The 4th meeting of the Fundamental Information Technology of the Next Generation (Real World Computing Project) Promotion Committee (chaired by Professor Hidehiko Tanaka, the University of Tokyo) was held at MITI on August 30, 2000.
This committee was established as a private advisory board to the Director-General of the Machinery and Information Industries Bureau at MITI to discuss basic policies, implementations, and other issues during the second phase (FY1998-FY2001) of the Real World Computing Project, and to promote the main theme of the second phase, which is to develop Fundamental Information Technology of the Next Generation.
This meeting actively discussed the finalized image of the RWC Projectıs research activities and the planned final exhibition and symposium scheduled for next year, as 2001 is the last year of the project.
A summary of the meeting is given below.
n Opening Speech
Mr. Akinori Takashima, director, Electronic Policy
Division, Machinery and Information Industries Bureau (MITI), delivered the
opening speech at the beginning of the meeting.
[Summary]
The environment surrounding the RWC Project has greatly
changed in two aspects since the last meeting of the Promotion Committee.
First, information technology (IT) has become a household term throughout Japan. However, there is little discussion as to whether IT can take full advantage of Japanıs strengths and how to accelerate development of the necessary technologies. In short, the term exceeds reality.
Second, there is a growing tendency to make prior, interim and post assessments of Japan's national policies. Public works, for instance, will be reviewed and some of them will be discontinued, if necessary, and the same can be seen among technology developments.
A division will be established within MITI exclusively for assessing the Ministry's policies. The new organization will be responsible for checking and balancing the Ministry's activities. Japanese people are becoming increasingly concerned about the government's policies, including technology development.
Since only 18 months remain before the project expires and in view of the changing circumstances as I have explained, I'd like everyone to discuss two points during this fourth meeting of the Promotion Committee: how the project should be completed and how it should be evaluated.
As I mentioned, the overall environment has changed significantly, as Japanese people start paying closer attention to IT and assessing the government's activities. Under such circumstances, your discussions at this meeting are particularly valuable.
Your opinions and advice will be greatly appreciated, and I hope that we shall witness tremendous achievements next fall when the RWC Project is completed.
n Summary of the Discussion
1. Finalized Image of the Project for
Fundamental Information Technology of the Next Generation (draft)*
The following is a summary of valuable opinions from committee members as to finalized image (draft). (l = committee member, u = Secretariat)
Chairman: You may say that 18 months is very short. Considering the relatively short periods allowed for universitiesı research activities, however, we still have sufficient time remaining, and various activities can be completed within this period. With that in mind, Iıd like to hear your opinions on the finalized image of the Project.
l: When you present your research results, you should compare them with other similar research activities, both domestic and overseas.
Chairman: When should be the deadline for preparing materials of such similar research activities?
l: You should prepare all necessary materials before the exhibition and symposium scheduled next year.
l: Remember that your presentation style should differ depending on the
audience. This material (on the finalized image of the project) is compiled for
engineers and researchers.
From this material, I can't see how the event
will be designed for newspapers and other mass media.
I'd also suggest you
consider how you can effectively present your achievements to researchers from
different fields. In short, you should consider three different presentation
methods, and must remember this point for the final exhibition and symposium
scheduled for next year.
It's not always appropriate for researchers to
prepare the exhibition materials by themselves. Another option is to consult
exhibition specialists.
u: When we provide a press release covering each research theme of the implementation plan after the 2001 research plan finishes, what should the title of our announcement be? Since our message includes comparison with other domestic and overseas research activities, it will serve as basic material in that sense.
u: I don't mean to imply otherwise, but it is very important for us to describe (demonstrate) our achievements such that they can be easily understood. Also, there is a rapidly growing awareness that our research results should be put to practical use. So, we must complete our project in a form that meets people's expectations.
Chairman: I'd like your advice on how to push each of our research activities to completion. They are at very different stages of progress; some of them are at a very basic level and others could be applied quickly. There is no single solution to enable all of them to be completed.
l: You must understand the global changes. It's difficult to decide how your achievements should be displayed. Why not list research activities that have been converted into real products or make an inventory of your intellectual properties by field of research?
l: Most importantly, we should focus on how research results can be utilized
by other specialists - this is a critical point (of any scientific or
technological research effort). In that sense, I think that the project's
finalized image proposed here is insufficient.
I urge you to use your
website, and to modify the site to reflect the project's achievements. Outside
researchers can then access the site and obtain data on the finalized image of
the RWC Project.
l: One of our engineers who wasn't involved in this RWC Project obtained data from your site and made a brilliant achievement. It's important for you to improve your website so that outside researchers and engineers can easily acquire useful data.
l: It's important to consider how your database will be managed after the RWCP is dissolved. Since people at the Electrotechnical Laboratory want to continue researching technologies with high potential, please consider this point.
l: What will count in the final exhibition and symposium to be held next year
is whether the audience find it interesting.
I recommend that the exhibition
have three categories: research activities already put into actual use, research
activities just before actual use, and new (patentable) knowledge acquired
during the project.
I'd like you to discuss specific display methods for the
exhibition in more detail. A working group may need to be set up for the
purpose.
l: Applying results isn't the only goal of this project. It must be clearly
indicated that what level of completeness researchers had really imaged in their
respective paradigm.
Paradigms of our project include "information
integration" in the field of real world intelligence and "seamless" in the field
of parallel and distributed computing. These paradigms should be displayed in
different ways depending on the target audience. As has often been pointed out
by private companies, we must clearly show the degree of completeness that the
RWC Project has achieved.
l: Frankly speaking, at the beginning of the project we tended to think it
would be a success as long as we could identify what the problems were.
Discovering issues requiring further selective research is one of our
finalized image. Though we need to present this only to engineers and
researchers concerned, we must clearly identify the issues that cannot be
immediately solved - please consider this identification of problems in your
finalized image of the project.
2. Plan for the RWC Final Exhibition and Symposia 2001 (Scheduled in October 2001)
After the secretariat explained the plan for the final exhibition and symposia, the committee discussed and pointed out problems*. First, the MITI secretariat commented as follows.
u: The objectives of the exhibition and symposia are;
1) To demonstrate
the research results and present what the project was intended to achieve
2)
To promote the usefulness of the research results and discover potential users
In order to achieve the two objectives,
l: A more appealing title should be devised for the event. The present title
could be used as a subtitle.
You must ask exhibition professionals' opinions
about the presentation method, even if it costs you some money.
l: The finalized image of the project is good enough as is. You should start preparing for the exhibition and symposia as soon as possible in order to make it more appealing.
u: We don' to allocate uniform display spaces in a mechanical manner.
An
appropriate booth area will be given to each exhibitor depending upon the
contents of their research. This issue will be discussed at the 1st meeting of
the Demonstration Committee to be held on September 7.
l: I'd like to propose that purchasers' evaluations, including the benefit they've obtained from their purchased goods, be put on display for the actual product exhibition. Such evaluations can be very persuasive.
l: "An exhibition for exhibition's sake" or an exhibition having poor content is not acceptable. The essence of the project should be exhibited in an easy-to-understand manner.
l: Although the final exhibition and symposia will be held as a domestic conference rather than an international one, display panels and other boards should be prepared in English.
l: Our major concern is what will happen to the project results. We don't
have to cling to the initial framework; rather, we should create a new
direction.
l: It is necessary to display research results in an orderly
manner.
You should ask presentation specialists to check your exhibition
plan and improve it to pass their professional criteria.
l: Don't stick to the principle of "one booth for one company or lab." You need to provide exhibition spaces according to their technology fields.
l: The audience should be able to understand the intent of the whole
exhibition.
You must ask professional advice even if it costs you money.
l: Is the final exhibition and symposia for presentation purposes only? Is a symposium included in the program?
u: We're going to hold the demonstration as the most important part of the event. But we also plan to have plenary sessions, workshops on demonstrations for each technical area. Of course, there will be a symposium. However, we don't intend to shut the door on the general audience by limiting it as a symposium.
l: Do you mean that the symposium is for professional visitors and the demonstrations are for general visitors? If so, the event needs a more attractive title as mentioned earlier.
l: Is it necessary to link IT (information technology), one of the most
sensational topics in Japan, to the contents of the exhibition?
We should
have a consensus on this point in case we're asked.
u: We have not reached a decision on this point. Although we may have to reconsider depending upon the general circumstances in Japan, we now believe the most important point in holding the exhibition is to clearly indicate the overall goal of the project.
l: Is the exhibition an evaluation factor?
u: We'd like to keep the exhibition away from evaluation.
l: To make it a success, you should consider whom you will invite to the exhibition. The ability to invite certain users should be evaluated. You also need to ask researchers of similar subjects to come to the exhibition. This is important to prevent the exhibition from becoming an exercise in self-satisfaction.
Chairman: Our Web site isn't powerful enough as a PR tool for the exhibition. We need to prepare a list to select our guests.
3. Evaluation of the Project for Fundamental Information Technology of the Next Generation
After the secretariat explained the evaluation of the project, the committee members started discussing and pointing out problems.
The MITI secretariat commented as follows.
We must clearly differentiate the promotion of the project from the evaluation of the project. We therefore point out in advance that the opinions of the Promotion Committee will not be conveyed to the Evaluation Committee.
l: Tell us about the membership of the Evaluation Committee.
u: It consists of specialists from the two fields of parallel computing and real world intelligence. It also includes in its membership commentator(s) covering the general subjects of science and technology. We also plan to form working group(s) for specific technology field(s).
l: Will the evaluation report be made public?
u: It'll be made available for public access by the end of FY2001.
l: Are you considering changing the way of conducting the committee or altering its membership (i.e. to determine how many specialists should be involved), taking into account the nature of the project?
u: We revised the MITI technology evaluation guidelines in May 2000. We are going to establish an evaluation committee for each project according to the guidelines.
l: What are your views on accepting some committee members from industry?
u: Leading companies in IT-related fields are also partnership members of the
RWC Project, and are promoters of the project. As I mentioned before, it is
quite difficult to accept representatives from such companies as members of the
Evaluation Committee. However, we are considering whether it's possible to
receive some people from consulting firms as Evaluation Committee members.
l: I understand that you can't have Promotion Committee members join the
Evaluation Committee. But I guess there are some business people who can make a
fair assessment. Without representatives from business, evaluation won't be very
effective.
u: I understand your point. But we have reached the present form of the committee in an attempt to perform strict evaluations.
l: How does the committee perform evaluations?
u: We must clearly identify advantages and disadvantages of the present system. We won't take a simple "success or failure" approach. We also intend to use our evaluations to help improve future projects.
l: What will the evaluation results be used for?
u: They will be used as data to develop future policies, and we will also use them as a yardstick for selectively allocating resources.
l: What is the material for evaluation?
u: We will prepare the material in response to the request from the Evaluation Committee. We're going to hold interviews and, if necessary, visit RWCP laboratories.
Chairman: Please take care to ensure that researchers are not forced to spend much time preparing the data for evaluation and that the R&D of the RWC Project is not delayed.
n Other
The secretariat expressed its opinion that the software programs developed by the RWC Project should be designated as freeware for wider distribution. They also said it was important for researchers to make full use of such applications.
In response to the secretariat's remark, Mr. Shoji Takedahara, executive director of the RWCP, stated that programs developed by the Tsukuba Research Center had been specified as freeware for diffusion purposes.
A member said that distributed laboratories would make efforts to disseminate their own research results (this is now legally possible as a special measures act has been enforced). All members agreed that software programs developed by the RWC Project should be diffused as quickly as possible and RWCP researchers' efforts in this matter should be positively evaluated.