaustively. Instead, this report identifies key issues. Given the necessarily non-exhaustive
nature of the review process, the omission of any particular CNST program or project should not
be interpreted as a negative reflection on the omitted program or project.
The preceding Summary highlights issues that apply broadly to several or all of the
groups or to the center as a whole and presents the panel’s key recommendations for the CNST.
Chapter 2 presents a more detailed overall assessment of the center against the three criteria
established by the NIST Director. Chapters 3 and 4 present observations and suggestions specific
to the groups in the CNST research program and to the NanoFab program, respectively. Chapter
5 presents the panel’s overall conclusions.
6
