Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Hey, Tony

Publications and source records attributed to Hey, Tony.

Can the United States Maintain Its Leadership in High-Performance Computing? - A report from the ASCAC Subcommittee on American Competitiveness and Innovation to the ASCR Office

The United States (U.S.) is no longer the unambiguous leader in the vitally important field of high performance computing (HPC). Japan, the European Union (EU), and China have fielded systems that are on par with our fastest supercomputers. The supply chain for everything from semiconductors to scientific software is globally distributed. Yet our economic future and security depend critically on our ability to innovate faster than our competitors, and the speed of innovation depends increasingly on large-scale computational science and engineering and thus HPC. How should the United States respond to this challenge? This report seeks to initiate a new and potentially transformative national discussion on this vital question. The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program is well-positioned to make informed, targeted decisions about where the United States should cooperate and where it should compete in the global market for scientific exploration and discovery. By setting its sights on problems critical to our nation and the world, by establishing productive new collaborations, and by making strategic investments, ASCR can restore and maintain U.S. scientific leadership in the critical areas described in this report while strengthening our research infrastructure and training a large, diverse cohort of scientists. In doing so, ASCR and its scientists will pave the way for a secure and prosperous future for America. For more than 30 years, the ASCR program has provided the HPC and networking capabilities and expertise needed to support DOE’s mission to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States. The program now faces the challenge of developing and deploying the next generation of HPC systems and technologies, as well as supporting the application of HPC and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to a wide range of scientific and engineering research problems. Through its research and development efforts, the ASCR program must also advance the state of the art in HPC and accelerate the pace of scientific discovery and technological innovation. Fulfilling this promise will require significantly increased investments, as well as innovative policies and programs. This subcommittee is aware that we are making recommendations and calls for action at a time when federal resources are limited. We understand that a wide range of competing priorities must be balanced by the nation’s leaders and that there is a need to leverage resources in new ways and seek efficiencies in facilities and operations. However, we must not let these realities limit our imagination or silence our advocacy. The ASCR program is a key part of the U.S. research infrastructure and an important component of economic growth and U.S. competitiveness. ASCR has a responsibility to pursue its mission, including advanced scientific computing, applications of AI technologies, and the required advanced research facilities, with determination and enthusiasm. To fulfill the scientific enterprise’s responsibility to the nation, the ASCR program must not only develop and publish a clear vision with an associated list of goals, priorities, and recommendations but also demonstrate scientific leadership by consistently securing long-term funding. This will allow the program to build on its achievements to date, to realize its ambitious vision, and to make lasting contributions to the field.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Benchmarking for AI for Science

AI has been instrumental for recent developments in a number of domains of the sciences. With several hundred machine learning (ML) algorithms and models, and numerous AI-specific hardware platforms, a common quest for all scientists working on AI for Science is around the selection of machine learning algorithm(s) to solve their domain-specific scientific problems. A number of different initiatives around AI Benchmarking have been set up and have been useful in understanding the benefits of different ML algorithms for different tasks.However, with the majority of these AI Benchmarking initiatives focusing on the conventional notions of benchmarking, where the focus is purely runtime performance (such as training time or inference time), their suitability for benchmarking different ML algorithms for solving scientific problems has been viewed as a performance problem even though both are hardly the same. To make reasonable, explainable, and justifiable advancements in science using AI, it is critical to focus on the merits of these algorithms in handling different domain science problems. In other words, more emphasis must be given on Benchmarking for AI for Science than AI Benchmarking. The vision of the former is not only to assess the performance of ML algorithms, but also to assess, and understand the benefits and merits of different ML algorithms in handling scientific problems. Benchmarking for AI for Science, instead of pure performance focused AI Benchmarking, has several benefits: (i) it has the potential to offer advances in the sciences, much more rapidly than through pure performance-based AI methods, (ii) it will encourage the community to focus on developing better domain-specific AI techniques, particularly given the provision for being able to benchmark different techniques, and (iii) it will encourage hardware manufacturers to focus on developing science-specific hardware subsystems.

Thiyagalingam, Jeyan↗