Funding a Revolution

Government Support for Computing Research

Committee on Innovations in Computing and Communications: Lessons from History

Computer Science and Telecommunications Board

Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
1999



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
--> Funding a Revolution Government Support for Computing Research Committee on Innovations in Computing and Communications: Lessons from History Computer Science and Telecommunications Board Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1999

OCR for page R1
--> 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. 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. Bruce Alberts 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. William 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. Kenneth I. Shine 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. Bruce Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. Support for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation under grant EIA-9529482. Additional support was provided by the Association for Computing Machinery and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers' Computer Society. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 98-88131 International Standard Book Number 0-309-06278-0 Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press (http://www.nap.edu) 2101 Constitution Ave., NW, Box 285 Washington, D.C. 20055 800-624-6242 202-334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
--> COMMITTEE ON INNOVATIONS IN COMPUTING AND COMMUNICATIONS: LESSONS FROM HISTORY THOMAS HUGHES, University of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Chair GWEN BELL, The Computer Museum ERICH BLOCH, Council on Competitiveness ROBERT BRESSLER, Sun Microsystems, Inc. PAUL DAVID, Oxford University and Stanford University MARVIN DENICOFF, Office of Naval Research (retired) DAVID HOUNSHELL, Carnegie Mellon University AMOS E. JOEL, JR., Lucent Technologies, Inc. (retired) TIMOTHY LENOIR, Stanford University DOUGLAS McILROY, Dartmouth College EMERSON PUGH, IBM Corporation (retired) CHARLES SEITZ, Myricom Corporation CHARLES THACKER, Microsoft Corporation Special Advisor DANIEL J. KEVLES, California Institute of Technology Staff JERRY R. SHEEHAN, Senior Program Officer (study director after February 1997) MARJORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director (study director through February 1997) DAVID MINDELL, CSTB Consultant JED GORDON, Research Aide LESLIE M. WADE, Research Assistant (through March 1997) DAVID PADGHAM, Project Assistant (starting August 1998) MICKELLE RODGERS, Project Assistant (through August 1998) SYNOD P. BOYD, Project Assistant (through December 1997)

OCR for page R1
--> COMPUTER SCIENCE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS BOARD DAVID D. CLARK, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Chair FRANCES E. ALLEN, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center JAMES CHIDDIX, Time Warner Cable JEFF DOZIER, University of California at Santa Barbara A.G. (SANDY) FRASER, AT&T Corporation SUSAN L. GRAHAM, University of California at Berkeley JAMES GRAY, Microsoft Corporation BARBARA J. GROSZ, Harvard University PATRICK HANRAHAN, Stanford University JUDITH HEMPEL, University of California at San Francisco DEBORAH A. JOSEPH, University of Wisconsin BUTLER W. LAMPSON, Microsoft Corporation EDWARD D. LAZOWSKA, University of Washington DAVID LIDDLE, Interval Research BARBARA H. LISKOV, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JOHN MAJOR, QUALCOMM Incorporated DAVID G. MESSERSCHMITT, University of California at Berkeley DONALD NORMAN, Nielsen Norman Group RAYMOND OZZIE, Groove Networks DONALD SIMBORG, KnowMed Systems LESLIE L. VADASZ, Intel Corporation Staff MARJORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director JANE BORTNICK GRIFFITH, Interim Director, 1998 HERBERT S. LIN, Senior Scientist JERRY R. SHEEHAN, Senior Program Officer ALAN INOUYE, Program Officer JON EISENBERG, Program Officer JANET BRISCOE, Administrative Associate NICCI DOWD, Project Assistant RITA GASKINS, Project Assistant DAVID PADGHAM, Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
--> COMMISSION ON PHYSICAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICS, AND APPLICATIONS PETER M. BANKS, ERIM International, Inc., Co-chair W. CARL LINEBERGER, University of Colorado, Co-chair WILLIAM BROWDER, Princeton University LAWRENCE D. BROWN, University of Pennsylvania MARSHALL H. COHEN, California Institute of Technology RONALD G. DOUGLAS, Texas A&M University JOHN E. ESTES, University of California at Santa Barbara JERRY P. GOLLUB, Haverford College MARTHA P. HAYNES, Cornell University JOHN L. HENNESSY, Stanford University CAROL M. JANTZEN, Westinghouse Savannah River Company PAUL G. KAMINSKI, Technovation, Inc. KENNETH H. KELLER, University of Minnesota MARGARET G. KIVELSON, University of California at Los Angeles DANIEL KLEPPNER, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JOHN R. KREICK, Sanders, a Lockheed Martin Company MARSHA I. LESTER, University of Pennsylvania M. ELISABETH PATÉ-CORNELL, Stanford University NICHOLAS P. SAMIOS, Brookhaven National Laboratory CHANG-LIN TIEN, University of California at Berkeley NORMAN METZGER, Executive Director

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
--> PREFACE Computing technology is widely touted as fast moving. Generations of products and their underlying electronics are introduced at intervals of 18 to 24 months, and the number and variety of computer- and communications-based goods and services are growing. Technology and industry experts believe that the double-digit rates of improvement experienced in the last couple of decades can be sustained for computer-based technologies over at least another decade if appropriate investments are made, but it is not clear what those investments should be and on what they depend. Similarly, there is little understanding of how to relate a seemingly strong and steady flow of new technology to the slower and more diffuse processes of assimilating new technology into the economy. As described in Evolving the High-Performance Computing and Communications Initiative to Support the Nation's Information Infrastructure, also known as the Brooks-Sutherland report,1 part of the reason for the tremendous advances in information technology since World War II has been the extraordinarily productive interplay of federally funded university research, federally and privately funded industrial research, and entrepreneurial companies founded and staffed by people who moved back and forth between universities and industry. To a degree that appears 1   Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB), National Research Council. 1995. Evolving the High Performance Computing and Communications Initiative to Support the Nation's Information Infrastructure. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
--> uncommon in all but a few other disciplines, there has been a mix of people and ideas that highlights the limitations of the linear model of innovation, which posits that innovation proceeds sequentially from laboratory research to product development to manufacturing and sales. The dynamic nature of the process is evidenced by the fact that many of today's leading computer technology firms did not exist 20 years ago; many innovative firms that did exist have failed as businesses, but their innovations have endured or become the bases for subsequent developments; many familiar products and businesses can be traced back to federally funded research, often conducted at universities; and the ebb and flow of individual firms is fueled by the movement of people among universities, government laboratories, and private companies. Understanding this interplay and the ways the private sector has leveraged publicly funded activities is important for sustaining success in this arena. Understanding the changes in these elements—such as downward pressures on research support in industry and government—and the potential implications of such change is important for directing federal research and development efforts. The Committee and Its Charge To better understand these issues, the National Science Foundation (NSF), along with the Association for Computing Machinery and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, asked the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) of the National Research Council to initiate a study of lessons to be learned from the history of innovation in computing and communications technology. The committee was charged to expand on the analysis in the Brooks-Sutherland report to understand the way federal research funding affects the economy and creates new industries. The study was to address questions such as the following: How did the U.S. computing and communications industries achieve developmental fertility? On what have they built, and on what does their continuation depend? What are the interactions among players in academia, government, and industry? What is special or unique about these players and interactions compared to other technologies? Where are the frictions—where have the interactions foundered, and why? How can success be calibrated? How often are there unexpected successes and how well are they tracked? What are notable instances of failure, what were the underlying factors, and what has been learned? How well can we assess causality, as opposed to associations?

OCR for page R1
--> What are the key lags, to what are they attributable, and how constant are they? How long does it take for an advance to show up as a commercial product—and how long does it take from commercial introduction to market acceptance? To conduct this study, CSTB assembled a committee of 13 members and one special advisor with experience in both computing and communications technology and relevant social sciences. Members included (1) individuals involved in developing key computer and communications technologies who had experience in academic research, government research and development, and industrial research, development, and commercialization and (2) economists, historians, sociologists, and others with insight into the history of technology and the analysis of economic impacts of technology. This was a project in which experience, judgment, and expert interpretation were needed to produce balanced presentations of events and formulation of lessons. The study was strengthened by involving social science experts in relevant forms of data gathering, analysis, and interpretation. The committee met six times between July 1996 and June 1998 to plan its course of action, meet with relevant experts, deliberate over its findings, draft its final report, and respond to reviewer comments. In order to combine a broad understanding of the major trends in computing and communications with more in-depth knowledge of particular fields and innovations, the committee took a two-pronged approach to the study. First, it examined the broad history of computing and communications, extending from early attempts to design and build computers in the post-World War II era to the present. The goal was not to document each innovation in computing and communications, but rather to identify the key trends in each historical era and identify the primary government activities that contributed to the industries' development. Data were gathered on federal and industrial funding levels for research and development in computing technology, as well as investments in research infrastructure and human resources. Second, the committee developed case studies of five specific areas: relational databases, the development of the Internet and the World Wide Web, theoretical computer science, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality. These areas were selected because of the expertise of individual committee members and because they were believed to represent a broad range of federal roles in the innovation process. The case studies were not intended to be exhaustive histories of the topics investigated, but rather to provide illustrative examples that could inform the committee's attempt to discern lessons regarding the role of federal research funding in computing. As a result, they differ significantly in length, structure, and tone.

OCR for page R1
--> Nevertheless, the committee derived overarching themes from seemingly discrete events regarding the relationship between public and private investment, the roles of federal research funding in stimulating innovation, and characteristics of effective government support for research. Additional information for the study was gathered through a series of interviews with key leaders in federal science and technology policy making and in computing research: Claude Barfield (American Enterprise Institute), Gordon Bell (formerly with the National Science Foundation), George Brown (U.S. House of Representatives), Mel Ciment (National Science Foundation), Fernando Corbato (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Tice DeYoung (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), Howard Frank (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), Juris Hartmanis (National Science Foundation), Charles Holland (Air Force Office of Scientific Research), Anita K. Jones (Department of Defense), John Lehmann (National Science Foundation), John Machado (Naval Electronic Systems Command), Steven Squires (Corporation for National Research Initiatives), John Toole (National Coordination Office for Computing, Information, and Communications), Bruce Waxman (University Research Foundation), Gilbert Weigand (Department of Energy), and Patrick Winston (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). These interviews provided considerable guidance on policy debates surrounding federal funding of research and served to inform the committee's evolving set of conclusions. The interviews revealed a broad consensus regarding the importance of the federal government in funding research in computing and communications. Regardless of their political affiliations and different roles in the research enterprise, the experts interviewed for this study confirmed the value of federal funding in computing research, especially federal support for university research. This report attempts to summarize, as concisely as possible, the main conclusions of the study while providing needed justification and support. As such, this report is not a comprehensive history of computing, nor is it a complete accounting of federal involvement in computing. Rather, it provides an overview of the innovation process in computing technology based on a select set of seemingly representative examples and buttressed by more comprehensive data. The lessons derived regarding the federal role in computing and communications will, it is hoped, provide relevant guidance for continued efforts in these fields. Acknowledgments This report represents the cumulative and cooperative efforts of many people. The study committee, itself a blend of technologists, historians, and social scientists, worked tirelessly to overcome differences in cultural

OCR for page R1
--> perspectives and predilections to form a more unified view of the history of computing and the government's role in supporting it. Committee members' contributions to the case studies and their deliberations formed the backbone of this project. Special thanks are due to David Mindell, assistant professor in the Science, Technology, and Society (STS) program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), who as a consultant to this project assisted in all aspects of its development—helping to define the study and its scope, participating in committee discussions, and drafting sections of the final document. Jed Gordon, an undergraduate in the STS program at MIT, played a key role in collecting and analyzing data on the contributions of various government organizations to computing research and in writing brief histories of specific federal research programs, such as Project Whirlwind and Project MAC. He also analyzed federal statistics on research funding in computing and educational support of computer science students. Hui Zeng, a graduate student in computer science at George Mason University, assisted in compiling and analyzing information about federal funding of computing research and development of human resources. Laura Ost, editor-consultant, helped to turn the original manuscript into a readable text. Beyond those directly affiliated with the project were many others who contributed valuable information to the report. Jennifer Sue Bond, John Jankowski, Margaret Machen, Ronald Meeks, and Raymond Wolf at NSF were instrumental in providing a wide range of data on federal and industrial support for computing and communications. John Lehmann at NSF opened his historical files to the committee, making available a wealth of information about NSF programs in computing and communications. David Gries at Cornell University provided historical data from the Taulbee surveys, tracking the growth of academic computer science activities. Francis Narin and Anthony Breitzman at CHI Research, Inc., generated special tabulations of patent and citation data in computing. John Warwick, a computer science student at Carnegie Mellon University, built a Web crawler to gather data on U.S. patents in artificial intelligence. Margaret Taylor of Carnegie Mellon University's Department of Engineering and Public Policy helped to design the search and to sort and analyze the data. The committee is also grateful to those who took time to meet with its members and provide relevant briefings: John Alic (then with the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies), Paul Ceruzzi (National Air and Space Museum), Kenneth Flamm (Brookings Institution), John Hennessy (Stanford University), Robert Kahn (Corporation for National Research Initiatives), Nils Nilsen (Stanford University), Paul Romer (Stanford University), Ivan Sutherland (Sun Microsystems, Inc.), and William Wulf (National Academy of Engineering). Their input pro-

OCR for page R1
-->     Common Pool Problems, Patent Races, and Potential Overinvestment in R&D   45     The Benefits of Public Support of Research   46     Direct Contributions to the Scientific Knowledge Base   47     Indirect Effects of Government-sponsored Research   49     Intellectual Assistance   49     Research as Training   50     Notes   51 3   Federal Support for Research Infrastructure   52     Federal Research Funding   53     Levels of Federal Support   53     Sources of Federal Support   55     Comparisons to Industrial Research Funding   59     Human Resources   62     Computer Facilities   71     University Computing Centers   73     Departmental Computing   74     High-performance Computing   76     Network Infrastructure   77     Effects of Federal Investments in Research Infrastructure   79     Conclusion   81     Notes   81 4   The Organization of Federal Support: A Historical Review   85     1945-1960: Era of Government Computers   86     The Government's Early Role   87     Establishment of Organizations   88     Military Research Offices   88     National Bureau of Standards   89     Atomic Energy Commission   90     Private Organizations   91     Observations   95     1960-1970: Supporting a Continuing Revolution   96     Maturing of a Commercial Industry   96     The Changing Federal Role   98     The Advanced Research Projects Agency   98     ARPA and Information Technology   99     ARPA's Management Style   101     National Science Foundation   105     1970-1990: Retrenching and International Competition   107

OCR for page R1
-->     Computer Science, Computer Technology   107     The Changing Political Context   111     Science and Politics in the 1970s: A Changed Climate   111     Policy for the 1980s: Industrial Research and Competitiveness   112     Changes in the Organization of Federal Research Support   113     Changes at ARPA   113     Very Large Scale Integrated Circuits   115     Strategic Computing Initiative   122     Making a Science, Funding a Science: The NSF in the 1970s and 1980s   124     Other Federal Agencies in the 1970s and 1980s   126     SEMATECH   129     High-performance Computing   130     1990 and Beyond   132     Notes   134 5   Lessons from History   136     The Benefits of Federal Research Investments   137     Providing the Technology Base for Growing Industries   138     Maintaining University Research Capabilities   139     Creating Human Resources   140     Accomplishing Federal Missions   141     Characteristics of Effective Federal Support   142     Support for Long-range, Fundamental Research   142     Support for Efforts to Build Large Systems   145     Building on Industrial Research   146     Diverse Sources of Government Support   147     Strong Program Managers and Flexible Management Structures   150     Industry-University Collaboration   152     Organizational Innovation and Adaptation   153     Concluding Remarks   155     Notes   155 Part II: Case Studies in Computing Research   157 6   The Rise of Relational Databases   159     Background   160     Emergence of Computerized Databases   160     Early Efforts at Standardization   161     Emergence of the Relational Model   162     Codd's Vision   162

OCR for page R1
-->     System R   163     Ingres   164     Diffusion and Commercialization of Relational Databases   165     Lessons from History   167     Notes   168 7   Development of the Internet and the World Wide Web   169     Early Steps: 1960-1970   170     Expansion of the ARPANET: 1970-1980   173     From ARPANET to Internet   174     Local Area Networks   174     Integrated Networking   176     Standards and Management   176     Closing the Decade   177     The NSFNET Years: 1980-1990   177     Emergence of the Web: 1990 to the Present   179     Lessons from History   181     Notes   182 8   Theoretical Research: Intangible Cornerstone of Computer Science   184     Machine Models: State Machines   186     Computational Complexity   189     Verifying Program Correctness   191     Cryptography   193     Lessons from History   196     Notes   197 9   Developments in Artificial Intelligence   198     The Private Sector Launches the Field   199     The Government Steps In   201     DARPA's Pivotal Role   204     Success in Speech Recognition   205     Shift to Applied Research Increases Investment   209     Artificial Intelligence in the 1990s   216     Lessons from History   221     Notes   222 10   Virtual Reality Comes of Age   226     Launching the Graphics and Virtual Reality Revolution   228     Seeding the Academic Talent Pool   229

OCR for page R1
-->     Virtual Reality in the Private Sector: Approach with Caution   233     Synergy Launches the Quest for the ''Holy Grail''   235     Graphics Hardware: RISC Technology   238     Biomedical Applications   240     Virtual Reality and Entertainment: Toward a Commercial Industry   242     The Right Mix: Virtual Reality in the 1990s   244     Lessons from History   247     Notes   248 Bibliography   250 Appendix: Committee Biographies   267

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
--> BOXES, FIGURES, AND TABLES BOXES ES.1   Why a Historical Approach?   3 ES.2   Case Studies of Innovation in Computing   6 1.1   Drawing Conclusions from Case Studies   19 1.2   Analogy in Technological Innovation   22 1.3   Early Industrial Efforts in Computing   29 4.1   Project Whirlwind and SAGE   92 4.2   Project MAC and Computer Time-sharing   103 4.3   Roots of the Personal Computer   109 4.4   Accomplishments of DARPA's Very Large Scale Integrated Circuit Program   119 4.5   Computer Engineering at the National Science Foundation   125 8.1   The Formal Verification Process   192 8.2   Rivest-Shamir-Adleman Cryptography   195 9.1   The Development and Influence of LISP   202 9.2   Dragon Systems Profits from Success in Speech Recognition   208 9.3   Pioneering Expert Systems   210 9.4   DARPA's Current Artificial Intelligence Program   219 10.1   What Is Virtual Reality?   227 10.2   Community Building   230 10.3   The Rise and Fall of Atari   233 10.4   Real3D Emerges from Military-Commercial Linkage   245

OCR for page R1
--> FIGURES ES.1   Federal and industry funding for computing research, 1977-1996   4 1.1   Illustrations of the role of government-sponsored computing research and development   20 3.1   Federal funding for research in computer science, 1976-1995   54 3.2   Federal funding for research in electrical engineering, 1971-1995   55 3.3   Federal funding for scientific research, 1974-1995   56 3.4   Federal funding for research in computer science by agency, 1976-1995   57 3.5   Federal funding for research in electrical engineering by agency, 1972-1995   57 3.6   Federal funding for basic research in computer science by agency, 1976-1995   58 3.7   Federal funding for basic research in electrical engineering by agency, 1972-1995   59 3.8   Federal and industrial funding for computing research, 1977-1996   60 3.9   R&D intensity in computer-related industries, 1975-1996   63 3.10   Bachelor's degrees awarded by field, 1966-1995   65 3.11   Master's degrees awarded by field, 1966-1995   66 3.12   Doctoral degrees awarded by field, 1966-1995   67 3.13   Federal funding for university research in computer science, 1976-1995   69 3.14   Federal funding for university research in electrical engineering, 1975-1995   69 3.15   Portion of university research funding provided by the federal government, 1973-1995   70 3.16   Computer science and electrical engineering graduate students supported by the federal government, 1985-1996   71 3.17   Expenditures for research equipment in computer science, 1981-1995   74 3.18   Expenditures for research equipment in electrical engineering, 1981-1995   75 8.1   Simplified state diagram for supervising a telephone line   187 9.1   Artificial-intelligence-related patents awarded per year, 1976-1996   217 9.2   Ph.D. dissertations submitted annually in artificial intelligence and related fields, 1956-1995   220 9.3   Number of Ph.D. dissertations submitted annually in AI and related fields and in computer science, 1956-1995   221

OCR for page R1
--> TABLES 1.1   Worldwide Deployment of Computers in 1995   24 1.2   Sales and Employment in the Information Technology Industry, 1996   25 1.3   Historical Improvement in Microprocessors and Memories   26 3.1   Funding for Industrial R&D and Research in Office and Computing Equipment, 1975-1979   61 3.2   Funding for Industrial R&D and Research in Communications Equipment, 1965-1990   62 3.3   Employment, by Sector, for New Ph.D. Recipients in Computer Science and Engineering, 1970-1995   68 3.4   University Expenditures for Computing Equipment, Maintenance, and Operations (in millions of dollars), 1988   72 3.5   National Science Foundation Obligations for Institutional Computing Services (in thousands of dollars)   73 3.6   National Science Foundation Expenditures on the Coordinated Experimental Research and Computing Research Equipment Programs (in millions of dollars), 1977-1985   76 3.7   Authorship and Source of Financial Support for Computer-related Papers Cited in U.S. Patents Granted in 1993-1994   80 4.1   Computing and Related Equipment as a Share of the National Economy   111 4.2   Representative VLSI Technologies and Resulting Commercial Products   118 4.3   Growth in the National Science Foundation's Computer and Information Sciences and Engineering Directorate Budget (millions of dollars), 1987-1996   127 9.1   Total Federal Funding for Artificial Intelligence Research (in millions of dollars), 1984-1988   215 9.2   Federal Funding for Basic Research in Artificial Intelligence by Agency (in millions of dollars), 1984-1988   215 9.3   Federal Funding for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence by Agency (in millions of dollars), 1984-1988   215 9.4   Leading Holders of Patents Related to Artificial Intelligence, 1976-1997   218 10.1   Select Alumni of the University of Utah's Computer Graphics Program   231

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.