LSC - Livingston, LA 20–23 Mar 2002 The View from NSF Funding prospects The LIGO/LSC Reviews MREFC for Advanced LIGO NSF Gravity Program Staff Source Simulations.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ed Seidel Assistant Director Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences National Science Foundation October 1, 2010.
Advertisements

What do we currently mean by Computational Science? Traditionally focuses on the “hard sciences” and engineering –Physics, Chemistry, Mechanics, Aerospace,
1 Performance Assessment An NSF Perspective MJ Suiter Budget, Finance and Awards NSF.
Intro to Grant-Seeking Presented by Bess de Farber Library Grants Manager George A. Smathers Libraries University of Florida February 09,
Business & Operations Advisory Committee -- March 31, Performance Assessment.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Construction Proposal Submission Gary Sanders LIGO Laboratory PAC 12 June 2002, Cambridge.
Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre April 1, 2010.
Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC) Program Sam Weber Program Director March 2012.
LIGO- G W LIGO Update by Fred Raab Local Educators Network LIGO Hanford Observatory October 27, 2005.
University of Wisconsin-Madison Space Science and Engineering Center (SSEC) 26 October 2005 SSEC/CIMSS Administrative Overview from Wenhua Wu, Tom Achtor.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Cost, Schedule and Management Gary H Sanders NSF Review of Advanced LIGO Caltech, June 11, 2003.
Senior Review Evaluations (1 of 5) Proposals due: 6 March 2015 Panel evaluations: Week of 22 April 2015 Performance factors to be evaluated will include.
Fundamental Physics and the Decadal Survey Quantum to Cosmos 3 Airlie, VA 7 July 2008 Michael Salamon NASA HQ/Astrophysics Div.
LIGO-G M Status of LIGO Barry Barish PAC Meeting Caltech 3-June-04 Upper limits on known pulsar ellipticities.
What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Ecclesiastes 1:9 NOT.
Overview of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Program Office of Integrative Activities National Science.
NSF Office of Integrative Activities Major Research Instrumentation Program November 2007 Major Research Instrumentation EPSCoR PI Meeting November 6-9,
Grant Proposal Basics 101 Office of Research & Sponsored Programs.
Effective proposal writing Session I. Potential funding sources Government agencies (e.g. European Union Framework Program, U.S. National Science Foundation,
1 Sally J. Rockey, PhD Deputy Director for Extramural Research National Institutes of Health NIH Regional Seminar on Program Funding And Grants Administration.
October 22, 2003Advisory Committee for Business and Operations 1 Management of Large Facility Projects Within the NSF Mark Coles Deputy Director for Large.
LSC – Hanford, WA 11th November 2003 The View from NSF Funding: FY 03 (actual) & FY 04 (prospects) Funding Opportunities for GP Research Some Developments.
Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.
Sept 29-30, 2005 Cambridge, MA 1 Grand Challenges Workshop for Computer Systems Software Brett D. Fleisch Program Director National Science Foundation.
Legal Services Advisory Committee (LSAC) Grant Applicant Workshop February 11, 2013.
NCAR Scientific and Research Engineering Staff Appointments Process Jeff Stith 2012 Appointments Review Group (ARG) Chair October 5, 2011.
Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA) Program Erica Brown, PhD Director, NIH AREA Program National Institutes of Health 1.
LIGO-G M Management of the LIGO Project Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology Presented to the Committee on Programs and Plans of the.
LSC – Hanford 16 th - 19 th August 2004 The View from NSF Changes in NSF leadership Funding Interagency Working Group response to Q2C Outreach - New $5M.
Medical Scholars Travel Program Overview 11/20/2013.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO MREFC (Construction) Proposal Submission Gary Sanders Caltech/LIGO November 2001.
Brinkman Report: Setting Priorities for Large Facility Projects Sponsored by the NSF Key Issues Raised in Report Transparency of process (next slide) Involvement.
LSC/Virgo Meeting HannoverOctober 22, The View from NSF Tom Carruthers LIGO Program Officer +1 (703) Tom Carruthers LIGO.
LIGO-G M LIGO Overview and Status Stan Whitcomb NSF Annual Review 9 November 2005 Caltech.
Introduction & NSF Overview NSF Tribal College Workshop November 14, 2008.
LIGO-G M Management and Operation Plans/Budget Stan Whitcomb NSF Annual Review 8 November 2004 Caltech.
LIGO-G M Planning and Implementation Strategy for Advanced LIGO Gary Sanders LSC Meeting Hanford, August 14, 2001.
LIGO-G M Summary Remarks: Management of LIGO Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology NRC Committee on Organization and Management of Research.
Tom Carruthers The View from NSFLIGO-G Z November 11, LSC/Virgo March Meeting The View from NSF Tom Carruthers LIGO Program Director (703)
CARRUTHERS LSC 3/20/06 1 LIGO-G M The View from NSF Tom Carruthers LIGO Program Officer National Science Foundation (703)
1 Access to the World and Its Languages LRC Technical Assistance Workshop (Part 1) Access to the World and Its Languages I N T E R.
LIGO-G Z 8/14/2001LSF/Penn State Center for Gravitational Wave Physics Lee Samuel Finn Penn State University.
1. G O D D A R D S P A C E F L I G H T C E N T E R 2 New Budget Initiatives for NASA in FY04.
Funding Caroline Wardle Senior Science Advisor, CISE Directorate National Science Foundation
SAFE PATIENT MOVEMENT AND HANDLING: VHA NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE STEPS Office of Public Health and Environmental Hazards Office of Nursing Services Office.
Possibility of detecting CHRISTODOULOU MEMORY of GRAVITATIONAL WAVES by using LISA (Laser Interferometer Space Antenna) Thus, the final form of the memory.
LIGO-G M Organization and Budget Gary Sanders NSF Operations Review Caltech, February 26, 2001.
LIGO-G Z LIGO at the start of continuous observation Prospects and Challenges Albert Lazzarini LIGO Scientific Collaboration Presentation at NSF.
LSC - Hanford, WA 19–22 August 2002 The View from NSF GP Funding FY 2002 NSF Funding Prospects FY 2003 Funding Opportunities for GWP Some Areas of Special.
LISA News from ESA O. Jennrich LISA Project Scientist.
LSC Meeting LIGO Scientific Collaboration - University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee 1 Software Coordinator Report Alan Wiseman LIGO-G Z.
1 Cyber-Enabled Discovery and Innovation Michael Foster May 11, 2007.
LIGO-G M Overview of LIGO R&D and Planning for Advanced LIGO Detectors Gary Sanders NSF R&D Review Caltech, January 29, 2001.
1 Grant Applications Rachel Croson, PhD Dean, College of Business UT Arlington (formerly DD SES/SBE NSF)
LIGO-G E PAC9 Meeting LIGO Laboratory at Caltech 1 The LIGO I Science Run Data & Computing Group Operations Plan 9 th Meeting of the.
LIGO-G M Overview of the LIGO Continuing Operations (FY FY2006) Proposal Gary Sanders LIGO PAC9 Meeting December 2000.
LIGO-G M Advanced LIGO Construction Proposal Submission Gary Sanders LIGO Laboratory LSC Meeting August 2002, Hanford.
Detector R&D through the NSF PHY division. Jim Shank/Jim Whitmore, NSF CPAD Meeting Arlington, TX 5-7 October, 2015.
PEER 2003 Meeting 03/08/031 Interdisciplinary Framework Major focus areas Structural Representation Fault Systems Earthquake Source Physics Ground Motions.
LIGO-G M Managing LIGO: Lessons for a Collaboratory Gary Sanders LIGO/Caltech NEES Awardees Meeting NSF, December 19, 2001.
GW – the first GW detection ! Is it a start of GW astronomy ? If “yes” then which ? «Счастлив, кто посетил сей мир в его минуты роковые !...» Ф.Тютчев.
Page 1 Coles – Operating the Observatories PAC 9 Dec. 13, 2000 G L Operating the Observatories Mark Coles.
NSF Update October 2009 Jo Ann Smith, Ph.D. Research Development Office of Research & Commercialization.
1 CF lab review ; September 16-19, 2013, H.Weerts Budget and Activity Summary Slides with budget numbers and FTE summaries/activity for FY14 through FY16.
Large Synoptic Survey Telescope
The 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics "for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves" Peter Berg Department of Science.
Scientific Computing At Jefferson Lab
Stan Whitcomb LSC meeting Livingston 21 March 2005
Searching for GRB-GWB coincidence during LIGO science runs
Office of Research & Commercialization
Presentation transcript:

LSC - Livingston, LA 20–23 Mar 2002 The View from NSF Funding prospects The LIGO/LSC Reviews MREFC for Advanced LIGO NSF Gravity Program Staff Source Simulations for LIGO and LISA B. K. Berger LIGO-G

NSFMPSPHYGravity FY FY ??  (%) ?? What about FY2002 ??? Good news and bad Gravity budget still uncertain Gravitational waves are predicted by Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. To date there has been no direct observation of gravitational waves. LIGO is designed to accomplish this and then to use gravitational waves to explore the most exotic structures in the universe. The technique used by LIGO to achieve this goal will be described by the LIGO Deputy Director and Construction Project Manager, Dr. Gary Sanders in the following talk. A $300M construction project requiring development of new technologies to meet a design sensitivity several orders of magnitude better than any yet achieved. MRE account created to protect single and few investigator research programs from being squeezed out of existence by the requirements of the much larger LIGO program. Budget numbers (3/02) ($Million)

Where has all the money gone? I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. All of the increase for Physics goes to initiatives and facilities. More than the increase for Gravity goes to the LIGO lab. GP AllLIGOLSCOtherCGWP FY FY  (%) –11.4* Needs *Not counting Physics Division reserves. All core programs were cut 11.4% to support facilities and initiatives. The most optimistic scenario on the reserves will still leave a shortfall.

FY 2003 I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Budget request has been submitted to Congress. NSFMPSPHYGravity FY FY ?  (%) –2.3? Request includes an increase for the LIGO Laboratory.

LIGO/LSC Reviews I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. We are in the process of setting up the LIGO annual review. The Review Panel to evaluate FY 02 LSC proposals will meet March

MRE for Advanced LIGO I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Advanced LIGO is on Physics Division list of “pipeline” MREFC projects. MREFC eligibility requires a project’s total cost cost to be at least 10% of MPS budget (threshold now  $92 M). We await a proposal.

NSF Gravity Program Staffing I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Rich Isaacson retired as Gravity Program Director, replaced by Beverly Berger. The new LIGO Program Director will start at NSF on April 7 (if all goes well). Tom Lucatorto heads the Photon Physics Group at NIST. –Measurement and Correction of Optical Properties –Synchrotron Radiation Instrumentation –EUV & X-ray Microscopy –EUV Transfer Standard Photodiode Calibrations

NASA/NSF Collaboration on Gravitational Wave Theory I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Gravitational wave computation task group What resources are needed? How can source simulation research meet LIGO and LISA needs effectively? Take advantage of national interest in NASA/NSF coordination. Why not ITR (existing NSF program)?

Office of Space Science Associate Administrator: Dr. Ed Weiler Sun-Earth Connection Division Director: Dr. Dick Fisher Astronomy & Physics Division Director: Dr. Anne Kinney Solar System Exploration Division Director: Dr. Colleen Hartman Discipline Scientists Fundamental Physics Dr. Michael Salamon General Relativity/Gravity Cosmology (CMB, …) Fundamental laws (time variation of fund.constants,….) LISA Gravity Probe B

What are the major science products (gravitational waveforms, signal extraction algorithms, estimates of astrophysical GW source rates) that the LIGO/LISA community needs, and on what time scales are these products required? Is the current community size adequate to meet these needs? If not, what rampup rates are suggested? What additional computational infrastructure will be needed? How should this infrastructure be configured? What process for distribution of cycles? What are the cost estimates for the above? Where do GR-computation PhDs go if they do not remain in the field? How does the production of significant numbers of PhDs with computational expertise benefit the nation? NSF/NASA Task Group Issues Nota bene: Small amounts of funding are available for waveform calculations and source rate estimates from NASA’s Astrophysics Theory Program; see

NASA/NSF Task Group I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Membership –Saul Teukolsky, Chair –Patrick Brady, Joan Centrella, Pablo Laguna, Albert Lazzarini, Fred Rasio, Kip Thorne –Barry Barish (ex officio), Tom Prince (ex officio)

NASA/NSF Task Group I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. What are the most urgent needs for LIGO and LISA in the area of theory involving large-scale computing? In what time frame? How does the current state-of-the-art in these theoretical areas compare to the needs? What are the major science products that the LIGO/LISA GW community needs? What changes in the demographics of the numerical relativity, data analysis, and source astrophysics groups will be needed to meet LIGO and LISA needs over the next 5-10 years? What, if any, additional resources will be required to support this (growing) community? What additional computational infrastructure will be needed? How should this infrastructure be configured (Beowulf clusters, single mainframes, GRID protocols, etc)? Not all PhD students will remain in academia. What is the general value of training in this area? How does the production of significant numbers of PhDs with computational expertise benefit the nation? Charge:

NSF ITR Program Description I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. In FY2002, NSF’s ITR (information technology research) investments will be focused in three multidisciplinary areas: software and hardware systems; augmenting individuals and transforming society; and advancement of the frontiers of science via information technology…. Physics Division receives a special allocation for ITR.

Gravitational Wave Source Simulations I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Data analysis Source simulation

Gravitational Wave Source Simulations I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Data analysis Source simulation Parametrized ignorance? “Good” info from “bad” codes?