Catalyzing Inquiry at the Interface of Computing and Biology
John C. Wooley and Herbert S. Lin, editors
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
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 Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency under Contract No. MDA972-00-1-0005, the National Science Foundation under Contract No. DBI-0094528, the Department of Health and Human Services/National Institutes of Health (including the National Institute of General Medical Sciences and the National Center for Research Resources) under Contract No. N01-OD-4-2139, the Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-FG02-02ER63336, the Department of Energy’s Office of Science (BER) under Interagency Agreement No. DE-FG02-04ER63934, and National Research Council funds. 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 0-309-09612-X
Library of Congress Control Number: 2005936580
Cover designed by Jennifer M. Bishop.
This report is available from
Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
National Research Council
500 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Additional copies of this report are available from the
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2005 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
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.
COMMITTEE ON FRONTIERS AT THE INTERFACE OF COMPUTING AND BIOLOGY
JOHN C. WOOLEY,
University of California at San Diego,
ADAM P. ARKIN,
University of California at Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Microsoft Research Labs
ROBERT M. CORN,
University of California at Irvine
University of Washington
University of British Columbia
MARK H. ELLISMAN,
University of California at San Diego
MARCUS W. FELDMAN,
DAVID K. GIFFORD,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Carnegie Mellon University
STEPHEN S. LADERMAN,
JAMES S. SCHWABER,
Thomas Jefferson Medical College
Herbert Lin, Senior Scientist and Study Director
Geoff Cohen, Consultant to CSTB
Mitchell Waldrop, Consultant to CSTB
Daehee Hwang, Consultant to Board on Biology
Robin Schoen, Senior Staff Officer
Elizabeth Grossman, Senior Staff Officer (through March 2001)
Jennifer Bishop, Program Associate
D.C. Drake, Senior Program Assistant (through March 2003)
COMPUTER SCIENCE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS BOARD
Benhamou Global Ventures, LLC
DAVID D. CLARK,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
CSTB Chair Emeritus
MARK E. DEAN,
IBM Almaden Research Center
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, Berkeley
RANDY H. KATZ,
University of California, Berkeley
WENDY A. KELLOGG,
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Carnegie Mellon University
BUTLER W. LAMPSON,
CSTB Member Emeritus
TERESA H. MENG,
TOM M. MITCHELL,
Carnegie Mellon University
GCI Cable and Entertainment
FRED B. SCHNEIDER,
ANDREW J. VITERBI,
Viterbi Group, LLC
JEANNETTE M. WING,
Carnegie Mellon University
RICHARD ROWBERG, Acting Director
KRISTEN BATCH, Research Associate
JENNIFER M. BISHOP, Program Associate
JANET BRISCOE, Manager, Program Operations
JON EISENBERG, Senior Program Officer and Associate Director
RENEE HAWKINS, Financial Associate
MARGARET MARSH HUYNH, Senior Program Assistant
HERBERT S. LIN, Senior Scientist
LYNETTE I. MILLETT, Senior Program Officer
JANICE SABUDA, Senior Program Assistant
GLORIA WESTBROOK, Senior Program Assistant
BRANDYE WILLIAMS, Staff Assistant
For more information on CSTB, see its Web site at http://www.cstb.org, write to CSTB, National Research Council, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20001, or call (202) 334-2605, or e-mail the CSTB at firstname.lastname@example.org.
In the last decade of the 20th century, computer science and biology both emerged as fields capable of remarkable and rapid change. Moreover, they evolved as fields of inquiry in ways that draw attention to their areas of intersection. The continuing advancements in technology and the pace of scientific research present the means for computing to help answer fundamental questions in the biological sciences and for biology to demonstrate that new approaches to computing are possible.
Advances in the power and ease of use of computing and communications systems have fueled computational biology (e.g., genomics) and bioinformatics (e.g., database development and analysis). Modeling and simulation of biological entities such as cells have joined biologists and computer scientists (and mathematicians, physicists, and statisticians too) to work together on activities from pharmaceutical design to environmental analysis.
On the other side, computer scientists have pondered the significance of biology for their field. For example, computer scientists have explored the use of DNA as a substrate for new computing hardware and the use of biological approaches in solving hard computing problems. Exploration of biological computation suggests a potential for insight into the nature of and alternative processes for computation, and it also gives rise to questions about hybrid systems that achieve some kind of synergy of biological and computational systems. And there is also the fact that biological systems exhibit characteristics such as adaptability, self-healing, evolution, and learning that would be desirable in the information technologies that humans use.
Making the most of the research opportunities at the interface of computing and biology—what we are calling the BioComp interface—requires illuminating what they are and effectively engaging people from both computing and biology. As in other contexts, the challenges of interdisciplinary education and of collaboration are significant, and each will require attention, together with substantive work from both policy makers and researchers. At the start of the 1990s, attempts were made to stimulate mutual interest and collaboration among young researchers in computing and biology. Those early efforts yielded nontrivial successes, but in retrospect represented a Version 1.0 prototype for the potential in bringing the two fields together. Circumstances today seem much more favorable for progress. New research teams and training programs have been formed as individual investigators from the respective communities, government agencies, and private foundations have become increasingly engaged. Similarly, some larger groups of investigators from different backgrounds have been able to
obtain funding to work together to address cross-disciplinary research problems. It is against this background that the committee sees a Version 2.0 of the BioComp interface emerging that will yield unprecedented progress and advance.
The range of possible activities at the BioComp interface is broad, and accordingly so is the range of interested agencies, which include the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy (DOE), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). These agencies have, to varying degrees, recognized that truly cross-disciplinary work would build on both computing and biology, and they have sought to advance activities at the interface.
This report by the Committee on Frontiers at the Interface of Computing and Biology seeks to establish the intellectual legitimacy of a fundamentally cross-disciplinary collaboration between biologists and computer scientists. That is, while some universities are increasingly favorable to research at the intersection, life science researchers at other universities are strongly impeded in their efforts to collaborate. This report addresses these impediments and describes some strategies for overcoming them.
In addition, this report provides a wealth of well-documented examples. As a rule, these examples have generally been selected to illustrate the breadth of the topic in question, rather than to identify the most important areas of activity. That is, the appropriate spirit in which to view these examples is “let a thousand flowers bloom,” rather than one of “finding the prettiest flowers.” It is hoped that these examples will encourage students in the life sciences to start or to continue study in computer science that will enable them to be more effective users of computing in their future biological studies. In the opposite direction, the report seeks to describe a rich and diverse domain—biology—within which computer scientists can find worthy problems that challenge current knowledge in computing. It is hoped that this awareness will motivate interested computer scientists to learn about biological phenomena, data, experimentation, and the like—so that they can engage biologists more effectively.
To gather information on such a broad area, the committee took input from a wide variety of sources. The committee convened two workshops in March 2001 and May 2001, and committee members or staff attended relevant workshops sponsored by other groups. The committee mined the published literature extensively. It solicited input from other scientists known to be active in BioComp research. An early draft of the report was examined by a number of reviewers far larger than usual for National Research Council (NRC) reports, and the draft was modified in accordance with their extensive input, which helped the committee to sharpen its message and strengthen its presentation.
The result of these efforts is the first comprehensive NRC study that suggests a high-level intellectual structure for federal agencies for supporting work at the BioComp interface. Although workshop reports have been supported by individual agencies on the subject of computing applied to various aspects of biological inquiry, the NRC has not until now undertaken a study whose intent was to be inclusive.
Within the NRC, the lead unit on this project was the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB), and Marjory Blumenthal and Elizabeth Grossman launched the project. The committee also acknowledges with gratitude the contribution of the Board on Biology—Robin Schoen continued work on the project after Elizabeth Grossman’s departure. Geoff Cohen and Mitch Waldrop, consultants to CSTB, made major substantive contributions to this report. A variety of project assistants, including D.C. Drake, Jennifer Bishop, Gloria Westbrook, and Margaret Huynh, provided research and administrative support. Finally, grateful thanks are offered to DARPA, NIH, NSF, and DOE for their financial support for this project as well as their patience in awaiting the final report. No single agency can respond to the challenges and opportunities at the interface, and the committee hopes that its analysis will facilitate agency efforts to define their own priorities, set their own path, and participate in what will be a continuing adventure along the frontier at this exciting and promising interface, which will continue to develop throughout the 21st century.
A Personal Note from the Chair
The committee found the scope of the study and the need to achieve an adequate level of balance in both directions around the BioComp interface to be a challenge. This challenge, I hope, has been met, but this was only possible due to the recruitment of an outstanding physicist turned computer science policy expert from the NRC. Specifically, after the original series of meetings, Herb Lin from the CSTB side of the NRC joined the effort, and most notably, followed up on the committee’s earlier analyses by interviewing numerous individuals engaged in both biocomputing (applications of biology to computing) and computational biology (applications of computing to biology). This was invaluable, as was Herb’s never ending enthusiasm, insight into the nature of the interdisciplinary discussions that are growing, and his willingness to engage in learning a lot about biology. The report could never have been completed without his persistence. His expertise in editing and analytical treatment of policy and technical material allowed us to sustain a broad vision. (Even with the length and breadth of this study, we were able to cover only selected areas at the interface.) The committee’s efforts were sustained and accelerated by Herb’s determination that we stay the course despite the size of the task, and by his insightful comments, criticisms, and suggestions on every aspect of the study and the report.
John Wooley, Chair
Committee on Frontiers at the Interface of Computing and Biology
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
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 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:
Harold Abelson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Eric Benhamou, Benhamou Global Ventures, LLC,
Mina Bissell, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,
Gaetano Borriello, University of Washington,
Dennis Bray, University of Cambridge,
Steve Burbeck, IBM,
Andrea Califano, Columbia University,
Charles Cantor, Boston University,
David D. Clark, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
G. Bard Ermentrout, University of Pittsburgh,
Lisa Fauci, Tulane University,
David Galas, Keck Graduate Institute,
Leon Glass, McGill University,
Mark D. Hill, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
Tony Hunter, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies,
Sara Kiesler, Carnegie Mellon University,
Isaac Kohane, Children’s Hospital,
Nancy Kopell, Boston University,
Bud Mishra, New York University,
William Noble, University of Washington,
Alan S. Perelson, Los Alamos National Laboratory,
Robert J. Robbins, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center,
Lee Segel, The Weizmann Institute of Science,
Larry L. Smarr, University of California, San Diego,
Sylvia Spengler, National Science Foundation,
William Stead, Vanderbilt University,
Suresh Subramani, University of California, San Diego,
Charles Taylor, University of California, Los Angeles, and
Andrew J. Viterbi, Viterbi Group, LLC.
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 Russ Altman, Stanford University. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was 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.