IP: -- a document I wrote in July 1985 Seems still relevant -- Information Systems Engineering Perspectives

[Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>]

\def\ss{\smallskip}
\def\ms{\medskip}
\def\bs{\bigskip}
\def\ce{\centerline}
\pageno=0
\footline={\ifnum\pageno>0\hss\folio\hss\else\hfil\fi}
\null
\vskip0.5in

\ce{\bf Information Systems Engineering Perspectives}

\vskip0.5in
\ce{David J. Farber}
\ce{Professor of Computer Science}
\ce{University of Pennsylvania}
\ce{Department of Computer and Information Science}
\ce{Philadelphia, Pa 19104-6389}
\bs
\ce{Phone:  (215) 898-9508}
\ce{Internet:  farber@cis.upenn.edu}
\bs
\ce{15 July 1985}
\vskip 1.0in
\ce{Abstract}
\ms
This document presents an overview of the state of the
information systems engineering research area.
It is found that the situation in the academic world is far
from ideal.
A number of areas of research where the nation and the
field could benefit from increased attention are
discussed; and equally importantly, a set of needs is highlighted,
which, if satisfied, would increase the productivity of
the academic researcher.
Finally, a set of recommendations will be made for
specific activities that could lead to
the creation of a new generation of information
systems engineers.

\vskip1.75in
\noindent {Prepared for the Policy Research and Analysis
Section of the NSF, and presented at the
 Internal Workshop on
opportunities for Engineering
 Research Focused on Emerging
Engineering Systems July 1985.}
\vfill
\eject

\pageno 1
\ce {\bf Introduction}
\ms
This report will examine the future
directions for information systems engineering
at the National Science Foundation.
It will address the current status of
the field, its current problems, its importance
to the nation, and potential directions for
enhancing the impact of the NSF in this area.
In addition, it will examine a set of alternative
scenarios that the NSF could follow and
the impact of each on the future of the field.
Finally, it will propose several potential areas
for research concentration that could have high
payoff for the nation.
\bs
\ce{\bf Background}
\ms
There have been many studies of the information sciences
and technology areas done over the past several years.
Perhaps the most comprehensive of these studies was one
done in 1984 by the Office of  Technology Assessment, Congress of
the United States, entitled {\it Information Technology
R \& D:  Critical Trends and Issues}.
A  copy of the summary document has been attached to this
report as Appendix A.
It would be appropriate to examine the principle
findings of this report (printed in italics)  and comment on each.
\bs
\ce{\bf Principle Findings of the OTA Report}
\ms
{\it Most areas of information technology examined
in this study, including microelectronics, fiber optics,
artificial intelligence, computer design, and software
engineering, are still in the early states as technologies.}
In particular, in the software engineering area, I
and others have pointed out the lack of coupling
of university research activities to the commercial environment,
where large software systems are written.
Later on in this document, I will specifically comment about
this and other lapses of technology transfer.
\ms
{\it By most measures, U. S. research and development in
information technology is strong and viable; however, those
traditional measures may not be realistic guides to
the future needs of the United States for R \& D in these areas.}
\bs
{\it In response to these new pressures (foreign competition
and profit motivations), industrial support
is growing rapidly for short term {\bf applied research}
and development work, both within industrial labs and
through support of university work.}  While industry has
traditionally looked to the academic world for basic
 research support in many other areas of science, it
has over the past decade ceased to expect such in the
information systems engineering area.
Many of the joint academic-industrial programs have resulted in
the university becoming a development shop for industrial
researchers.
In addition, the quality and quantity of academics who
can work with and understand the industrial
sector has decreased in this field due to the
large number of entrepreneurial start-ups motivated
and manned by ex-academics.
We are finding faculty positions in academia increasingly filled
by people who have inadequate experience to understand, react,
and deal with the real problems of industrial research and
advanced development.
\ms
{\it Universities, traditionally viewed as centers for
basic research, are re-examining their roles with
respect to applied research and are forming new
types of relationships with industry and
government.}
The OTA report states that it is too early to say
whether or not this will have a negative or positive
response on university.
It is my opinion that this has already been shown to
have a negative effect on the underlying academic
role of the university.
What has happened in a large number of cases is that the
institutions that have been formed are decoupled from
the university, thus exacerbating the isolation
of the teaching program and graduate research
from the institutional activities.
The University has effectively created a corporation
for doing external research
which
is indistinguishable from a separate R \& D entity,
usually without gaining the full benefits accruable from such.
This has created  the phenomena of faculty who never teach
and have minimal contact with undergraduates and even with
students, because they spend a majority of their time
in these institutes.
I strongly question the advisability of encouraging
such directions.
\ms
{\it The Department of Defense is the predominant source of
federal support of information technologies research
and development, providing nearly 80\% of the funding.}
Experience has shown that the  spillover from
these activities to the civilian industrial sector is minimal
in the information systems area because the
cost effectiveness criteria for military research
and development is totally different from that in the
commercial sector.
There are, of course, counterexamples, such as ARPANET.
However, many senior industrial managers believe
that such examples of significant spillover are
few and far between, as witnessed by their reluctance to
get involved in some DOD activities, such as the very high speed
integrated circuit work.
There are examples within U.S. industry where major
corporations refuse to undertake DOD research or
have isolated this work into separate subsidiaries.
Experience has shown that the technology transfer
from these subsidiaries to the mainline commercial
areas is essentially nonexistent.
Both the OTA and I strongly believe that increased funding
for long-term research in information systems and
technology is needed from non-defense agencies in order
to focus research on areas that will have more civilian
payoff.
\ms
{\it There is substantial concern that technical and
scientific information flows between the U. S. and
other countries are unbalanced outward.}
These concerns have recently surfaced in
the form of the new Department of Commerce
Export Control Laws.
A tight interpretation of these rules
would cause a severe decrease in the quantity
of graduate students available in the information
systems area, since many of these students
come from abroad.
Additionally, the decrease in freedom to publish
may have a severe impact on our ability
to communicate with our peers, even within the
United States.
While I do not advocate a completely open information flow,
it must be realized that such constraints will have a
particularly acute impact on the field of information
systems engineering.
\ms
{\it Instruments for scientific research are
growing more sophisticated and are becoming obsolete
at an increasingly rapid pace.}
This is particularly apparent
in the area of information systems engineering.
The computers used as research tools become obsolete
at a  rapid rate.
Such obsolesence especially causes problems in this
field, since research often relies on advanced
hardware and advanced communications facilities.
Outdated equipment puts the academic researcher in a disadvantageous
position relative to his industrial research colleague.
This disadvantage accelerates the departure from the
academic world of the talent that is necessary to both
properly train the next generation of students and to
insure that active, relevant research is maintained in
the academic community.
An area where the lack of adequate equipment is
particularly severe is in the computer architecture
and computer communications disciplines (as well as, of
course, in microelectronics).
In these cases, academic researchers who are trying
to investigate new computer organizations or new communications systems are
definitely handicapped by the lack of modern fabrication
facilities, of state of the art CAD systems,
and of the support staffs which are norms in equivalent industrial
laboratories.
Efforts on the part of non-DOD funding agencies to attack
the equipment problem in information systems engineering
have been minimal as are current efforts to allow the
academies effective access to industrial facilities.
\ms
{\it Policies designed to stimulate information technology
R \& D need to be evaluated for possible significant
tradeoffs and external costs in other areas.}
\bs
\centerline{\bf What is the State of Information Systems Engineering
Research?}
\ms
\noindent {{\it\bf Advanced Computer Architecture}}
\ms
While we have been through what appears to the public to have
been several revolutions in computer architecture, little
has been done at the fundamental organization level.
The architecture that are now in use in the commercial world,
with several notable exceptions, were designed over
15 years ago.
Even our technological star, the microcomputer, has
an internal organization which has not fundamentally changed
over the past decade.
There are many reasons for this phenomena;
some are commercial in the sense that new and
innovative designs have been very hard to sell in the
commercial marketplace (-for example, the Intel iAPX 432).
Safe, well-understood designs which are upwardly compatible
with past generation computers
have tended to be the norm.
\ms
While such conservatism  is not in and of itself bad,
it does have a dampening impact on the innovation
that one can expect from the
commercial field.
Innovative architectures is an area where the university,
with its studied indifference to
commercial viability can have a major impact.
One can argue that the RISC architecture re-spawned
from the university environment has become the basis for
several new and innovative microprocessors (there
are also opinions that RISC is just a transient
reaction to technological tradeoffs).
Nevertheless, the question of how such
innovation can be encouraged and harnessed is
one of the most difficult issues
facing the planners in our national research{
supporting agencies.
\ms
I believe that it is critical to support the
academic engineering research community in the
computer architecture area.
Such support must lead to the creation  of an infrastructure
which will allow researchers to try
their ideas and to create new designs in a reasonable
amount of time.
A path towards attaining this capability could
be modeled on the solution to a similar problem that the NSF
faced 20 years ago with the advent of computers as
a research tool.
At that time, the NSF undertook a program of
hardware capability grants to the universities on a massive scale to
to seed the computer science programs
that were forming at that time.
A similar program, centered about providing state-of-the-art
CAD tools, wide spread access to silicon foundries on a
rapid turn-around basis, and  modern
architecture verification and simulation
tools running on state-of-the-art engineering
workstations would have a profound impact on the
ability of researchers to operate in the
university environment.
\ms
I strongly recommend that a major initiative be
undertaken to supply to university departments
in the information systems engineering area, state-of-the-art
CAD facilities and widespread access to fast-turnaround
fabrication facilities.
These fabrication facilities should include both
board-level and microchip-level capabilities.
In addition, a mechanism must be found to fund
{\bf adequate} technical support staffs so that the
maximum productivity can be achieved by
researchers.
\bs
\noindent {{\it\bf Software Engineering}}
\ms
The field of software engineering has received a
significant amount of attention over the past 5 to 10
years as the balance of effort and cost in the
development of new systems shifted
primarily to software development.
Many computer companies (especially microcomputer
companies) have found, much to their horror, that
their software staffs are 2 to 3 times
larger than their hardware staffs.
\ms
Very large, defense-oriented software activities have pointed
out the sorry state of our knowledge of how to write large
software systems.
The ability to create relatively  free
bug software at a tolerable cost has become perhaps the
deciding factor in the battle for dominance of
the computer industry.
It is one of the areas where the United States
has shown itself to be traditionally stronger
than our foreign competitors, but
is again under attack by Japan and Europe.
\ms
It goes without saying (however, I will say it), that the
feasibility of large weapon systems, such
as SDI, depends on strong software engineering
technology.
Likewise, the widespread
success of large, distributed
applications, such as a fund-transfer systems,
automated factory systems, real-time control
systems, etc., depends on low-cost, high-reliability software
systems.
\ms
To date, much software engineering research has
centered on the theoretical aspects of software.
While such studies may provide the basis for
long-term payoffs, they have yielded little
insight that can be used in the short run by
practicing software designers.
We have not yet achieved the fundamental
breakthroughs that will be necessary to
achieve real success in this field.
In the meantime, the commercial field is suffering
from excessively expensive, ever more fragile
software systems.
\ms
Perhaps a major reason for this lack of short-term
benefits for the field lies in the lack of
exposure of academic researchers to large-scale software
development.
Those who do develop skills in this area
leave academia to form private companies.
The problem of how to involve academics in large-scale
activities so that they might learn
the problems, and thus contribute the solutions,
appears insurmountable.
The only path that seems at all viable lies with
industrial/academic collaboration at a level which
has not yet been practical.
It would involve a close liason between the researchers
and ongoing industrial software development groups.
\bs
\noindent {{\it\bf Some Common Problems}}
\ms
If one looks at the computer architecture and the
software production areas, one sees a
number of common problems.
The most fundamental problem seems to be the
management of complexity.
For example, recently a microcomputer design by a
key U. S. company had to be dramatically
downgraded, not because of technological problems
of chip size, line widths, or similar problems,
but because the design had become so large that the
designers were not able to control it.
These chip designers found themselves in essentially the
same position that many software groups have
found themselves in, namely that things had
gotten too complicated, and  too large for the
management and design tools that were
available (and these designers are reputed to have had some of
the most sophisticated tools around).
\ms
I feel that there are possible research
paths that can provide payoff in the management of complexity
and thus improve the future ability of the
nation to maintain its leadership.
Such paths are most likely similar to
those that the SDI effort must also develop, but
again, without a distinct activity targeted
at the civilian sector, our
commercial field will most likely not benefit from the SDI's advances.
It is suggested that the Foundation look
seriously at a research program which, for lack of a
better term, I will call ``complex systems
engineering.''  One of the functions of
this program would be to help understand and
develop tools for the management of complex systems
development.
It will have other, perhaps equally important
roles, which I will touch on shortly.
\bs
\noindent {{\it\bf Scaling}}
\ms
In the academic community, we tend to deal with small
problems which are neatly packaged into three-year
Ph.D. topics or two-year NSF grant durations, or,
worse yet, three-year tenure decision times.  Many
of the real problems in software or hardware
engineering show up only when one tackles large
problems.
The problem of building a real compiler shows
very clearly the issues  in this field,
(which is not much better than it was 10 years ago).  Building
a state of the art microcomputer shows the problems of
complexity, while building a small prototype circuit does not.
A major challenge facing the academic research
community is how to undertake research which can
help understand the management of complex technical
systems development.
Since by the nature of the university, long-term
and large tasks are unattractive, some mechanism
must be evolved to expose academics and students to and involve them in such
tasks.
\bs
\noindent {{\it\bf The Convergence of Computers and Communications}}
\ms
Attached as Appendix B is a reprint of a paper, written
some eight years ago (``The Convergence of Computing
and Telecommunications Systems,'' by David Farber and
Paul Baran, \underbar{Science}, 18 March 1977). It
explores the convergence of computer technology
and communications technology and points out that
future systems will, and must blend together
these technologies if such systems are to be competitive.
In the eight years since this paper was published,
the argument has become even stronger.
The advent of local computer networks in the
university and government arenas has brought
into day-by-day focus this synthesis.
At the same time, the evolution and transition of technology,
such as the DOD networking; from a research tool
to a commercially viable and necessary technology
has further strengthened the argument.
The commercial importance of this work can be shown quite dramatically by
the
movements in the international arena toward
standards in the store-and-forward data
communications area.
\ms
In the early 70's, the academic research community
was a leader in the definition and creation of local
area network technologies.
As is proper, the leadership in
this area has now passed to the commercial area as the
economic importance of the technologies became obvious.
\ms
In the main, the continuing contribution from the
academic world has centered on network modeling and
measurement techniques.
It is the belief of leaders in this field that the
advent of fiber optic technology as a viable transmission
medium offers the opportunity for a resurgence of
fundamental research in local networking.
The ability to have bandwidths that approach those
attained on multiprocessor system buses offers the
possibility of a new view of distributed systems.
Research activities being undertaken on
a small scale, such as MEMNET at the University of
Delaware, are attempting to optimize the efficiency of the
network/processor interface by making them more
`natural.'  Research towards a better understanding of
the switching of very high speed communication
facilities is an area that also requires fundamental
understanding (for example, how does one passively switch
fiber links?).
\ms
The potential for very high speed, yet relatively
high latency, transmission facilities, such as fibers, calls for increased
research
to better understand communications protocols and how
they can be created or adapted to perform better
in this environment.
There has been some work to date in this area,
dealing primarily with satellite communications.
However, I feel that the problems which arise in
local, ground-based systems may require
substantially different solutions due to the
extremely high bandwidths involved and to the
uses of these facilities (for example,
processor/peripheral and processor/processor interconnections).
\ms
Research involving such high speed media calls for not only
encouraging the development of the appropriate talents within
the academic community, but also for making
available state-of-the-art transmission facilities and
test equipment to academic researchers.
Also, the very high speeds attained by
these systems makes the fabrication of interfaces
inherently dependent on the use of very high speed
logic circuits, with all their attendant design
difficulties.
\ms
On a broader scale, when one looks in the academic
community for people with the depth of experience
and knowledge of the communications world necessary
to do systems engineering synthesis, one finds a
startling shortage of people.  Such shortages are not
unique to academia; there is a major and
severe lack of qualified researchers and developers
in the telecommunications industry as well.
This lack portends critical problems
for an industry which needs to create systems
that blends communications and computing.
Actions to rectify this shortage should
be given the highest priority and
attention on the part of NSF.
\ms
The future holds both technological and
application imperatives which will further the
symbiotic relationship of computing and communications.
Technologies such as fiber optics offer data
bandwidths which approach those of the internal bus
on modern midscale computers.
The adoption of standards such as the ISDN
portend an integrated service offering from
the data communications carriers.
The health of the computer community
within the United States may depend,
in large measure, by on ability to react with
foresight and imagination to the potentials of these technologies.
While the United States research community is still a
leader in research in distributed processing and
in local networking, foreign suppliers are rapidly becoming
leaders in the application of this technology to the marketplace.
The future stimulation of university research in these
areas will depend in very large measure on the
availability of substantial hardware commitments
so that they may have an environment in which to
perform their research.
Trying to understand the impact of fiber optics
on distributed processing systems while being
forced to utilize low bandwidth local networks
is a frustrating and non-productive enterprise.
\ms
\hfuzz=2pt
In addition, there are new areas of research activity
that are motivated by the computer-communications synthesis;
for example, the problem of privacy and protection of
information in a distributed computer-based office
environment may be critical to the commercial viability of
this important and  large target area.
Yet, if one looks within the academic community
for research activities, both technical and
social, that deal with this area, one finds very, very few.
The reasons for this are complex and relate both to the
``military'' image of research in trusted systems and
to a lack of systems oriented research groups
within the academic community.
\bs
\noindent {{\it\bf What Can Be Done?}}
\ms
In the early part of this document, I suggested some
specific actions that could be undertaken and
alluded to paths that could be used to
stimulate research in the information systems
engineering areas.
The question remains of how to tie this disparate
suggestions together into a program that could motivate important
research to complement that being done
in industrial laboratories.
\ms
I propose that it would be valuable to stimulate a real,
traditional systems engineering perspective
to guide and motivate university research in the information systems  areas.
The traditional role of systems engineering is to provide
a synthesis of fundamental research, market
needs, and technological feasibility  to
create new products and new understanding of a field.
Systems engineering studies traditionally have had a longer
term payoff than the short, advanced, development type of
research activities.
These studies also provide a training ground for the development of
personnel
who have an appreciation for all aspects of the engineering
profession.
In the case of the information systems engineering field,
this broad, high-level view is critical to the
evolution of the complex systems we have been discussing.
\ms
A systems engineering activity can not, however, exist
in a vacuum.
In the industrial world, it is motivated by products.
In the military world, it is motivated by
broad initiatives, such as SDI.
The academic world, also, must be motivated
by a goal. To provide such a goal, I am proposing that the National
Science Foundation formulate a project which can be used
as a vehicle for hosting both the systems engineering studies
as well as the resulting research activities.
\ms
Such a project must integrate communications,
computing, software engineering, human interface
design, and information privacy.
Further, it must result in improvements in university information
systems design and fabrication facilities, as well as yielding
insights into the management of complexity.
\ms
A project which fits these goals would be the development
of a advanced national network. This network would be based on the most
modern transmission technology including, but not limited to,
fiber optics and satellite links. It would interconnect
every engineering
researcher in the United States.
The network project would provide these researchers with
advanced {\bf Engineering Workstations}, high speed
multimedia communications both within and without their
campuses, and access to the information and data
bases that they need in order to carry out their day-by-day
activities.
Further, it would provide an appropriate level of information
privacy protection for all network users.
\ms
The engineering workstation would be an excellent vehicle
for the exploration of human interfaces symbolic algebra, and
expert systems technology when applied to a technical
environment, as well as providing a test bed for the most
advanced notions in microprocessor architecture.
The definition, design, modeling, construction and performance
measurement of such a system would focus the
attention of the information systems engineering research
community on:
\ms
\item{(1)}  system level problems
\ss
\item{(2)}  a complex design which will require the development
of tools for dealing with this complexity,
\ss
\item{(3)}  a training ground for future researchers, and
\ss
\item{(4)}  a set of understandings and an environment
which would greatly enhance their productivity as researchers.
\ms
Additionally, the fallout of such an activity into the industrial
sector in the form of new product ideas, new ways of using
communications, new man-machine interfaces, etc., would
have a stimulating and valuable impact on the
national scene and on our international
competitiveness.
It would also
have
the potential for producing major improvements
in the productivity and quality of life for the
academic researcher.
\ms
It should be emphasized that this project
is designed to develop
and mature {\bf fundamental research} in the areas covered.
It is not intended to just be another facility;
thus, it is important that it be managed as a
research project, drawing together the best people
that the industrial and academic research communities
can offer.
We expect that the technology developed within this
activity will be pioneering, and not just another
case of rehashed, 10-year old ideas.
There are models of similar projects in Japan and
in the United Kingdom.
In all these cases, the activities have had a
stimulating {\bf widespread} effect on the research capabilities of the
countries, as well as having provided a motivation for
effective joint academic/industrial collaboration.
\bs
\noindent {{\it\bf The Alternatives}}
\ms
If we continue at our current level of activity in the
information systems engineering areas, we will become
more and more a customer country for advanced
technical products.
We already see in Japan and in Europe
strong indications that this will happen.
Further, the academic community's capability to
train people in information systems technology  will continue
to decline as faculty who are interested in
systems-level issues leave for industry.
Our faculty will become more and more comprised of
people who are not interested in doing, but just
theorizing.
Our future computer engineers will not be well-trained by
exclusively theoreticians.
\ms
Small additions in funding will probably have minor
impact on the situation we have talked about.
In order to provide the stimulus for a major push
in the academic community, a significant amount
of money must be targeted into a real,
concrete initiative which can fire the imagination
and creativity of our scientists and engineers.
\ms
It is my view that the atmosphere in Congress
is receptive to such initiatives and that, ongoing
NSF-sponsored activities can provide
some, but not all, of the infrastructure
and additional motivation for such an effort.
\bs
\ce {\bf Acknowledgement}
\ms
I would like to acknowledge the authors of the
two attachments for their contribution to
my thinking processes, as well to Gary Delp,
Peter von Glahn, and Manny Farber for their useful insights
and help.
\vfill
\bye


------ End of Forwarded Message

For archives see:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/