Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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
Committee on Global Approaches to Advanced Computing Board on Global Science and Technology Policy and Global Affairs Division THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW 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. This study was supported by Contract No. HHM402-10-D-0036 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26235-4 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26235-6 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Thhe National Academy of Sci iences is a priv vate, nonprofit, self-perpetuatin ng society of distinguished d sc cholars engagedd in scientific and engineering g research, ded dicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to o their use for the t general welf fare. Upon the authority of the e charter granted d to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has h a mandate th hat requires it to o advise the fede eral government on scientific nd technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is pr an resident of the National N Academmy of Sciences. Thhe National Aca ademy of Engin neering was esta ablished in 1964 4, under the char rter of the Nation nal Academy of f Sciences, as a parallel p organiza ation of outstandding engineers. It is autonomouus in its administ tration and in th he selection of it ts members, sharring with the Na ational Academy y of Sciences th he responsibility for advising th he federal governnment. The Nati ional Academy of o Engineering also a sponsors en ngineering prograams aimed at m meeting national needs, encoura ages education anda research, an nd recognizes thhe superior achi ievements of en ngineers. Dr. Ch harles M. Vest is s president of the e National Academy of Engineer ring. Thhe Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the Na ational Academy y of Sciences to t secure the se ervices of eminen nt members of appropriate a profe essions in the examination of policy matters pert taining to the heealth of the public. The Institute e acts under the responsibility r gi iven to the Natio onal Academy off Sciences by its s congressional charter to be an n adviser to the federal governmment and, upon its i own initiativee, to identify issues of medical l care, research,, and educationn. Dr. Harvey V. V Fineberg is president p of the e Institute of M Medicine. Thhe National Research Council l was organized by the National l Academy of Sciences S in 1916 6 to associate th he broad commu unity of science and technology with the Acade emy's purposes of o furthering kn nowledge and ad dvising the fede eral governmen nt. Functioning g in accordance e with general policies determ mined by the A Academy, the Cou uncil has becom me the principal operating o agencyy of both the Na ational Academyy of Sciences an nd the National Academy of Engineering E in providing p servic ces to the government, the pub blic, and the sc cientific and enggineering commmunities. The Council C is adminnistered jointly by both Academ mies and the In nstitute of Mediccine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone andd Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of f the National Reesearch Council.. www.nat tional-acade emies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON GLOBAL APPROACHES TO ADVANCED COMPUTING DANIEL A. REED, Chair, University of Iowa CONG CAO, University of Nottingham TAI MING CHEUNG, University of California, San Diego JOHN CRAWFORD, Intel Corporation DIETER ERNST, East-West Center MARK D. HILL, University of WisconsinMadison STEPHEN W. KECKLER, NVIDIA (on sabbatical from the University of Texas at Austin) DAVID LIDDLE, U.S. Venture Partners KATHRYN S. MCKINLEY, Microsoft Corporation (on sabbatical from the University of Texas at Austin) PRINCIPAL PROJECT STAFF WILLIAM O. BERRY, Study Director, Board on Global Science and Technology ETHAN N. CHIANG, Program Officer, Board on Global Science and Technology LYNETTE I. MILLETT, Associate Director, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board v

OCR for page R1
BOARD ON GLOBAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY RUTH DAVID, Chair, Analytic Services, Inc. HAMIDEH AFSARMANESH, University of Amsterdam KATY BRNER, Indiana University Bloomington JEFFREY BRADSHAW, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition DIANNE CHONG, The Boeing Company JARED COHON, Carnegie Mellon University ERIC HASELTINE, Haseltine Partners, LLC JOHN HENNESSY, Stanford University NAN JOKERST, Duke University PETER KOLCHINSKY, RA Capital Management, LLC CHEN-CHING LIU, Washington State University KIN MUN LYE, Singapore's Agency for Science, Technology and Research BERNARD MEYERSON, IBM Corporation KENNETH OYE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology NEELA PATEL, Abbott Laboratories DANIEL REED, University of Iowa DAVID REJESKI, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars STAFF WILLIAM O. BERRY, Director PATRICIA WRIGHTSON, Associate Director ETHAN N. CHIANG, Program Officer NEERAJ GORKHALY, Research Associate PETER HUNSBERGER, Financial Officer vi

OCR for page R1
Preface T he information revolution of the last half-century has been driven by dramatic improvements in computing technology--in particular by year-over-year exponential growth in single-processor computing performance that translated into phenomenal new technologies and indeed served as the foundation for entire new industries. Improvements in hardware and associated software advances sustained this growth for decades. In the last few years, those single-processor performance gains have slowed dramatically due to fundamental physical and technical constraints related to power dissipation.1 Moreover, there is substantial uncertainty as to which technological breakthroughs, if any, may make it possible to continue this approach. This technology disruption has implications not just for the information technology (IT) industry and sectors that depend on it, but for U.S. competitiveness and national security. The United States has traditionally been on the leading edge of research related to general-purpose computing performance, demonstrated in part by its dominant position in commodity microprocessors for personal computers and servers. The United States has also long been the leader in high-performance computing (HPC) systems, both in research and in deployment. Finally, the United States has also been a leader in the development of graphics processing units (GPUs) and other specialized processors.2 However, the shift to mobile- based devices and the globalization of the international economy, of communications, and of science and technology (S&T) threatens to erode U.S. technological leadership in these critical areas. The emergence of global competitors to the United States in advanced computing underscores the need for U.S. policymakers to both understand the advancement of global S&T related to advanced computing and to integrate this understanding with programmatic S&T decision making. To understand these issues more fully, the Office of the Assistant 1 National Research Council, 2011, The Future of Computing Performance: Game Over or Next Level?, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press (available online at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id =12980). "Before 2004, processor performance was growing by a factor of about 100 per decade; since 2004, processor performance has been growing and is forecasted to grow by a factor of only about 2 per decade. An expectation gap is apparent." 2 Although both HPC systems and specialized processors are key elements of U.S. competitiveness and na- tional security, the committee's guidance from the sponsor was to focus on the broader computing environ- ment, not on high-end computing. The enabling technologies for these HPC systems are based on the same single-processor, multicore and GPU technologies that are the basis for consumer commodity computing. vii

OCR for page R1
Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering at the Department of Defense asked the National Research Council (NRC) to assess the global S&T landscape for responding to the challenge of improving computing performance in an era where parallel rather than sequential computing is at the forefront. The Committee on Global Approaches to Advanced Computing was appointed under the auspices of the NRC's Board on Global Science and Technology to conduct this exploration. The nine members of the study committee represent academia and private industry and have expertise in computer science, international S&T, technology assessment, and global innovation. Biographical information for members of the committee is presented in Appendix A. Box P-1 contains committee's statement of task. The committee held three meetings during the course of its work (August, September, and October 2011). To meet its charge, the committee took a two-part approach. First, it investigated worldwide global research capabilities and commercial competitiveness related to advanced computing,3 beginning with technology context setting and definitions. As an additional data-gathering experiment, the committee solicited insights from approximately one dozen leading computer scientists and engineers to help identify potential "hubs" of science and technology, relevant to the computing performance challenge (see Appendix B). The committee then examined different innovation strategies, policy tools, and institutional arrangements in a variety of countries that are potentially important players in the development of computing devices technologies and products. Finally, the committee explored the implications of changes in the global advanced computing landscape for U.S. national security. The data analyses presented in this report are intended to be a starting point for further exploration. The committee's observations highlight important global trends with regard to computing and potential implications for U.S. leadership and for U.S. defense and national security. Rather than providing formal recommendations, this report offers an assessment of the landscape based on the observations and insights of the study committee. I would like to thank the members of the study committee for their efforts and contributions in developing this report. I also thank the briefers who came and spoke to the committee and provided crucial input and insights that helped to guide our thinking. (Briefers to the committee are listed in Appendix C.) I also thank the reviewers (see Acknowledgment of Reviewers on page xi). Lastly, the support of the NRC staff was indispensible to accomplishing this study. Special thanks go to Ethan Chiang, who worked closely with the committee throughout the study and played a major role in the preparation of this report. Thanks also go to Lynette Millett for her many valuable insights and contributions. Daniel Reed, Chair, Committee on Global Approaches to Advanced Computing 3 By "advanced computing" the committee means any innovations in semiconductor technologies (includ- ing fabrication, processing and manufacturing); computer architectures, computing hardware, algorithms and programming approaches; and software developments that improve computing performance or provide new or improved functionality. viii

OCR for page R1
BOX P-1 Statement of Task An ad hoc committee of the Board on Global Science and Technology (BGST) will describe and assess the global S&T landscape for responding to the challenges of sustaining historical trends in computing performance improvement in general and to the challenge presented by the shift to multicore processors in particular. The committee will identify cutting-edge approaches in computer hardware (e.g., multicore architectures) and software (e.g., emerging parallel programming models) technologies to meet this challenge. The committee will also identify hot spots of innovation around the world and project areas of technological leadership in the United States and elsewhere. Lastly, the committee will consider the implications of these global advances for the U.S. S&T enterprise and for U.S. national security. Based on their work, the committee may suggest criteria or methodologies to more effectively assess the global state of play in a variety of emergent areas of S&T. To accomplish this task, the committee should consider, but is not limited to, the following questions: 1. What is the cutting edge of approaches for responding to the computing performance challenge? 2. How do other nations and institutions view the computing performance challenge, and what strategies do they have for responding to it? 3. Where are the innovation hot spots in efforts to advance computing performance in the United States and overseas? 4. How are efforts to improve computing performance likely to advance (or stall) over time? Can such efforts be regionally identified? If so, what are they? 5. What are U.S. strengths relative to other international technology leaders in advanced computing performance currently and how might those strengths be expected to change over time? 6. What are the implications of these global advances for U.S. national security in the near and far terms? What are potential resulting IT capabilities and what implications do these have for U.S. national security in the near and far terms? ix

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgment of Reviewers T his 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 Research Council's 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 deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Eric Archambault, Science-Metrix Inc.; Mark Bohr, Intel Corporation; Katy Brner, Indiana University; Keith Cooper, Rice University; Peter Cowhey, University of California, San Diego; Robert Doering, Texas Instruments Incorporated; Daniel Edelstein, IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center; David Kirk, NVIDIA Corporation; James Larus, Microsoft Research; David Messerschmitt, University of California, Berkeley; Henk Moed, Elsevier; and James Valdes, United States Department of the Army. 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 Anita Jones, University of Virginia and Samuel Fuller, Analog Devices, Inc. Appointed by the National Research Council, 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. xi

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Contents SUMMARY 1 1 COMPUTER AND SEMICONDUCTOR TECHNOLOGY TRENDS AND IMPLICATIONS 5 1.1 Interrelated Challenges to Continued Performance Scaling , 5 1.2 Future Directions for Hardware and Software Innovation, 11 1.3 The Rise of Mobile Computing, Services, and Software, 13 1.4 Summary and Implications, 14 2 THE GLOBAL RESEARCH LANDSCAPE 17 2.1 Preliminary Observations from Pilot Study of Papers at Top Technical Conferences, 17 2.2 Increased International Collaboration, 19 2.3 Commercialization of Technologies, 19 2.4 Growing Complexity in IT Trade Tracing Shifts in International Competitiveness, 24 2.5 China's Position in the Global Semiconductor Value Chain, 28 2.6 Concluding Remarks, 30 3 INNOVATION POLICY LANDSCAPE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 31 3.1 Development of the U.S. Computer and Semiconductor Industry, 32 3.2 China Strengthening Indigenous Innovation, 36 3.3 Taiwan Low-cost and Fast Innovation, 39 3.4 Korea Coevolution of International and Domestic Knowledge Linkages, 43 3.5 Europe Integrated EU-wide Innovation Policy Coordination, 44 3.6 Conclusions and Policy Implications, 46 4 IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGES IN THE GLOBAL ADVANCED COMPUTING LANDSCAPE FOR U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY 49 4.1 Parallelism in Hardware and Software, 49 4.2 Integrity and Reliability of the Global Supply Chain, 50 4.3 Decline of Custom Production, 51 4.4 Convergence of Civilian and Defense Technological Capabilities, 51 4.5 Rise of a New Post-PC Paradigm Driven by Mass ICT Consumerization, 52 4.6 New Market-Driven Innovation Centers, 53 4.7 The Future Educational and Research Landscape in Advanced Computing, 53 4.8 Cybersecurity and Software, 53 4.9 Possible Defense IT Outcomes, 54 xiii

OCR for page R1
APPENDIXES 55 A. Committee Member Biographies 57 B. Identifying Hubs of Research Activity in Key Areas of S&T Critical to this Study 61 C. Contributors to the Study 65 D. Findings and Recommendations from The Future of Computing Performance: Game Over or Next Level? 67 E. Dennard Scaling and Implications 69 F. Pilot Study of Papers at Top Technical Conferences in Advanced Computing 71 G. Conference Bibliometric Data 89 H. Top 20 Largest Hardware and Software Companies 97 I. China's Medium- and Long-Term Plan 99 J. List of Abbreviations 101 xiv