International = Collaboration in Computer Science and Engineering

Ronald A. Cole
University of Colorado at = Boulder

José Fortes
Purdue University =

Table of = Contents

Executive Summary
The Changing Landscape
Benefits of International Collaboration
Barriers to International Collaboration
Worskhop Participants

Executive = Summary

This report documents our conclusion that international collaboration = in science and technology is a fundamental paradigm for advancing = knowledge and solving global problems. It urges the United States to = take a leadership role in advancing international collaboration, and = presents new models to achieve this mission.

In the United States, the Administration and Congress clearly support = international collaboration in science and technology. International = collaboration is viewed as a good way to leverage U.S. investment in = science and technology, to position U.S. industry to capitalize on = research breakthroughs, and to train U.S. researchers to collaborate = with foreign colleagues to solve global problems. Further, the free = exchange of ideas is viewed as a positive force for democratic = change.

A clear and visionary plan of action regarding international = collaboration in science and technology can be an essential component of = national policy to address physical issues (e.g., global warming) and = socio-political issues (e.g., economic liberalization, drug trafficking, = rising standards of living around the world, increase of democratic = governments). International collaboration in computer science and = engineering must be an essential component of this plan.

Advances in computer science and engineering, more than any other = discipline, are responsible for the internationalization of science. = Advances in these areas have created a global information network that = supports distributed computing and collaboration. Future advances will = reduce or eliminate remaining barriers to collaboration due to time, = space and language, and support a global scientific enterprise. Quite = simply, the disciplines of computer science and engineering are central = to international collaboration. They are creating and advancing the = essential infrastructure that is used to conduct the business of = science.

In October 1997, scientists in areas of computer science and = engineering participated in a workshop on international collaboration = sponsored by the National Science Foundation. The goals of the workshop = were to: a) understand the benefits and barriers to international = collaboration; b) examine current policies and programs; and, c) propose = new means to increase transnational research and realize greater = benefits for the U.S. and participating countries from such = activities.

The participants concluded that the benefits of international = collaboration justify extraordinary efforts to increase and sustain = international research projects. The main benefits of these projects = are: (a) the creation of new knowledge and technologies; and, (b) their = application to global problems that threaten health, peace and = prosperity. The main barriers to international collaboration are the = lack of coherent and consistent policies and plans to promote and = support such activities. The report reviews the historical context that = produced current policies. This is so current policies' motivations can = be contrasted easily with the barriers they pose to international = collaboration.

The report concludes that the U.S. must take a leadership position in = creating mechanisms for international collaboration in science and = technology. This would be a significant step toward achieving many = national goals. Specifically it would contribute to: a) developing a = more secure, healthier, wealthier (prosperity depends on clean air and = water, economically viable neighbors), and better-educated citizenry; b) = advancing scientific knowledge; and c) finding solutions to global = problems.

The United States has one key agency that is well positioned to lead = this effort. It is the National Science Foundation. We conclude that the = computer science and engineering community should be challenged to work = with the NSF, and to form bridges from it to other agencies, to create = programs leading to increased international cooperation on science and = technology projects.

The report proposes several models to stimulate and sustain = international cooperation in science and technology, namely:

International Science Foundation
The research community and NSF and should establish an International = Science Foundation with participation by all nations. The new = institution should have as its main goal advancing knowledge and = developing technologies to solve global problems. A single organization = with this mission can help remove many of the current barriers to = international collaboration inherent in bilateral relationships, and = develop standard procedures to initiate and sustain multinational = projects.

New Computer Science Division for International = Collaboration
The National Science Foundation should establish a new division within = the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering = (CISE) to support international collaboration. This would underscore a = new national commitment to a world-orientation in building computer and = intellectual infrastructure. Substantial budgetary resources should = accompany the new division. Plans should ensure a focus on significant = international goals where achievements are possible due to advances in = computer networking. [A new CISE directorate is the appropriate = administrative step because computer science plays an essential role in = developing the infrastructure and tools that support the global = scientific enterprise.]

International Super Centers
International Super Centers should be formed to solve specific global = problems. These would be virtual collaboratives focused on physical = centers of excellence. Associates would use high bandwidth networks to = communicate. New technology will be in place here to enable the worlds = best scientists and engineers to work together to solve global problems. = [Developing them will provide computer scientists and engineers an = invaluable testbed for design and test of distributed networks; = distributed computing; and, collaboration technologies.]

Develop Next Generation Infrastructure and Tools
Fund explorations to advance the tools and infrastructure for = international collaboration. [International projects provide the best = possible environment for computer scientists to propose and evaluate = advances in distributed computing, communication and collaboration.]

Expand Existing Programs in Latin America and Elsewhere
Increase the amounts for, and durations of, collaborative research = projects. In developing and economically depressed countries, the U.S. = should subsidize joint research projects. [We include a general = conclusion that investment in international collaboration is the best = form of foreign aid.] Move current NSF funding for joint research = projects from modest levels [designed to stimulate initiation of = collaborative research projects in new areas] to more substantial = efforts. To attract the best researchers in the U.S. and other nations = these programs must include follow-on funding with a joint review scheme = to sift out the most successful projects.


The radical changes in information and communication technologies = sweeping the globe during the past decade are having a profound effect = on the way people learn about and interact with the world, on the way = business is conducted, and the way scientists and engineers do research. = We are moving in rapid steps toward an age of a single, global economy = and a single, global scientific enterprise.

Although professional and national competition is as vital as ever, = cooperation and shared goals are gaining increasing importance. Evidence = shows that international scientific collaboration leverages national = investment, and can produce great benefits. International efforts to = protect ecosystems and the natural environment recognize and underscore = the importance of setting objectives higher than individual gain in = order to provide for societal gains. This spirit of international = cooperation is reflected in common market efforts, trade agreements, = international recognition of intellectual property rights, and = international efforts at educational reform.

The Administration has emphasized the importance of international = collaboration in recent policy statements. In his address to the United = Nations on October 12, 1998, Vice President Gore proposed five new = challenges in a "Declaration of Interdependence". He challenged the = world community to:

Today, we can only glimpse the changes that advances in information = and communication technologies will bring. But as scientists who are = involved in the development of these technologies, we need to look ahead = and begin to create frameworks that will be successful in guiding and = managing these changes, and harnessing their potential to advance = science to meet global objectives as we enter the next millennium.

While the United States maintains a leadership position in many areas = of information and communication technologies, federal agencies = supporting computer science and engineering research have been slow to = consider and implement new policies to support international = collaboration. Given the global changes in communication, commerce and = collaboration driven by the growth of the Internet, now is an excellent = time to consider whether new policies are necessary, and if so, what = issues an integrated, comprehensive policy must address.

As a start toward understanding the internationalization of science = and technology, and specifically of research on computer, communication = and information science and engineering, the NSF funded a Workshop on = International Collaboration in Computer Science (WICCS =9297). The goal = of the workshop organizers and participants was to arrive at a deeper = understanding of the benefits of international collaboration, the costs = and risks associated with these activities, and to recommend ways to = increase opportunities and optimize future benefits.

The workshop was held October 9-11 1997 in Stevenson Washington near = Portland Oregon. It brought together recognized leaders and visionary = young investigators. All participants were strongly interested in = contributing to international scientific cooperation. The workshop = agenda and the list of participants can be viewed at http:/ = . The wide-ranging = discussions at the workshop mainly focussed on these issues:

This report summarizes the main insights and recommendations of the = workshop. It also responds to recent developments subsequent to the = workshop including new international initiatives, and recent activities = of the U.S. Congress and White House. The report also includes many = beneficial contributions by members of the research community who did = not attend the workshop.

The main conclusion of this report is that international = collaboration in computer science is vital to our national interest. = This is so because international participation is required for solutions = to global problems that threaten our welfare and security. Indeed some = global problems could even impact the long-term survival of = humanity.

Moreover, computer and information science and engineering provide = infrastructure necessary to conduct the business of science. Today the = essence of harnessing diverse international talent is computing and = communications. Therefore the report recommends that the CISE community = be challenged and given means to take leadership in promoting = international collaboration in computer science and engineering. = International CISE collaboration must include sufficient investigators = to positively address those global problems whose solutions depend on = advanced CISE technologies.

Progress toward these goals can be materially advanced by NSF = activity. For example, a programmatic assertion that international CISE = collaboration is of highest priority would be very significant. = Similarly, the process of supporting international interaction would = benefit greatly from definite standards, new research funding = initiatives, and significant programs at the level of major NSF = divisions. These should be focused on CISE topics, and oriented to = stimulating and supporting international collaborative CISE = research.

The remainder of this report is organized as follows. In the next = section, we briefly review the changing landscape of U.S policy = regarding international collaboration in science and technology, and the = nature of the NSF=92s participation in support of international = collaboration in CISE. In the following two sections, we explore the = many benefits of international collaboration in CISE, as well as the = barriers to international collaborations. In the final section, we = submit a set of recommendations for increasing and optimizing = international collaboration, while overcoming some current barriers to = such activity.


The Changing Landscape

The Cold War Agenda

Until quite recently, = science and technology policy in the United States was driven by = national security needs. The critical role of science and technology in = winning World War II underscored the importance of national investment = in science and technology. In a 1993 report, the House Committee on = Science provides this summary:

World War II dramatically altered the relationship between = science, engineering, and the government. The atomic bomb, radar, nylon, = penicillin, electronic computers, and a host of other products = demonstrated the power of fundamental research when combined with = engineering skills. Americans emerged from the war with a wholly new = appreciation of the research enterprise and of the products it could = generate.

This new appreciation was focused and elaborated in Vannevar Bush's = 1945 report Science, the Endless Frontier. Bush, who was head of = the federal Office of Scientific Research and Development during the = war, argued that new knowledge generated by basic scientific research = was essential to the national defense, the war against diseases, and the = creation of new products, new industries, and new jobs. Traditional = patronage of basic science=97primarily from philanthropies and other = private sources=97was no longer sufficient; only the federal government = had the resources and the broad public mandate to take full advantage of = the promise offered by science [1].

During the cold war years, the U.S. research agenda in most areas = of CISE was heavily influenced by DARPA, and reflected the needs of the = defense establishment. Until quite recently, DARPA was the only federal = agency with sufficient resources to support large multi-site programs in = computer science with ambitious, long-term goals. These programs have = provided both a stimulus and a model for programs in other countries. = For example, in the areas of speech and natural language, DARPA = sponsored programs in which research results were evaluated in = international competitions run by NIST. These competitions engaged = international research communities in common research and system = development efforts. The net result of this implicit form of = collaboration is an amplification of the national effort to achieve = world-relevant scientific U.S. goals.


The = end of the Cold War had dramatic effects on our nation=92s international = science and technology policy. In a 1995 report submitted by the = President to Congress [2], a new = agenda was proposed for international collaboration in science and = technology. The new agenda was based on five tenets: (a) promoting the = spread of democracy worldwide; (b) promoting and maintaining peace; (c) = promoting economic growth and sustainable development; (d) solving = global problems; and (e) providing humanitarian assistance.

In 1997, the Speaker of the House of Representatives charged the = House Committee on Science to develop a new science and technology = policy for the U.S. The letter included the following motivation for = this task:

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the de facto end of the = Cold War, the Vannevar Bush approach is no longer valid. Appealing to = national pride in the sense that "Our science is better than your = science" is no longer meaningful to the American public. The needs of = our military mission today are far different, and the competitions we = are engaged in now are less military and largely economic. Science today = is an international enterprise, and we must assume a leadership role in = guiding international science policy. [3] =

In the Congressional Hearings that followed in March of 1998, = Congressman Vernon Ehlers noted the importance of international = collaboration in his opening statement [4]:

"While the United States still leads the world in the largest number = of research disciplines, the growth of modern communications = technologies, coupled with the existence of cutting-edge scientific = research programs in foreign countries, has made it both possible and = scientifically useful for the United States to leverage our own = investments in research with those taking place in foreign nations. Not = only does this allow U.S. researchers access to unique research, it = allows them to reap the full benefits of that research at a fraction of = the cost of performing the research ourselves. International = collaborations also help build positive, sustainable relations with = other nations based upon mutual self-interest. Even more importantly to = the United States, we are perfectly positioned to take advantage of the = new knowledge we gain through international collaborations with foreign = researchers because we have the most fertile innovation environment in = the world."

Recent Events and Current = Trends

In Computer Science = and Engineering, the vast majority of international collaboration occurs = at the level of individual investigators, or through collaborative = relationships between research laboratories or academic institutions. = The NSF's Division of International Programs (INT) coordinates = international programs for graduate students, postdoctoral and junior = investigators; joint research projects for more senior scientists and = engineers; and supports planning visits and international workshops. In = many cooperative research projects INT works with other NSF research = divisions to support internationalization of projects supported by those = divisions.

The NSF's INT division provides a vital role in stimulating and = supporting international collaboration in computer science. The focus is = on exploring collaborative opportunities through workshops and visits, = and supporting initial collaborative partnerships for several years at = the level of an individual investigator grant. INT's goal is to = stimulate international collaboration, and to fund new cooperative = projects for a period of two or three years. Activities supported by INT = require direct cooperation between U.S. scientists and foreign = scientists and their respective institutions, and cost sharing by each = side. The exact requirements of joint research projects depend upon the = bilateral agreements between the U.S and its partner countries.

In the past two years, the NSF=92s funding of computer science = related research has increased dramatically, with major initiatives such = as the $68 million Knowledge and Distributed Information initiative. For = the first time, the NSF funding of computer science and engineering = research exceeded funding by DARPA. Moreover, the NSF has sponsored an = increasing number of programs encouraging interdisciplinary efforts, = multiple institutions, and technology transfer from laboratories to = classrooms. These new programs reflect changing national priorities, and = the growing realization that advances in computer science and = engineering are vital to our national interest. These new initiatives = and programs have not included an international component.

The United States and European Union (EU) are currently working = together through joint efforts to support international collaboration in = digital libraries and multilingual information management. Both the U.S. = and EU support substantial research efforts in these areas, and are = seeking to accelerate progress by leveraging on existing work and the = many benefits of international collaboration.

In the area of Digital libraries (DL), both the U.S. and EU support = substantial research efforts. Although the digital libraries they are = creating are inherently international, by and large, scientists involved = in the U.S. and EU DL projects have not had the opportunity to work = together. To meet this challenge for an international DL research = agenda, the Special Programs Division of the National Science Foundation = and the EU have established five working groups in key technical = infrastructure areas of digital libraries. The five working groups have = each met over the last two years and are finalizing a white paper with = recommendations. A summary of this program can be found at

Multilingual information management represents a second major area in = which efforts are underway to promote collaboration between the U.S. and = EU. A new study, funded by the National Science Foundation and supported = by DG-13, focuses on the various technologies required for multilingual = information management in general, encompassing machine translation, = information retrieval, language resources, information extraction, text = summarization, evaluation, multimedia work, speech processing, and = language and speaker identification. The aim of this study is to review = the historical development of each of these areas in order to illustrate = the capabilities and limitations of current approaches, and to identify = the research advances needed to handle multilingual processing. The = results of this working group are available as a report at This study also provides important input to the Digital = Library program; indeed, several individuals are participating in both = the DL multilingual working group and the multilingual information = management study.

It is clear that there is great interest in international = collaboration in computer science by members of the U.S. and EU research = communities in digital libraries and multilingual information = management. These activities have culminated in an agreement between the = United States and the European Union to support collaboration in = multilingual language technologies.

New initiatives are also underway between the U.S. and Latin America. = International workshops in Brazil and Mexico, sponsored in part by the = NSF, have led to joint initiatives to support international = collaboration in all areas of computer science. A joint NSF/CONACyT = program with Mexico has helped support a dramatic increase in support of = computer science research in Mexico, and has resulted in notable success = stories resulting from joint research funded through this initiative. = International collaboration between the U.S and Brazil is now supported = through a joint NSF/CNPq initiative, which provides up to $200k of = support for U.S. researchers to collaborate on joint projects of up to = three years duration with their Brazilian colleagues.

The NSF has joined other nations in funding the interconnection of = their networks, as exemplified by TransPAC and = Startap. = TransPAC provides high performance international Internet service = connecting the Asia Pacific Advanced Network to the vBNS and other = global networks for international collaborations in research and = education. It is funded by the National Science Foundation and the Japan = Science and Technology Agency. The NSF CISE Networking and = Communications Research and Infrastructure (NCRI) division funded STAR = TAP, the Chicago Science, Technology And Research Transit Access Point, = a persistent infrastructure to facilitate the long-term interconnection = and interoperability of advanced international networking in support of = applications, performance measuring, and technology evaluations. STARTAP = is already linked to fast research networks in Canada, Northern Europe, = TransPAC (i.e. Japan, Singapore, Taiwan) and Russia. The number of = interconnected countries is expected to continue to increase at a fast = rate.

The Opportunity

The White House and = Congress have identified international collaboration in science and = technology as a national priority. The research community, through this = report and other efforts, has an exciting opportunity to help identify = new opportunities and models for international collaboration.

Benefits of International Collaboration

This section concludes that there is a compelling case for making = international collaboration in CISE a national and international = priority.

Solving Global Problems

As the dominant = species on this planet, it is our responsibility to support biological = well being (ourselves and other creatures), protect future generations = and foster global health and prosperity. Threats to our health, = prosperity and future include: terrorism; drug-trafficking and abuse; = compromises of computing infrastructure integrity and security; = international monetary instability; spread of AIDS and other diseases; = poverty and starvation; natural resource depletion; environmental = pollution; bio-diversity losses; global warming; and natural disasters. = Each of the above ultimately impact everyone, and are therefore global = problems.

The scientific community plays an essential role in solving global = problems because its work leads to understanding their causes, and the = ability to evaluate potential solutions. Such work consists of defining = the problem space, collecting and analyzing data, and proposing and = testing solutions. The best progress in this work requires scientists = from many nations: global problems require global solutions, and global = solutions require global participation.

Climate change is an example of a global problem that requiring = widespread participation. The consequences of even small increases in = global warming -- fewer than five degrees Centigrade -- are losses of = life and property.

It is well recognized that global initiatives are necessary to deal = with all facets of this problem. There are a significant number of = international collaboration efforts already under way in the area of = Remote Sensing and Earth Observation [5]. According to Wagner=92s report [5], there are a total of 490 international = agreements involving 76 countries and six multinational organizations. = However, none the 15 subjects addressed by these collaborations are in = CISE disciplines, despite the fact that most of these projects use or = could benefit from using CISE technologies.

The applicability of CISE research to monitoring and managing global = weather follows from the need to collect, process, understand, predict = and evaluate (enormous amounts of) information at large numbers of world = sites where unique resources (people, laboratories, sensors, computers, = actuators, etc.) are located. The following lists ten sample areas of = CISE research essential to world weather and other global tasks:

  1. World-level networking. Size, heterogeneity, software demands = and hardware requirements of large global networks present unique CISE = research problems. (This is needed to enable seamless access to weather = information across the world from both sensors and databases.)
  2. Archiving and processing massive amounts of data. Coping with = real-time data collection rates. (Processing accumulations of weather = data is needed to address global warming, climate trends.)
  3. Intelligent data retrieval. Means to support timely selection = and distribution of data. (Obtaining weather information and directing = it to the people and locations where it is needed.)
  4. Distributed processing of information. Means to enable local = processing and global sharing and analysis of data. (Weather information = and its analyses possess value apart from its geographic source.)
  5. High-performance computing. Means to provide the necessary = computational power for detailed simulation beyond the ability of any = existing supercomputer. (Needed for weather simulations across the = world.)
  6. Knowledge understanding and data mining. Methods to search, = detect and explain phenomena from aggregated data sources. = (Weather-relevant issues are present in the massive resources present in = existing databases.)
  7. Computer interfaces and language translation. Technology to = allow people of varied cultures and languages to work and collaborate = effectively. (This is essential to create world weather management = infrastructure, and to support more effective air traffic control.) =
  8. Software engineering. Standards to enable worldwide software = development. (Practices to support interfacing software modules = developed in different countries, particularly for issues that bridge = political borders, e.g. weather, natural resources, and biology.)
  9. Network-based machine operation. Means to support remote = operation of sensors, actuators and instrumentation from anywhere in the = world. (Seismological and weather measurements require new network = modalities.)
  10. Intelligent sensor and instrumentation technology. Means to = allow data to be collected anywhere and anytime. The range of such = technology goes from the extremely small (nanomachines) to the uniquely = large (e.g. arrays of large antennas and satellites) and encompasses a = multitude of CISE topics. (As in 9., weather and other issues require = new modalities.)

The above contains central CISE topics. Research activities on these = themes are under way in universities, industries and national research = laboratories around the world. However, global warming presents problems = of unprecedented scale involving many millions of information sources = networked across the world. Each source could provide a massive and = continuous stream of data. Likewise, the system could require feedback = control in ways that could depend on the evolution of the data. The = complexity of coordinating, managing, maintaining and programming such = an infrastructure dwarfs that of any system in existence today. To = collect, store process and manage these data requires infrastructure = involving large constituencies and capable of surviving geopolitical = phenomena. The global warming problem can be solved only through novel = structures ensuring world participation of specialists in computer and = information science.

Leveraging International = Investment

In the United States, = the European Union, Japan, Korea, the former Soviet Union, and to a = lesser extent elsewhere, governments and industries have spent billions = of dollars advancing information and communication technologies. Joint = initiatives have been created that combine the resources of government, = industry and academia, and massive infrastructure has been put in place. = Researchers have been educated and trained to solve problems in computer = science and engineering. International collaboration can leverage this = investment, building upon the infrastructure developed, the research = breakthroughs achieved and new technologies developed by individual = nations and groups of nations.

Cost Sharing

The 1998 House Report = identifies cost sharing as an important benefit of international = collaboration in science and technology. "One rationale for entering = into international science collaborations is that the costs of large = scale science projects, such as colliders for high-energy physics, can = be shared among participating countries." Dr. Bruce Alberts, president = of the National Academy of Sciences, noted that "Some research = facilities are so expensive that international collaboration is = necessary in order to make them affordable. In order for the U.S. to be = able to capitalize on discoveries made elsewhere and facilities located = elsewhere, we must have world-class researchers who maintain constant = communication and work frequently in collaboration with the best = scientists in other countries."[3]

Harnessing the Diverse Talent = Pool

International = collaboration builds upon the education, training and experience of tens = of thousands of engineers and computer scientists, the lessons they have = learned, and the discoveries they have made. The diversity of the talent = pool produces synergistic results: Scientists from different countries = approach problems with diverse skills, attitudes and perspectives that = stimulate novel approaches and creative breakthroughs. Providing = scientists from different countries the opportunity to work together not = only increases the talent pool, but also changes and enhances it. The = potential synergy of the hybrid talent pool could greatly accelerate the = advancement of knowledge, the creation of new technologies, and the = solutions to global problems.

Creating New Paradigms for = Collaboration and Discovery

Current NSF CISE = initiatives, such as Digital Libraries, Educational Innovation and = Knowledge and Distributed Information (KDI), will create new = technologies, tools and paradigms for scientific collaboration and = discovery. International collaboration extends the scope of these = activities to overcome challenges of physical distance, time zones, = languages, cultures, computing environments, etc. Moreover, the = scientists in different countries who collaborate to solve global = problems test the effectiveness of new tools and technologies. Thus, = international collaboration is a valuable laboratory for research, = development and evaluation of new paradigms for scientific discovery and = collaboration.

Creating Tools and = Infrastructure

In addition to their = role as participants in scientific inquiry, computer scientists and = engineers play a special role in science and technology: they provide = the infrastructure and tools used by the scientific community to conduct = research and advance knowledge. This includes the infrastructure and = tools used by the international community to collaborate and solve = global problems.

While international collaboration in computer science is happening = today, it is not now focused on study and solution of coordinated global = problems. Better tools, infrastructure and focus can greatly improve our = chances of understanding and solving global problems. There is thus a = compelling need to overcome individual, group and national barriers to = promote and support international collaboration in computer science and = engineering.

New paradigms for collaboration and discovery require new = infrastructure. Understanding the infrastructure needs and = implementation strategies in an area that is evolving as rapidly as = computer science and engineering is itself a major research challenge. = It is both inefficient and risky to address problems of distributed = computing and collaboration locally, and hope that these solutions = generalize to support international collaboration. Similarly, in = disciplines other than computer science, it is equally inefficient to = develop international cooperation mechanisms and policies without any = involvement by the CISE community and hope that they are the most = efficient in leveraging information processing and communication = techniques.

Training Tomorrow=92s = Leaders

Projects that require = international collaboration provide necessary training and experience = for scientists, engineers and managers who must compete in an = increasingly global marketplace. The graduate students who participate = in global projects will gain competitive advantage, both for themselves = and the companies that will employ them. These fortunate students will = master the complexities of working in distributed virtual environments = with people in other cultures; gain valuable insights about the = limitations and capabilities of current technology; and discover = opportunities for commercialization of new technologies. If the U.S. is = to maintain world leadership in information and communication industry, = it must train students to work and compete in a global arena.

Promoting Democracy

International = collaboration promotes democracy. In his congressional testimony, Dr. = Bruce Alberts noted that "In a world full of conflicting cultural values = and competing needs, scientists everywhere share a powerful common = culture that respects honesty, generosity and ideas independent of their = source, while rewarding merit=85 Knowledge is power, and diffusing it = more widely across the globe also provides a strong force that favors = democracy." [3]

Promoting Economic Strength and = Financial Stability

In the past five = years, the high technology sector has contributed the largest share to = our national growth, about double the national average. Growth in high = technology is perhaps the most prominent among the factors contributing = to recent U.S. economic prosperity.

A main tenet of U.S. international science and technology policy is = to promote our economic well being. "While we must remain ever vigilant = and militarily strong, the need to maintain economic strength has taken = on primary importance today. We now recognize more clearly than ever = that economic strength facilitates not only a strong defense, but = promotes other societal needs, such as social and political stability, = good health, and the preservation of freedom." (1998 House Report, page = 4)

The Asian financial crisis underscores the extent to which the = economies of individual nations are interrelated. International = collaboration in computer science, computer information, and computer = engineering offers a potential positive force for global financial = stability by enabling developing nations to become both consumers and = producers of high technology.

Good Foreign Policy

Supporting foreign = research provides an excellent way to exercise U.S. policy abroad. = Supporting research and education in economically depressed and = developing countries could represent one of the least controversial and = most efficient means of foreign aid. Such support would reach some of = the most respected and influential people in targeted nations, provide = means for them to collaborate with U.S. researchers, and contribute to = the careers of globally aware and U.S.-friendly leaders worldwide. = Foreign aid in the form of direct support for research will help less = developed countries build centers of excellence, computing = infrastructure and industries, and help bring developing countries into = the information age. This aid can take the form of computing equipment = and software produced by U.S. companies, thereby establishing markets = for the U.S., and providing motivation for U.S. industry to participate = in foreign research initiatives .

U.S. support of research in foreign countries through international = collaboration is good foreign policy. Many countries economically = depressed and developing countries have highly capable and motivated = scientists and students who lack the resources to achieve their = potential. Scientists in these countries are unable to participate in = large international projects because they lack infrastructure, tools and = training. With the ever-decreasing costs of computers, and the ability = to collaborate over long distances using computer networks, relatively = small investments in foreign research can produce enormous returns. = Given appropriate resources and guidance by their colleagues in the = U.S., scientists in these countries can establish viable research and = development efforts, enabling them to participate in future = multinational projects. In addition to producing advances in science and = technology, investment in foreign research increases the hybrid talent = pool, builds lasting professional relationships and earns good will for = the U.S.

Maintaining Scientific = Leadership in Information Technology

The impending = transition of most of the world=92s nations into a global information = society brings with it an urgent need for engineering leadership in the = definition of standards, international protocols and mechanisms for = trade, commerce, intellectual and cultural exchanges. In case the U.S. = does not provide this leadership, other technologically advanced = countries will seize this unique historical opportunity and reap the = benefits.

Historically, information technologies have been strongly influenced = by scientific discovery and interaction. Scientists often blaze the = technology trails that industries later leverage and expand into = publicly accessible infrastructures. This paradigm of technology = transfer and the fact that in order to lead in technology deployment it = is essential to be involved in its development are strong arguments for = the early (pre-competitive) involvement of US scientists in = international CISE research efforts.


The benefits described = in this section indicate an urgent and vital need to accelerate = international collaboration in computer science, computer information, = and computer engineering. Providing the means and motivation for = scientists to collaborate effectively across national and political = boundaries will create the infrastructure and synergies needed to = advance knowledge, create new and improved technologies and provide = solutions to coordinated global problems that cannot be solved locally. = In addition, international collaboration will train U.S. researchers to = participate in global projects, and position U.S. industry to both = provide and participate in the development of new technologies to = support international efforts.

Barriers to International Collaboration

A surprising number of factors work against international = collaboration in computer science and engineering. This section reviews = some of the most important.  

U.S. Policy

The main barrier to = international collaboration in computer science and engineering is lack = of U.S. policy that promotes and supports international cooperation. = Although international collaboration is now identified as a national = priority, policies and programs have not yet been put in place to = translate this priority into a plan of action. For example, within the = National Science Foundation=92s Computer and Information Science and = Engineering (NSF CISE) directorate, procedures for funding international = collaboration differ from country to country, when such opportunities = exist at all.

International collaboration in science and technology is the province = of the Department of State. Congressional testimony by several experts = noted that State is poorly provisioned to promote international = collaboration or take advantage of opportunities that arise. According = to Congressional testimony, the Department of State has failed to = provide the necessary vision, leadership and support for international = collaboration in computer science. The 1998 House Report cites testimony = that "scientific expertise and commitment is severely lacking within the = Department of State." Admiral Watkins noted that "leadership there = always seems to be lacking in both timely enthusiasm and technical = qualifications."

NSF Realities

International = Collaboration in CISE has a relatively weak constituency within the NSF. = Programs within CISE are driven by a constituency of managers and = researchers who support and lobby for the importance of their programs. = Each program has a clear focus for advancing knowledge and creating new = technologies in areas of national importance. Given this organizational = structure, it is difficult to motivate support for international = collaboration, since funding is perceived as a "zero sum game," with = support for international collaboration necessarily eliminating support = for other programs. Supporting international collaboration is robbing = Peter to pay Paul, and Peter is better armed.

Support for international collaboration is also relatively weak in = the U.S. computer science academic community. It was surprisingly = difficult to get scientists to participate in the workshop on = international collaboration in computer science. Fewer than half those = invited to WICSS agreed to attend. Many who agreed to attend dropped out = in the weeks before the workshop. In contrast, attendance at the 1997 = NSF Interactive Systems Grantees Workshop (organized by one of the = authors of this report) was about 95%.

Researchers understand where the "action" is within the NSF, and = invest their time in activities that promise to deliver the greatest = amount of funding. The NSF divisions in CISE science have relatively = large budgets to support research, and relatively small budgets to = support international collaboration. The NSF=92s approach to = international collaboration provides seed money to stimulate = collaborative activities, such as travel, workshops, visits, = postdoctoral training. A limited number of collaborative research = projects are also supported at modest funding levels. Because the NSF = does not provide resources to fund major efforts involving international = collaboration, these efforts are not taken seriously by the research = community. Whether intentional or not, the NSF sends a message to = researchers in computer science and engineering: International = collaboration is encouraged but is not a priority.

This message is reinforced by the resources allocated to marketing = and funding international programs in computer science within the NSF. = According to Caroline Wagner [6] the funds allocated to CISE international collaborative = research by the US in FY95 are less than 0.1% of the total amount, = placing CISE in 13th place among 18 disciplines. Within the = NSF, the CISE allocation for international collaboration ranked last = among the 12 disciplines considered in Wagner=92s report, corresponding = to approximately 1% of the total CISE budget and to 1% of the total NSF = funds used for international collaborative research.

National Priorities versus = International Collaboration

Funding of research in = computer science and engineering in the United States is guided by = national priorities, such as the desire to maintain technological = superiority in areas of computing and communication. National priorities = are often in conflict with the outcomes of international = collaboration=97shared knowledge and technology=97since research = advances and new technologies are no longer "owned" by the U.S. This = conflict is compounded by industry participation in federally funded = projects (stimulated by agencies=92 requirements of matching funds), = since industry participation is often motivated in part by the = opportunity for competitive advantage in the marketplace. These same = barriers to international participation are present=97to greater or = lesser extent=97in all countries.

In addition to the forces of capitalism and the realities of the = marketplace, international collaboration, and its funding by Congress, = is influenced by attitudes shaped by the Cold War. The 1998 House Report = reminds us that "The political consensus necessary to build today=92s = science and engineering enterprise was forged largely by the Nation=92s = needs and priorities in the period following the second World War, when = the threat of total destruction by nuclear weapons was frighteningly = real. Under these circumstances, the exigencies of the Cold War made = science politically unassailable." [3] While the 1998 House Report acknowledges that international = collaboration is a "strong force that favors democracy," it is difficult = to change the attitudes of the past, and the role of international = collaboration in science and technology is probably viewed with great = suspicion by many.


For international = collaboration to be truly effective, collaboration must occur between = national governments and their agencies. Even when all parties share the = same vision, existing rules and regulations (immigration, taxation, = etc.) complicate the process. Government bureaucracy may be frustrating = to researchers and program managers within the U.S., but the effects of = government bureaucracies attempting to work together on international = programs are truly enlightening.

Personal Realities

The Workshop on = International Collaboration in Computer Science began with a session = entitled "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly," in which participants shared = feelings and stories about international collaboration. A clear = consensus emerged from our work that the benefits of international = collaboration outweigh the difficulties and hardships often encountered. = U.S. researchers' motivations range from the desire to collaborate with = the best people in the world, to the desire to help talented colleagues = in less prosperous countries who cannot realize their creative potential = because of insufficient resources.


There are significant = barriers to international collaboration in computer science. Because = there is a clear, important and urgent need to increase international = collaboration, the computer science research community seeks to = facilitate international collaboration, and to remove current barriers = to such activities. This will require proposing, examining and testing = new models for international collaboration. We present a set of = recommendations for consideration. These share the common theme that the = goal of new programs and models is to dramatically increase = opportunities for international collaboration.


Establish a New CISE Division: International Collaboration in = Computer Science and Engineering (ICCSE)

The research community = would like the NSF to consider establishing a new division in CISE: = International Collaboration in Computer Science and Engineering (ICCSE). = Having a CISE division devoted to promoting and supporting international = research efforts removes the most serious barriers to international = collaboration. The division would have significant resources; would = develop a strong constituency with the CISE community; and would become = an effective partner with the NSF=92s International Division.

The research community feels that the NSF is uniquely qualified to = assume leadership in international collaboration in computer science and = engineering. The NSF CISE directorate is one of the leading agencies = worldwide supporting research in computer science and engineering. CISE = has demonstrated an increasing interest in international collaboration, = with recent international initiatives announced or underway with = European partners (Digital Libraries, Multilingual Language Resources) = and joint initiatives in Mexico (with CONACyT) and Brazil (with CNPq). = To quote the recommendations of J. Thomas Ratchford, Director of the = Center for Science, Trade, and Technology Policy of George Mason = University [7]:

"=85 there is a special role for the NSF in effecting these = solutions. The NSF is highly respected at home and abroad, the NSF = organic act provides the authority and the existing NSF international = office provides a solid base from which to grow the analytic = capability."

Establishing a new division within CISE would demonstrate the high = priority, commitment and focus that international collaboration = requires. Divisions within the NSF have status and stability. Formation = of a new division within the NSF CISE is a significant event; it = underscores the importance that the U.S. and its CISE research community = assign to international collaboration. It sends a clear message to other = governments and research agencies that the U.S. assigns high priority to = initiating and supporting international collaboration in computer = science, and establishes the NSF as the point of contact for initiating = new programs.

An appropriate mission of the new division would be would be to serve = the national interest by advancing scientific knowledge in computer = science and engineering through international collaboration. The = division, for example, could promote and coordinate establishment of = international "super centers" to solve global problems. Additional goals = might be to support training of U.S. researchers through participation = in international projects; to help establish global computing and = communications infrastructure for international collaboration in science = and technology; and to support the development of new technologies for = solving global problems through international collaboration.

An important activity of ICCSE would be to seek out opportunities for = international collaboration in computer science. Having NSF personnel = working in different regions of the world would do this most = effectively. NSF should consider opening new offices in different = regions of the world, or assigning NSF representatives to embassies in = areas where U.S. participation in science and technology is lacking and = needs to be increased.

International Science = Foundation

Experience shows that = establishing joint initiatives between countries requires a great deal = of time and effort. Champions must be identified within the funding = agencies and research communities in two countries, workshops must be = proposed, organized and funded, and the many details of a joint program = worked out. Given the time and effort involved, it is probably not = practical for the U.S. to establish joint funding initiatives with all = countries. Even if this could be a done, joint programs exclude = collaboration by scientists from more than the two participating = countries. Establishing programs between three or more countries may be = possible, but the difficulties probably increase exponentially, and = political sensitivities may arise if other countries feel that they are = being excluded.

Because a policy of forming bilateral agreements is inefficient (and = perhaps ineffective) in promoting internationalization of science and = technology, the research community proposes formation of an = International Science Foundation, with participation by all nations. = This organization would work like the NSF, accepting unsolicited = proposals from scientists, or proposals in response to programs and = initiatives developed and offered by the Foundation. All proposals, = however, would require collaboration by scientists from two or more = countries. This model is already followed within the European Union = where a variety of research programs have been established with the = explicit requirement of international collaboration. These programs have = been driven by the creation of the European union. However, they also = illustrate the efficiency and effectiveness of an infrastructure that = can stimulate, evaluate and fund international collaborative research = while satisfying the political and scientific goals of the participating = countries.

We believe that the notion of an International Science Foundation has = great merit, and could overcome the major barriers to international = collaboration. We also believe that this kind of organization will = inevitably be created and the time is now for the U.S. to play a = leadership role in its definition. In this context, the recommended = creation of the ICCSE division is also an important step towards the = establishment of an International Science Foundation. The foundations of = operational procedures, mechanisms for pooling of international funds = and awarding grants can be explored by the ICCSE and International = Program divisions of NSF and then transferred to the proposed = International Foundation. It is beyond the scope of this report to = conceptualize this in detail. If the idea of an International Science = Foundation is well received by the research community, we recommend that = a separate workshop be organized to consider its principles and = organization, perhaps with internationa l advisors.

International Super = Centers

Distributed = international centers of excellence provide an excellent model for = international collaboration. International super centers could be = established to advance science and technology in areas of computer = science, such as digital libraries, multilingual information management = or virtual environments for collaboration, or to solve global = problems.

The vision of international super centers is consistent with a = recommendation offered by the President's Information Technology = Advisory Committee (PITAC). The committee's August 1998 Interim Report = recommends establishing Enabling Technology Centers. These are = envisioned as centers of excellence that focus on applying information = and communications technology to a particular application domain, such = as health care, crisis management, environmental monitoring, life-long = learning, or law enforcement and public safety. These Centers "will = conduct R&D in CS&E to support the chosen application domain, = develop new curricula for students and mid-career professionals, = participate in testbeds, and identify barriers to more widespread = adoption of IT in a particular applications domain." [8]

The NSF is well positioned to assume a leadership role within the = U.S. and internationally to promote the establishment of international = centers of excellence in computer science and engineering. In recent = years, the NSF has developed a number of successful initiatives that = require or encourage interdisciplinary and inter-institutional = collaboration. For example, the NSF Challenge initiative supported = projects that required collaborative research among scientists in = several sub-disciplines of CSE to develop technologies or applications = of immediate benefit to the nation. The NSF has also supported = distributed centers through its Science and Technology Centers (STC) = program. For example, the Graphics and Visualization Center (, one of 24 NSF Centers funded through the foundations STC = program, comprises five universities: Brown, Caltech, Cornell, = UNC, and Utah. The NSF's = International and CISE Divisions could work together, taking advantage = of complementary expertise and resources, to extend the model of = distributed centers to international super centers.


Expand Joint Research = Programs in Latin America, and Create New Ones Elsewhere

The NSF should = increase the number and scope of joint research programs in developing = countries. While we have argued that bilateral agreements are not the = most efficient means to promote internationalization of computer = science, they can be very effective in specific countries, and should be = pursued at increased funding levels until more ambitious multinational = initiatives can be implemented. Establishing such programs requires = identifying researchers in the U.S. and partner nations who are willing = to organize workshops to promote joint research programs.

It is important to find ways to subsidize to foreign institutions to = support joint research efforts. We have made the case that this is good = foreign policy. In many countries, financial resources are simply not = available; amounts as low as $30k to $50k can support students, = postdoctoral fellows and faculty in other countries. Presently, this is = very difficult to do within the NSF. This investment would enable U.S. = investigators to utilize unique resources, and to leverage CISE funding. = In many countries, small U.S. dollar investments can make a big = difference.

The benefits of U.S. participation in joint research programs in = developing countries are illustrated by the success of the NSF / CONACyT = program. During the last five years, the NSF and Mexico=92s CONACyT have = sponsored three workshops to promote collaboration in computer science = between the U.S. and Mexico. Prior to these workshops, there was no = division or program within CONACyT responsible for funding computer = science. Mexican computer scientists were forced to submit proposals to = programs supporting research in Chemistry, Biology, Physics, etc. The = NSF / CONACyT workshops, organized by a Principal Investigator at UTEP, = with the encouragement of CISE Program Officers of the NSF, helped = mobilize the Mexican computer science community. At the most recent = workshop, a representative of CONACyT reported that funding computer = science is now a top priority within CONACyT. CONACyT has now funded the = establishment of centers of excellence at several universities in = Mexico.

The NSF / CONACyT program has also demonstrated that joint projects = with relatively small capitalization can yield significant outcomes. A = collaboration between the Oregon Graduate Institute and the Universidad = de Las Americas, Puebla (UDLA) was funded to develop Mexican Spanish = language technologies. Prior to this project, there were two faculty = with small research programs in language technology. Today, UDLA=92s = TLATOA speech group is the largest in Mexico, with twelve faculty, = research staff and students. As documented on its Web site the TLATOA group provides language resources, = technologies and short courses to other academic institutions in Mexico. = CONACyT has funded a center of excellence at UDLA, with speech as one of = three focus areas. A U.S. speech technology company has established a = subsidiary at UDLA, hired two graduates of the TLATOA group, and has = invested over $100,000 in support of the TLATOA group (triple = CONACyT=92s original investment). The international research community = has also benefited from this effort; Mexican Spanish speech recognition = and text-to-speech synthesis systems are now available from the TLATOA = Web site.

We recommend that joint research programs, such as those established = by the NSF with federal funding agencies in Mexico and Brazil, be = initiated in other countries. The amount of the awards in these programs = must be increased to attract top U.S. researchers, and agencies should = find ways to provide follow-on support beyond initial grants. A seed = grant is a good way to initiate collaboration, but there must also be = mechanism to support successful collaborations, so they can realize = their potential. Follow-on funding is necessary to attract top = researchers to international programs. The model could be the successful = SBIR program.

Collaboration Model

A model for supporting = international collaboration among different countries or funding = agencies that is reasonable, consistent and understandable by = researchers and program managers world wide is highly desirable. = Ideally, it would support training international research teams on the = basis of scientific goals and complementary expertise. It would enable = groups to seek funding for their work by submitting research proposals = to a single agency with the ability to review and fund the proposal. The = details of what agencies in different countries should be involved, = their deadlines and requirements and other idiosyncrasies should be = hidden from the researchers by the agency that receives the = proposal.

Funding agencies have a major organizational role to play in this = context and should reexamine and reform their inner workings and formal = relations with foreign counterparts. Their international funding units = should capitalize on the new interest and high priority placed in = international collaboration and global efforts. In order to seize this = opportunity, they must re-evaluate and revise policies to remove = barriers and constraints that were imposed by Cold War attitudes and = policies. They have a major responsibility and much of the necessary = competence and experience in developing an international collaboration = model that reflects the CISE needs in the 21st century.

Market International = Programs

Many in the CISE = community do not know about existing international opportunities. = Funding agencies should market existing international activities and = opportunities more aggressively.

Funding agencies should actively encourage researchers to take = advantage of opportunities for international collaboration when they can = show that such collaboration is appropriate and desirable. In such = cases, concrete measures should be used to quantify the benefits of = collaboration.

The NSF should develop better reporting mechanisms regarding INT = proposals, research results, the investigators and their international = collaborators. The information should be collected and made available = readily to the CISE community.

It is also important to make the CISE community aware of = international activities, such as those of the European Union, including = RACE, PACE, ESPRIT, etc. Some of these multinational programs require = the participation of universities, industry and government labs, and = serve as interesting models for international collaboration.

A good way to promote and market opportunities for international = collaboration is to support the development and maintenance of new = infrastructure. This could include linked Web sites (similar to the = U. of Arizona site on = Japan), that identify = existing collaborations, areas of expertise in computer science = worldwide, opportunities for collaboration, etc. The NSF could provide = support for developing this infrastructure by relatively modest funding; = e.g., several grants of about $25k to $50k per year.

The importance of international collaboration must also be marketed = within funding agencies. Leading officers should encourage and empower = program directors to take advantage of existing mechanisms to stimulate = and fund international collaborative research.

Further, we recommend that a small delegation of workshop = participants make a presentation to leading officers of funding agencies = to underscore the importance of international collaboration, and the = recommendations herein.

Finally, a follow-on workshop should be held in about one year, to = examine the outcomes of the first workshop, and to continue to find ways = to support international collaboration in CISE.

Other Institutions and = Agencies

Funding barriers to = international collaboration could be overcome in several ways.


Tools and Infrastructure

International = collaboration requires significant infrastructure. Development of = infrastructure is essential to successful research. The development of = tools to enable international collaboration is a necessary step.

Recent developments associated with projects that are pushing both = the state of the art in fast networking and the development of = applications enabled by the Internet of the future augur many = opportunities for collaboration. These are broadly referred to as the = Next Generation Internet and the Internet 2. They have wide support from the government, industry and = academia. Fast progress in these projects already enables more than 100 = universities to be connected by very fast networks that are to be used = for both research and education purposes. While the US has been leading = in the push for fast network infrastructure, it is remarkable that = several other countries have similar initiatives. Collaborative = arrangements between the organizations leading these efforts are already = being established. At the time of this writing the Internet 2 has = Memoranda of Understanding with countries in Europe, North America and = the Asia/Pacific Rim. In addition to the physical interconnection of = their networks the participating countries have also agreed to promote = the development of applications and to collaborate in the definition of = standards that might be needed to make such applications possible.

The international networking infrastructures are essential for both = CISE research and international scientific collaboration. Efforts are = needed to investigate and develop new classes of applications that = explore these infrastructures. Examples of such applications include = tele-immersion and virtual collaboratories.

Tele-immersion is defined as collaborative virtual reality over = networks, an extension of the "human/computer interaction" paradigm to = "human/computer/human collaboration." In this paradigm, the computer = provides real-time data in shared, collaborative environments, to enable = computational science and engineering researchers to interact with each = other (the "tele-conferencing" paradigm) as well as their computational = models, over distance. Current tele-immersion research focuses on = providing easy access to integrated heterogeneous distributed computing = environments, whether supercomputers, remote instrumentation, networks, = or mass storage devices using advanced real-time 3D immersive interfaces = ( ).

Virtual collaboratories allow scientists to access and use tools in = different geographical locations. The tools can be software for = computer-aided simulation and modeling or actual computer-controllable = instruments.The computer resources can be distributed and shared across = many locations and so can the users. An example of such a system is = PUNCH (Purdue University Network-Computing = Hubs) which provides = web-based access to the use of simulation tools for several CISE and = engineering disciplines. It is the enabling infrastructure for the = NSF-funded distributed center for advanced electronics simulations = (DESCARTES) which includes the University of Illinois-Urbana, Arizona = State University, Stanford University and Purdue University. = International distributed centers can make use of similar = network-computing infrastructures. Similar systems can be develo ped for = other disciplines. For example, the Web site at OGI = provides a free set of tools and technologies for building and = researching spoken language systems in different languages.


The potential benefits = of international collaboration justify extraordinary efforts to produce = new programs and initiatives, and to explore new models for = collaboration and funding. Coordination of resources contributed by = other countries and international organizations will have major impact = on world problems.


1 SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE FEDERAL = GOVERNMENT: National Goals for a New Era, Committee on Science, = Engineering, and Public Policy, 1993. Available at .
2 Bilateral Relations. Available at = .
3 "Unlocking Our Future Toward a New = National Science Policy" A Report to Congress by the House Committee on = Science September 24, 1998. Available at and .
4 Opening statement of Congressman Vernon J. = Ehlers at Congressional Hearings on International Science, March 25, = 1998. Available at .
5 International Agreements on Cooperation in = Remote Sensing and Earth Observation, Caroline S. Wagner, MR-972-OSTP, = RAND, 1998.
6 Caroline S. Wagner, "International = Cooperation in Research and Development: An Inventory of U.S. Government = Spending and a Framework for Measuring Benefits," Santa Monica, Calif.: = RAND, MR-900-OSTP, 1997. Available at .
7 Statement of J. Thomas Ratchford, Hearing = On International Science National Science Policy Study Committee On = Science, U. S. House Of Representatives, March 25, 1998. Available at = .
8 President's Information Technology = Advisory Committee Interim Report to the President, August 1998. = Available at .


We gratefully = acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Rita Rodriguez, whose energy and = vision motivated the workshop and final report. The report benefited = greatly from revisions by Allen Klinger, and input from Jerry Engel, = Robert Frederking, Hynek Hermansky, Eduard Hovy, Judith Klavans, Rick = Schlichting, Don Towsley and Benjamin Wah.

Workshop = Participants

Alo, Richard

University of Houston Downtown = Ctr. for Computational Science

Anger, Frank

National Science = Foundation/CCR

Barnes, Bruce

National Science = Foundation/CCR

Beer, Joachim

International Computer Science = Institute (ICSI)

Cole, Ron

University of Colorado at = Boulder

De Groat, Joanne

Ohio State University

Engel, Gerald

Univ of Connecticut at Stamford = Computer Science Eng.

Fortes, José

Purdue University

Fuja, Tom

National Science = Foundation/NCRI

Hermansky, Hynek

Oregon Graduate Institute of = Science and Technology

Hudson, Jeanne

National Science = Foundation/International

King, Willis K.

University of Houston

Klinger, Allen

Univ of California at Los Angeles = Computer Science Eng.

Kraemer, Ken

University of California, = Irvine

Luperfoy, Susann

The MITRE Corporation

Min, Paul

Washington University

Moura, Jose M. F.

Carnegie Mellon = University

Mukherjee, Biswanath

University of = California

Ni, Lionel

Michigan State = University

Reeker, Larry

National Science = Foundation/IRIS

Rodriguez, Rita

National Science = Foundation/CDA

Sadagopan, V.

Pace University School of CS Inf. = Systems

Schlichting, Richard

University of Arizona

Towsley, Don

University of = Massachusetts

Vermeulen, Pieter

Oregon Graduate Institute of = Science and Technology

Wah, Benjamin

University of Illinois = Coordinated Science Lab

Wittie, Larry

SUNY at Stony Brook