Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Final i GS Portfolio Review
Investments in Critical Capabilities for
Geospace Science 2016 to 2025
A Portfolio Review of the Geospace Section
of the Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Science
Requested by the Advisory Committee for Geosciences
National Science Foundation
Reportsubmittedto
GeorgeM.Hornberger|Chair,AdvisoryCommitteeforGeosciences
RogerWakimoto|AssistantDirectorfortheDirectorateforGeosciences
bythePortfolioReviewCommittee
DanielN.Baker,JorgeChau,ChristinaCohen,SarahGibson,JosephHuba,MonaKessel,DeloresKnipp,LouisLanzerotti,WilliamLotko(Chair),PatriciaReiff,AlanRodger,JoshuaSemeter(GEO/AdvisoryCommitteeLiaison),HowardSinger
onFebruary5,2016
FINAL | Accepted and publicly released by the NSF Advisory Committee for Geosciences on April 14, 2016
Final ii GS Portfolio Review
Final i GS Portfolio Review
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1
1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5
2 Review Process and Guiding Principles .............................................................................................. 7
2.1 Committee Charge .............................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Review Process ................................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Community Input ................................................................................................................................ 9
2.4 Guiding Principles ............................................................................................................................. 11
3 Budget Overview and Projections ................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Budget Summary for Current GS Investments .................................................................................. 14
3.2 Budget Implications of DS Recommendations .................................................................................. 14
3.3 Future Impacts of Past GS Budget Trends ........................................................................................ 16
3.4 Additional NSF Investments in Geospace Science ........................................................................... 17
4 Capabilities for a Vital Profession ................................................................................................... 19
4.1 Proposal Pressure.............................................................................................................................. 19
4.2 FDSS and CAREER Awards ................................................................................................................. 24
4.3 AGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program .............................................................................. 25
4.4 NSF Graduate Research Fellowships Program .................................................................................. 25
4.5 Graduate Summer Schools and Workshops ..................................................................................... 25
4.6 Research Experiences for Undergraduates Program ....................................................................... 26
4.7 Workforce Diversity .......................................................................................................................... 27
4.8 PhD Employment Opportunities ...................................................................................................... 28
4.9 GS CubeSat Program and Education ................................................................................................. 29
4.10 Public Outreach ............................................................................................................................. 30
4.11 Survey of Earned Doctorates .......................................................................................................... 30
5 Science Goals and Capabilities for SSP ............................................................................................. 31
5.1 Atmosphere‐Ionosphere‐Magnetosphere Interactions .................................................................... 32
5.2 Solar Wind‐Magnetosphere‐Ionosphere Interactions ...................................................................... 37
5.3 Solar and Heliospheric Physics .......................................................................................................... 40
5.4 Space Weather and Prediction ......................................................................................................... 45
5.5 Summary of Critical Capabilities ....................................................................................................... 48
Final ii GS Portfolio Review
6 GS Core and Strategic Grants Programs .......................................................................................... 52
6.1 General Aspects of GS Grants Programs ........................................................................................... 54
6.1.1 Core Grants Programs ........................................................................................................... 55
6.1.2 Strategic Grants Programs .................................................................................................... 55
6.2 Aeronomy .......................................................................................................................................... 56
6.2.1 AER Core Program ................................................................................................................. 57
6.2.2 CEDAR ................................................................................................................................... 57
6.3 Magnetospheric Physics .................................................................................................................... 58
6.3.1 MAG Core Program ............................................................................................................... 58
6.3.2 GEM ....................................................................................................................................... 59
6.4 Solar‐Terrestrial Research ................................................................................................................. 59
6.4.1 STR Core Program ................................................................................................................. 60
6.4.2 SHINE ..................................................................................................................................... 61
6.5 Integrative Geospace Science ........................................................................................................... 61
6.5.1 Space Weather Research ...................................................................................................... 62
6.5.3 Grand Challenge Projects ...................................................................................................... 64
6.6 CubeSat Program .............................................................................................................................. 66
6.7 Senior Review of GS Grants Programs .............................................................................................. 70
7 GS Facilities and Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 73
7.1 Recent History of GS Facilities .......................................................................................................... 73
7.2 Characteristics of GS Facilities .......................................................................................................... 74
7.2.1 Definition of a Community Facility ............................................................................................ 74
7.2.2 Community Facility: Funding and relationship with NSF .......................................................... 75
7.2.3 Class 1 and Class 2 Community Facilities .................................................................................. 75
7.3 Current Investments and Capabilities ............................................................................................... 75
7.3.1 Evidence Used by the PRC ......................................................................................................... 75
7.3.2 Class 1 Facilities: Summary ....................................................................................................... 76
7.3.3 Class 1 Facilities: Findings and recommendations .................................................................... 76
7.3.4 Class 2 Facilities: Findings and recommendations .................................................................... 80
7.4 New Investments and Capabilities .................................................................................................... 82
7.4.1 Innovation and Vitality Program ................................................................................................ 82
7.4.2 EISCAT and EISCAT‐3D ............................................................................................................... 83
7.4.3 Distributed Arrays of Small Instruments (DASI) ........................................................................ 84
Final iii GS Portfolio Review
7.4.4 Data Systems, Products and Management ............................................................................... 85
7.5 Facility Extensions ............................................................................................................................. 86
7.5.1 Advisory/User Groups ................................................................................................................ 86
7.5.2 Scientific Research within Facilities Awards ............................................................................. 86
7.6 Non‐GS Funded Instrumentation ...................................................................................................... 87
7.7 Midscale Projects Program ............................................................................................................... 87
7.8 Facilities Senior Review ..................................................................................................................... 88
8 Partnerships and Opportunities ...................................................................................................... 91
8.1 NSF Intra‐Agency Partnerships and Opportunities ........................................................................... 91
8.1.1 AGS Programs ........................................................................................................................... 91
8.1.2 Programs within Geoscience Directorate ................................................................................. 92
8.1.3 Cross‐Directorate Programs ....................................................................................................... 94
8.1.4 Foundation Wide ....................................................................................................................... 95
8.2 NSF Inter‐Agency Partnerships ......................................................................................................... 98
8.2.1 Department of Defense ............................................................................................................ 98
8.2.2 Department of Energy .............................................................................................................. 99
8.1.3 NASA .......................................................................................................................................... 99
8.1.4 NOAA ........................................................................................................................................ 101
8.3 International Partnerships .............................................................................................................. 102
9 Recommended GS Portfolio .......................................................................................................... 104
9.1 Balance of Investments .................................................................................................................. 104
9.2 Core Grants Programs .................................................................................................................... 104
9.3 Strategic Grants Programs ............................................................................................................. 107
9.4 GS Facilities Program ...................................................................................................................... 109
9.5 Prioritizations ................................................................................................................................. 113
9.6 GS Management Processes ............................................................................................................ 114
Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... A1
A. Committee Charge ............................................................................................................................ A1
B. Committee Membership .................................................................................................................. A3
C. PRC RFIs to Facilities PIs ................................................................................................................... A4
D. PI Diversity Data for Targeted Grants Programs ............................................................................ A11
E. Summary of GS CubeSat Missions .................................................................................................. A17
F. Membership in EISCAT: Categories and Conditions ....................................................................... A18
G. List of ACRONYMS .......................................................................................................................... A20
Final iv GS Portfolio Review
Final 1 GS Portfolio Review
Executive Summary
TheGeospaceSection(GS)oftheDivisionofAtmosphericandGeospaceSciences(AGS)oftheNa‐tionalScienceFoundationservesauniqueandimportantroleinadvancingthefrontiersofknowledgeofsolar‐terrestrialinteractions,theEarth’sspaceenvironmentandtheeffectsofthespaceenvironmentontheNation’stechnologies.GSinvestmentsinstate‐of‐the‐artinstrumentationandfacilitiesenablescientificdiscoveriesofthephysics,chemistryanddynamicsofEarth’supperatmosphereandexosphereandtheSun.GSfacilitiesprovidecrucialmeasurementsthatcanonlybeobtainedfromground‐basedinstrumentsandthatcomplementthosefromspace‐basedplatforms.
TheGSgrantsprogramsarerecognizedwithinthespacesciencecommunityasaprimarysourceoffundingtosupportideation,incubation,advancementandexploitationofnewmethodsandcon‐ceptsthathavethecapacitytotransformourunderstandingofgeospace,theinterplanetarymedium,theSunandsolar‐terrestrialandsolar‐planetaryinteractions.TheGScoregrantsprogramsupportscuriosity‐drivenresearchofthehighestquality.Itiscomplementedbyaninnovativetargetedgrantsprogramwhichthegeospacecommunityusestoinformandguidecollaborativeresearchstrategiesforexpandingtheenvelopeofnewknowledge.TheGSCubeSatprogramiswidelyrecognizedasbe‐inginthevanguardoffrontierscienceusinginstrumentsdeployedontinysatelliteplatforms.
GSledtheoriginalinteragencyeffortthatcreatedtheNationalSpaceWeatherProgram,apart‐nershipbetweenacademia,industryandgovernment.TheNationalSpaceWeatherActionPlanre‐leasedinOctober2015bytheOfficeofScienceandTechnologyPolicyassignsprimaryresponsibilitytoNSF,inpartnershipwithNASA,toprioritizeandidentifyopportunitiesforresearchanddevelop‐menttoenhancetheunderstandingofspaceweatheranditssources,includingdevelopingandtest‐ingmodelsofthecoupledsun‐Earthsystem.InordertomeetthischallengeGSwillneedtoaugmentitsfutureinvestmentsforresearchintothescienceofspaceweather.
ThisPortfolioReviewCommittee(PRC)oftheGeospaceSectionwaschargedbytheNSFAdvisoryCommitteeforGeosciencestoreconcilethemostpromisingandessentialsciencestrategiesandcriti‐calcapabilitieswiththesciencegoalsofthe2013DecadalSurvey(DS)forSolarandSpacePhysics(SSP),andoftheGeospaceSection.GrowthinfutureNSFbudgetsforgeospacesciencewouldcer‐tainlymakethisassignmentstraightforward,withsatisfyingoutcomesforpracticallyeverysegmentofthegeospaceresearchcommunity.However,thecommitteechargedwiththisreviewwasgivenamorefiscallydemandingconstraint:Assumeaninflation‐adjusted,flatbudgetforGSoverthenextdecade.
GSinvestmentsinfacilitiesandgrantsprograms,forthemostpart,arealreadywell‐positionedtoenablesignificantprogressinachievingthe2013DSsciencegoals.However,theSurveyanticipatedincreasingimportanceandfutureemphasisonintegrativeandcross‐disciplinaryscience,ofwhichspaceweatherisaprimeexample.Thus,thePortfolioReviewgaveparticularattentiontothealign‐mentandbalanceinGSinvestmentswiththisvectoroftheSurvey.
AfterassessingthecriticalcapabilitiesneededtomakeprogressinachievingDSgoals,thePRCexaminedindetailallGSprogramsandfacilities,theirbalanceandabilitytoprovidetherequiredca‐pabilities.ThecommitteefindsthattheSection’sprovisionofcriticalcapabilitiesforintegrativeandcross‐disciplinarysciencemustbeaugmentedifgeospaceresearchistointersectthefutureenvi‐sionedintheDecadalSurvey.Doingsowillrequirechangesinthebudgetsofsomeprogramelementsandfacilitiesasrecommendedbelow.“Freeenergy”toimplementnewprogramsandfacilitiesthatbetteraddressDSgoalsisderivedmainlyfromredirectingsupportfromsomecurrentfacilitiesintonewfacilitiesandprograms.
Final 2 GS Portfolio Review
BudgetimplicationsofthePRCrecommendationsaregivenattwosnapshotsinthefuture(Chap‐ter9).Thefirstsnapshotat2020showsthebudgetsofnewprogramelementsandfacilities(to‐getherwithunchangedprogramelementsandfacilities)thataremadepossiblebyreprogrammingelementsofthe2015budget.The2025budgetsnapshotcarriesthe2020budgetforwardwithlessspecificity.PRCrecommendationsforvariousGSprogramsandfacilitiesfollow.
CoreGrantsPrograms.MakingprogressonDSsciencegoalswouldbeimpossiblewithoutvi‐brantresearchgrantsprogramsthatsupport,sustainandstimulateanovelscientificenterprise.To‐getherwiththespecialGSprogramforFacultyDevelopmentinSpaceSciences(FDSS),theyarealsoessentialinpromotingavitalprofession.TheGSshouldmaintaintheexistingbudgetshareforthecoreresearchprogramsinAeronomy,MagnetosphericPhysicsandSolar‐TerrestrialResearchandtheFDSSprogramwithintheassumedinflation‐adjusted2015level(orgreater)forthenextdec‐ade.Itshoulduseproposalpressureinconcertwithportfoliobalancetodetermineanoptimumdis‐tributionofinvestmentsacrossthethreeprograms.
TargetedGrantsPrograms.TheGSshouldmaintainthecombinedcurrentfundinglevelforitsthreetargetedresearchgrantsprograms–CouplingEnergeticsandDynamicsofAtmosphericRe‐gions(CEDAR),GeospaceEnvironmentModeling(GEM)andSolar,HeliosphericandInterplanetaryEnvironment(SHINE)–overthenextfiveyears.Whiledoingso,itshouldmonitorthenexusofcross‐disciplinarycollaborativeandintegrativeresearchwithintheseprograms,includingspaceweatherresearch.Beyond2020,orsoonerifadditionalfundingbecomesavailable,theGSshouldreprogramaportionofthetargetedresearchbudgetintoanewprogramelement,IntegrativeGeospaceScience(IGS).
SpaceWeatherModelingProgram.TheGSshouldcontinueitscurrentinvestmentinspaceweathermodeling(currentlyincollaborationwiththeNASALivingWithaStarprogram),atleastun‐til2020.Beyond2020,orsoonerifadditionalfundingcanbeidentified,andinconcertwiththerec‐ommendedGrandChallengeProjectsprogram(describedbelow),thecombinedbudgetforspaceweatherresearchandgrandchallengeprojectscomprisingIGSshouldbeincreasedsignificantly.Evenintheassumedflat‐budgetscenario,growthintheIGSprogramby60‐70%isexpectedbetween2020and2025withtheaforementionedreprogrammingfromtargetedgrantsprograms.
CubeSatProgram.TheGSCubeSatprogramhasattractednationalattentionbydemonstratingthefeasibilityofusingtinyandrelativelyinexpensivesatelliteplatformsfornovelmeasurementsingeospace.WiththerecentgrowinginterestfromothergovernmentagenciesinCubeSatscience,andfromindustryinthedevelopmentandprovisionofstandardCubeSatplatforms,itmaybetooearlytoassessthelong‐termvaluepropositionofconductingCubeSatsciencewithintheGSanditscurrentmodeofmissiondevelopment.TheGSCubeSatprogramhasbornesignificantcostsforCubeSatengi‐neering,whichdetractsfromtheSection’sprimaryscientificmission.However,developmentofCu‐beSatmissionsinuniversitieshasbecomeasignificantvehicleforgeneratinginterestamongunder‐graduatesinSTEMstudies.TheGSshouldcontinueitsCubeSatprogramwithincreasedemphasisonCubeSatscientificmissionconceptsandinstrumentdevelopmentandlessemphasisonengineeringofCubeSatbusesandcommunicationsystems.Withlessengineeringrequired,therecommendedbudgetfortheGSCubeSatprogramcandecreasebyonethird.InterestinCubeSatscienceisex‐pectedtoaccruemorebroadlyacrossNSFintheGeoscience,EngineeringandEducationDirectoratesandatNASAandotheragencies.TheGSshouldpursueopportunitiesforCubeSatcollaborationswiththeaimofleveragingitsinvestmentinthisemergingcapability.
FacilitiesProgram.GSfacilities,includingClass1andClass2facilities(definedinChapter7),currentlyaccountfor38%oftotalGSinvestments.ThefacilitiesinvestmentrecommendedbythePRCdecreasesto36%by2020andstabilizesatthisvaluefromthereon.Althoughthedecrementin
Final 3 GS Portfolio Review
thefacilitiesbudgetismodest,asignificantredistributionoffundswithinthefacilitiesportfolioisrecommended.
ThecurrentlysupportedGSfacilitiesinclude:
Class1Facilities:IncoherentscatterradarfacilitiesincludeArecibo,Jicamarca,MillstoneHill,PFISR,RISR‐NandSondrestrom.TheConsortiumofResonanceandRayleighLidars(CRRL)isalsofundedbytheGSFacilitiesprogram.
Class2Facilities:Thesecommunityfacilitiesincludedataandmodelingenvironments(AM‐PERE,CCMC,SuperMag)andadistributedarrayofcoherentscatterradars(SuperDARN).Theyarecurrentlymanagedbytheprogrammanagerforspaceweatherresearch.
TheCRRLoperatesasaPI‐ledresearchprojectanddoesnotmeetthecriteriausedbythePRCforafacility.ThePRCrecommendsthatfundingfortheinnovativescienceaccomplishedbyCRRLbede‐rivedfromthecoreortargetedgrantsprogramsthroughastandardcompetitivepeerreviewpro‐cess.Theabovenoted2%reductioninthefacilitiesinvestmentismainlyduetotheredirectionofCRRLfundingtothegrantsprograms.
Amongtheotherfacilities,Jicamarca,PFISR,RISR‐N,AMPERE,CCMC(inpartnershipwithNASA),SuperMagandSuperDARNprovidecriticalcapabilitiesthataredeemedessentialformakingprogressonDSsciencegoals.AllshouldcontinuetobefundedattheirnominalFY2015level,until2020oraninterimSeniorReviewforfacilitiesisconvened(seebelow).MillstoneHillalsoprovidesacriticalcapabilityanditsfundingshouldbesimilarlycontinued,exceptfortheportionofitsbudgetdedicatedtocommunitydatamanagement.Thesmallfraction(<10%)fordatamanagementshouldbeaddedtoapooloffunds(describedbelow)forfuturecompetitiontodevelopandmanagecommu‐nitydatasystems,whicheventuallyshouldalsobecomeseparateClass2facilities.
TheSondrestromISRprovidesimportantdiagnosticsintheionosphericcuspregion,equa‐torwardofthemagneticpole.ThiscapabilityisneededtoachieveDSsciencegoals,butSon‐drestrom’smaintenanceandoperationalcosts,anditsolderKlystron‐tubeanddishtechnology,di‐minishitsvaluepropositionintheportfolio.Theimportanceofinternationalcooperationinobserv‐ingtypicallyfast‐evolving,globalgeospacedynamicswaswellestablishedevenbeforetheInterna‐tionalGeophysicalYearof1957‐58.ItisrecommendedthattheGSbeginforginganewpartnershipwiththeEuropeanIncoherentScatterScientificAssociation(EISCAT)andterminatesupportforSondrestromwhenitscurrentcontinuinggrantiscomplete.ThecostoffullUSpartnershipinEISCATislessthanhalfthecostofSondrestrom,soGSresourceswillbesignificantlyleveragedifISRobserv‐ingtimeanddataaccessforUSinvestigatorscanbeadequatelymetbyjoiningEISCAT.ThelocationoftheEISCAT‐SvalbardISRrelativetoPFISRandRISR‐Nofferssomegeographicaladvantagesrela‐tivetoSondrestromindiagnosingday‐nightflowsacrossthepolarcap.Inaddition,anewcapabilityforauroralscience,EISCAT‐3D,isexpectedtobecomeoperationalby2020.ItsvolumetricimagingwillleapfrogtheAMISRphased‐arraytechnologydevelopedwithGSsupporttwodecadesago.
Theworld’smostsensitiveISRatAreciboObservatory(AO)providescapabilitiesprimarilytoaddresstheDSsciencegoalto“discoverandcharacterizefundamentalprocessesthatoccurbothwithintheheliosphereandthroughouttheuniverse”,specificallyinEarth’sionosphereandthermo‐sphere.Provisionofthiscapabilityrequirednearly10%oftheGSbudgetin2015.Thecostofthisin‐vestmentsignificantlydistortsthebalanceintheGSportfolioandcannotbejustifiedgoingforwardifGSistosupportactivitiesthatwilloptimallyimplementtheDSrecommendations.ThePRrecom‐mendsa73%reductionintheGScontributiontoAOtobringitscostapproximatelyinlinewithpro‐posalpressureandallocationofobservingtimeforGSinvestigatorsrelativetootherAOusers.
Final 4 GS Portfolio Review
TherecommendedchangesinGSinvestmentsinAOandSondrestrom,discountedbytheex‐pectedcostofjoiningEISCAT,open10%intheGSbudgetforimplementationofDSrecommenda‐tionsforNSF.Thiswedgefallsshortoftheestimated25%increaseintheGSbudgetrequiredforfullimplementationofDSrecommendations(Section3.2),butitdoesallowinitiationofimportantnewprogramelementsthatwillprovidecriticalcapabilities.
ThesenewprogramelementsincludeaGrandChallengeProjects(GCP)program,newpro‐gramsforDataSystemsandforDistributedArraysofScientificInstruments(DASI),andanInno‐vationandVitality(I&V)program.
– TheDSspecificallyrecommendedaGCPprogramtomakeprogressonlargecross‐disciplinaryproblems.Suchaprogramisdeemedcriticalinaddressingmanybasicscienceissuesofgeospace,theinterplanetarymediumandtheSun,aswellasintegrativesciencecuttingacrossthem.
– TheDSidentifiedtheneedforanadvanceddataenvironmentthatdrawstogethernewandar‐chivedsatelliteandground‐basedSSPdatasetsandcomputationalresults.TherecommendedGSDataSystemsprogramwillsupportdevelopmentofoneormorenewClass2facilitiesthatexploitemerginginformationtechnologiesforintegratedsoftwareanddataanalysistools,GSdatamin‐ingandassimilation.
– DASInetworksareessentialtoaddresstheDSsciencegoalto“determinethedynamicsandcou‐plingofEarth’smagnetosphere,ionosphere,andatmosphereandtheirresponsetosolarandter‐restrialinputs.”TherecommendedGSDASIprogramemphasizestheimportanceofdistributedmeasurementsystemsingeospacescience.Thepeer‐reviewedprojectsreceivingsupportfromthisprogramareexpectedtobecomeClass2facilities.
– IninterviewingPIsofGSfacilitiesthePRCheardrepeatedlythatfundsforsystemupgrades,in‐cludingsoftwareanddatasystems,havebeenstretchedthininrecentyears.Usingapeer‐reviewprocesstodetermineresourceallocations,therecommendedI&Vprogramwillmaintainthestate‐of‐the‐artinGSfacilitiesandmodels.Insodoing,thisprogramfulfillstheDSrecommenda‐tiontocompletethecurrentprogram.
Separatemid‐decadalseniorreviewsof(1)theGScoreandstrategicgrantsprogramsand(2)theGSfacilitiesprogram,includingbothClass1andClass2facilities,arerecommendedtoevaluatecon‐tinuingalignmentoftheprogramswithSurvey,SectionandDivisiongoalsandtoidentifyandpriori‐tizeemergingopportunitiesforinnovationintheprograms.
InidentifyinggapsinproposalopportunitiesandfundinglevelsthatlimittheeffectivenessofSSPresearch,theDSrecommendedtheadditionofamidscalefundingcapabilityspecificallyforNSF.TheDS‐envisionedMidscaleProjectsProgramwouldenablecompetitionandsupportforhigh‐prioritymidscaleprojectsleadingtonext‐generationground‐basedobservatorieswithindividualprojectcostsrangingfrom$4‐30M(severalcandidatesarelistedinSection7.7).ThisprogramdoesnotfitintothebudgetenvelopegiventothePRC,nordothefullcostsofDSrecommendationsforCubeSat,SpaceWeatherandGrandChallengeProjectsprograms.
ShouldfutureGSbudgetsbecomemoreoptimisticthancurrent,aMidscaleProjectsProgramwouldbecomeahighprioritytogetherwithmorecomprehensiveimplementationoftheseotherpro‐grams.TherecommendedSeniorReviewswouldbeaneffectiveprocessfordeterminingif,ortheex‐tenttowhich,additionalinvestmentsmightbeadaptedtoaccommodatemorefullyvestedcoreandstrategicgrantsprogramstogetherwithnewmidscaleprojectsandtheirfuturedemandontheGSfacilitiesbudget.
Final 5 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 1. Introduction
GeospacescienceunderwentaremarkabletransformationinthedecadebetweenthelasttwoDecadalSurveysforSolarandSpacePhysics(SSP).In2003,anascentthoughnotquitearticulatedconceptofgeospaceasasystemappearsasoneoftheSurvey’stoplevelsciencechallenges.Inthe2013Survey,thedomainscomprisinggeospacearenowrecognizedaselementsofacoupleddy‐namicalsystemextendingfromtheupperatmosphere,throughnear‐Earthandinterplanetaryspace,totheSun.Theoriginsofsolarvariability,thepredictabilityofspaceweatherandfundamen‐talplasmaprocessesarecommonthemes.
Todaygeospacesciencecontinuesitsarcofdiscoveryintothebasicphysicalandchemicalpro‐cessesthatgovernthedynamicsoftheSun,theinterplanetarymedium,themagnetosphereandionosphereandtheupperatmosphereofEarth.Wehavelearnedduringtherecent,unusuallyquietsolarminimumthatthethermosphereandionospherearestronglyforcednotonlyfromabovebythemagnetospherebutalsobytheatmospherefrombelow.Escapingoutflowsofionosphericions,stimulatedbyintenseelectrodynamicforcingfromthesolarwind‐magnetosphereinteraction,mod‐ifyfundamentalpropertiesofEarth’sionosphereandmagnetosphere,includingtheimportantmag‐neticreconnectionprocess.Wehavelearnedtointerpretthegeoeffectiveimpactsofdifferentinter‐planetarystructuresandcantracetheiroriginsbacktodynamiceventsandregionsattheSun.De‐spitethesesuccesses,wearestillunabletopredictoneofthemostimportantpropertiesofinter‐planetarydisturbancesthatdeterminetheirgeoeffectiveness–thenorth‐southcomponentoftheembeddedmagneticfields.Wenowrealizethatthegeospacesystembehavesdifferentlythanasim‐plesuperpositionofitsconstituentparts,andthiskeyrealizationunderpinsourfutureabilitytopredicttheimpactsofspaceweather.
TheNationalScienceFoundationhasendowedavibrantandinnovativecommunityofspacescientistswithleading‐edgetoolsforscientificinvestigation.Usingnewtechnologiesgeospacesci‐entistsaredeployingincreasinglysensitiveground‐basedinstrumentsandobservatoriestodis‐coverpreviouslyinvisiblestructuresintheupperatmosphereandSun.Widelydistributednet‐worksofground‐basedinstrumentsarehelpingtoresolvespace‐timeambiguityinsparsemeasure‐mentsofthespaceenvironment.Complexandincreasinglyrealisticnumericalsimulationsper‐formedonthemostadvancedsupercomputersandcombinedwithdataassimilationenableexplo‐rationofregionssuchastheinteriorofthesunthatarepracticallyinaccessibletodirectmeasure‐ment;andnovelnumericalexperimentsarerevealingthecausalchainofeventsresponsibleforma‐jordisturbancesingeospacesuchasgeomagneticandionosphericstorms.
Thegeospacesciencecommunity’sambitiousagendafordiscoveryandsynthesisofnewknowledgeappearstohavereachedalimitintheNation’sabilitytosustainitatanevergrowingpace.ThisPortfolioReview(PR)oftheGeospaceSection(GS)ofNSF’sDivisionofAtmosphericandGeospaceScience(AGS)reconcilesthemostpromisingandessentialsciencestrategiesandmeas‐urementcapabilitieswiththescientificaspirationsprioritizedinthe2013DecadalSurvey(DS).
Geospacephenomenaareglobalinnature,incontrastwithtroposphericdynamics,andtheyex‐hibitplanetary‐scalechangesontimescalesofanhourorless.ThuswhetherNorthAmericaisaf‐fectedbyanensuingspaceweathereventisdeterminedlargelybytheplanet’srotationandthetimeofimpactoftheinterplanetarydriver.Sincethestateofgeospacechangesquicklyandglobally,simultaneousmeasurementsareneededthroughoutitsextensivespatialdomainandovertheen‐tiresurfaceoftheplanet.Thisfundamentalfeaturehasengenderedaveryactiveandcollaborative
Final 6 GS Portfolio Review
internationalresearchcommunityingeospacescience.Withjudiciousconsiderationofthesyner‐giesbetweenUSandinternationalinvestmentsinthegeospacescientificenterprise,theNationalScienceFoundation(NSF)cansubstantiallyleverageitsimpactinthisfield.Thisreviewrecom‐mendsabalancedportfolioofGSinvestmentsincriticalcapabilities,anditidentifiesnaturalsyner‐giesthatcanleverageNSF’scurrentinvestmentsingeospacesciencetoallownewinitiativesinthenextdecade.
TheGeospaceSection’sleadershipofthepastdecadeinitiatedinnovativeprogramsthathavedemonstratedtheirvaluetogeospacescienceandtosociety.TheSection’sSpaceWeatherResearchandCubeSatprogramsareamongthemostoutwardlyvisibleoftheseprograms.TheCubeSatpro‐gramwasinitiatedatatimewheninexpensiveCubeSatmissionsandfrontiersciencewereconsid‐eredincompatible.AndyetNSF’sGeospaceSectionledthechargeindemonstratingviabilitywhensoundengineeringpracticeisfollowed,forwhichitisnowrecognizedasapioneerinthisarea.TheSection’seffortsinforgingaNationalSpaceWeatherProgramtwodecadesago,followedmorere‐centlywithresourcestofocustheattentionofgeospacescientistsonproblemsofsignificantna‐tionalimportance,arenowculminatingwiththeOctober2015releaseofaNationalSpaceWeatherActionPlanbytheOfficeofScienceandTechnologyPolicy.Thisactionplanelaborates18actionsforNSF,onewithNSFhavingprimaryresponsibilityandseventeentobeundertakenjointlywithotheragencies.TheGeoscienceDirectorate’sGeospaceSectionispreparedtoact,butnewre‐sourcesforspaceweatherresearchareneededtomeetthechallenge.
TheGeospaceSectionhasbeentheideainnovatorandentrepreneurialincubatorforsolarandspacephysicsformanyyears.Willitcontinuetoservethisimportantrole?
Thecommitteeofthirteenprominentgeospaceandsolarscientistschargedtoconductthisportfolioreviewhasbeentaskedspecificallywithrecommendinganoptimum,zero‐sumdistribu‐tionofGSinvestmentsthatwillenablesignificantprogressinachievingthe2013DSsciencegoalsinthenextdecade.Inconcertwiththischarge,thecommitteeassertsforthegeospacesciencecom‐munitythatNSF’sGeospaceSectionmustcontinueitscrucialroleasanentrepreneurialincubatorforgeospacescience.Theharddecisionsofthisreviewrecognizetheenormousvalueofpreviousgenerationsofcutting‐edgemeasurementtechniquesthatledtomanyscientificdiscoveries.Yetthisreviewisaboutthefutureofgeospacescienceandaboutnewmeasurementtechniques,newsimulationanddataassimilationtechniques,andnewcyberinfrastructurecapabilitiesfordataex‐ploitationofthegrowingdatabaseofheterogeneous,multi‐scalemeasurements.
ThePortfolioReviewCommittee(PRC)invitestheGeosciencesAdvisoryCommittee(ACGEO)andthegeospaceresearchcommunitytosuspenditsimpressionsofthestatusquoinreadingthisreportandjointhecommitteeinenvisioningavibrant,forward‐lookingGeospaceSectionthatmeldsthebestcurrentscientificpracticewithnewprograminnovationstotransformourunder‐standingofgeospace.
Final 7 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 2. Review Process and Guiding Principles
2.1 Committee Charge
ThefollowingboundaryconditionsweregiventothePRCforitsreview(seeApp.A):
AlloftheGS‐fundedactivitiesshouldbeconsideredtogetherwiththeDecadalSurveyrec‐ommendations:CoreProgramsofAeronomy,MagnetosphericPhysics,andSolarTerrestrialResearch,focusedprogramsCEDAR,GEM,andSHINE,elementsofthenewSpaceWeatherResearch&InstrumentationProgram(CubeSat,spaceweathermodeling,andothermulti‐user,spaceweather‐relatedactivities),componentsoftheGeospaceFacilitiesProgram,suchastheIncoherentScatterRadar,LidarConsortium,SuperDARNHFradars,andthoseactivitiesspecificallydesignedtoenhanceeducationalopportunities,diversity,andinterna‐tionalparticipation.
Thereviewshouldbeforward‐looking,focusingonthepotentialofallfundedfacilities,pro‐grams,andactivitiesfordeliveringthedesiredscienceoutcomesandcapabilities(whiletakingintoaccountrespectivepastperformances)andconsideringthevalueoffundedac‐tivitiesintermsofbothintellectualmeritandbroaderimpacts.
Thereviewshouldassumebudgetscenarios(tobeprovidedbyGS)toencompassthepe‐riodfrom2016through2025,andconsiderthecostsof(i)continuingtheexistingobserv‐ingcapabilitiesandscience‐fundedprograms,aswellasof(ii)newfacilitiesandprograms,includingthoserecommendedintheSurveyandotherstheReviewCommitteemaywishtointroduce.
TheCommittee’sdeliberationsshouldtakeintoconsiderationthenationalandinternationalGeospaceScienceslandscapeandtheconsequencesofitsrecommendationsfordomesticandinternationalpartnerships.
Withtheseguidelines,thePRCwasaskedtoconstructitsrecommendationsaroundtwothemes:
1. Recommendthecriticalcapabilitiesneededovertheperiodfrom2016to2025thatwouldenableprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedinChapter1ofthe2013DecadalSurveyforSolarandSpacePhysics.Therecommendationsshouldencompassnotonlyobserva‐tionalcapabilities,butalsotheoretical,computational,andlaboratorycapabilities,aswellascapabilitiesinresearchsupport,workforce,andeducation.
2. Recommendthebalanceofinvestmentsinthenewandinexistingfacilities,grantspro‐grams,andotheractivitiesthatwouldoptimallyimplementtheSurveyrecommendationsandachievethegoalsoftheGeospaceSectionasarticulatedintheAGSDraftGoalsandOb‐jectivesDocument(includingNRC/BASCReview,2014)andtheGEO/AdvisoryCommitteeDocument"DynamicEarth:GEOImperatives&Frontiers2015‐2020"(NSF,2014).Theserecommendationsmayincludeclosureordivestmentofsomefacilities,aswellastermina‐tionofprogramsandotheractivities,and/ornewinvestmentsenabledasaresult.Theover‐allportfoliomustfitwithinthebudgetaryconstraintsprovidedtotheCommittee,givenastheGSFY2015budgetof$43.5M,extendingoutto2025withinflationadjustmentbutotherwisenoaugmentation.
Final 8 GS Portfolio Review
TheCommitteewasfurtherinstructedtoconsidernotonlywhatnewactivitiesneedtobeintro‐ducedoraccomplished,butalsowhatactivitiesandcapabilitieswillbepotentiallylostinenablingthesenewactivitiesanddiscontinuingcurrentactivities.ThePRCwasaskedtoprioritizeelementsoftherecommendedportfolioinsufficientdetailtoenableGStomakesubsequentappropriatead‐justmentsinresponsetovariationsinFederalandnon‐Federalfunding.
FinallytheCommitteewasaskedtoconsidertheeffectsofitsrecommendationsonthefuturelandscapeoftheU.S.Geospacecommunity.Therecommendedportfolioandanychangesshouldbeviableandleadtoavigorousandsustainablefuture.Inparticular,theCommitteeshouldexaminehowtherecommendedportfoliosupportsanddevelopsaworkforcewiththerequisiteabilitiesanddiversitytoexploittherecommendedresearchandeducationinvestments.
2.2 Review Process
ThePortfolioReviewCommitteewasappointedandchargedinlateFebruary2015.Nomina‐tionsforthePRcommitteemembershipweresolicitedfromtheGSstaffand,uponidentifyingtheCommitteeChair,theGSstaffworkedwiththeChairtoidentifythemembershipwiththegoalthatthePRCommitteewillbehighlyrespectedand,tothegreatestextentpossible,regardedasequita‐bly‐constitutedandfair‐minded,bythebroadgeospacecommunity.
Theassembledcommitteeincludesabroaddiversityofknowledgeacrossgeospacesciencethe‐ory,instrumentation,observation,computationanddata.TheCommittee'sresearchexpertisein‐cludesaeronomy,magnetosphericphysics,solarandsolar‐terrestrialphysics,spaceweatherre‐searchandinstrumentation(includingCubeSats),useofGS‐supportedfacilities,aswellasbroadknowledgeofeducationalandworkforcedevelopmentactivities.TheCommitteemembersareinvariouscareerstages,balancedbygender,ethnicity,geography,andinstitutiontypes.TheyhavebeenvettedagainstNSFpolicyforconflictsofinterest.Acommitteesizeof12‐14wasviewedasmanageablewhilestillmaintainingthedesireddiversity.
ThecommitteebeganholdingregularbiweeklyteleconsonMarch4,2015initiallytoestablishprocessandtoidentifykeyinformationneededtoinformthereview.RequestforInformation(RFI)wasfirstdirectedtoGSprogramofficerstoacquireanunderstandingoftheprogramsandfacilitiesGScurrentlyfunds.EachPIofthesixClass1facilitiesandsixClass2facilities1fundedbyGSwasre‐questedbyGSprogramofficerstoprovideanarrativeorslideoverviewoftheirfacility,alongwithinformationonsciencehighlights,usersandpublications.ThisinformationwasmadeavailabletothePRcommitteeinlateMarch,2015.
Thecommitteeorganizeditselfintosixsubcommitteesalongthelinessuggestedinitscharge:1)AeronomyandCEDARprograms;2)MagnetosphericPhysicsandGEMprograms;3)Solar‐Ter‐restrialResearchandSHINEprograms;4)SpaceWeatherprogram;5)GSFacilitiesprogram;and6)EducationandWorkforce.Thesesubcommitteesweretaskedbythecommitteewithdevelopingrecommendationsforconsiderationbythefullcommitteeoncriticalcapabilitiesneededovertheperiodfrom2016to2025thatwouldenableprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedintheDS.
ThecommitteemetinpersonatNSFonApril6‐7,2015tohearpresentationsfromGSprogramofficersonthescope,organization,administrationandbudgetsofGSprogramsandfacilities.Itbe‐cameclearatthismeetingthatadditionalinformationontheSection’sgrantsprograms,funding
1 Class 1/2 facilities are defined in Section 7.2.3
Final 9 GS Portfolio Review
ratesandfacilitieswouldbeneededinordertounderstandcurrentand,mostimportantly,futurecapabilitiesoftheGStomakeprogressonDSsciencegoals.AdditionalRFIsweresubmittedtoGSprogramdirectors.
Thecommitteeconsideredtheutilityofsitevisitstokeyfacilities.SincethechargeofthePRcommitteediffersfrompastGSfacilitiesreviewcommittees,itoptedforamoreefficientmodeofinformationgatheringbydevelopingtargetedRFIsdirectedtothePIforeachfacility(AppendixC).Briefwrittenreplieswererequested,followedbyaone‐hourteleconinterviewwitheachfacilityPI.Theprimaryobjectiveofthisinformationgatheringwastounderstandthevalueofeachfacilityinprovidingcriticalcapabilitiesneededovertheperiodfrom2016to2025thatwouldenablepro‐gressonthescienceprogramarticulatedintheDS.GatheringthistargetedinformationonGSfacili‐tiestookabout7weekstocomplete.
ThePRcommitteealsoseparatelyinterviewedviatelecontheDirectorsofNCAR’sHighAltitudeObservatory,theNationalSolarObservatory,theAstrophysics&GeospaceSciencesprogramofNSF’sPolarPrograms(VolodyaPapitashvili,whowasthenactingasHeadoftheGeospaceSection)andtheEISCAT.ThefirstthreeoftheseprogramsaresponsoredbyNSF.TheEISCATDirectorisre‐sponsibleforoverseeingtheEISCATincoherentradarsystemandthedevelopmentofitsnewfacil‐ity,EISCAT‐3D.Developingrecommendationsonthesciencecapabilitiesoftheseprogramsandas‐sociatedfacilitieswasnotwithinthepurviewofthePRcommittee,butduediligenceneverthelesssuggestedthatthecommitteeshouldunderstandtheextenttowhichthescientificcapabilitiesoftheseprogramsandfacilitiesmayenableprogressontheDSscienceprograms.TheseprogramsandfacilitiesaresponsoredbyresourcesseparatefromGS.Thecommitteeespeciallywantedtoun‐derstandtheextenttowhichtheseotherinterestsmightbealignedwiththoseofGS,andwhetherappropriatesynergiesmighteffectivelyleverageGSresources.
Whenthebulkofthisinformationwasinhand,asecondin‐personmeetingwasheldatNSFonAugust12‐14,2015.ThePRCmetinexecutivesessionduringmuchofthismeetingtodevelop ini‐tialrecommendations,attimesengagingtheGSprogrammanagers,amongthemactingGSHeadJanetKozyra,thenewlyappointedGSFacilitiesProgramDirector,JohnMeriwether,andtheAGSDirectorPaulShepsonforadditionalinformationandtoclarifyfutureconstraintsonrecommenda‐tions.
DevelopmentofthewrittenPRreportoccurredafterthismeeting.Subsequentweeklywebcon‐ferencesprovidedthecommitteewithopportunitiestorefineandagreeonitsrecommendationsandcoordinatereportdevelopment.GSstaffrespondedtoadditionalRFIsfromthePRCduringthisperiod,andthisinformationwasusedtoensureaccuracyofthePRC’sfindings.
AfirstdraftofthisreportwasdeliveredtoAGSDirectorPaulShepsonandGSHeadThereseMorettoonDecember10,2015for“factchecking”byGSstaff.RecommendedcorrectionsfromGSweresubmittedtothePRConJanuary9,2016.AfinaldraftwasthendevelopedbythePRCandde‐liveredtoAC/GEOonFebruary5,2016.
2.3 Community Input
AnnouncementofthePortfolioReviewandinvitationtotheGeospaceResearchcommunitytoprovideinputtothereviewviaaspecialemailaddress2werepostedinallrelevantcommunityelectronicnewslettersandintheAGUjournalSpaceWeather.Theperiodforcommentwas
Final 10 GS Portfolio Review
provisionallypostedas60days,fromMarch30,2015throughMay29,20153,butasoftdeadlinewasimposed,andthecommitteeacceptedcommentsthroughoutJuneandJuly.Thesolicitationrequestedcommentsbelimitedtotwopagesorless,whichwasmostlyfollowedintheresponses.AnnouncementoftheportfolioreviewandsolicitationforcommunityinputwasalsomadebytheGSActingHead,VolodyaPapitashvili,attheannualSpaceWeatherWorkshopheldinBoulder,COonApril13‐17,2015.
ThreeTownHallmeetingswereheldattheNSF‐sponsoredGEM,CEDARandSHINEsummerworkshopstheweeksofJune14,June21andJuly6,respectively.SeveralcommitteemembersparticipatedinGEMandCEDARTownHalls.OnlyonememberofthecommitteewasabletoleadtheSHINETownHall.OneormoreoftheGSProgramsDirectors,theActingGSHeadandtheAGSDivisionDirectorwerealsopresentattheTownHalls.Spiriteddiscus‐sionsensuedattheseopenforumsandmanyviewpointswerepublicallyex‐pressedanddiscussedbymembersofthecommunity.
Thesolicitationforemailcommentsyielded47writtenresponses(with62sig‐natories)thatspannedallGSprogramele‐ments.Eachcommitteememberwasaskedtoreadallemailresponses.
Thewrittencommentswereanalyzedtofindcommonideas.Afirstreviewsearchedforcommonthreadsandconceptsineachofthe47responses.Asexpected,athreadasso‐ciatedwithDecadalSurveyrecommendationswaspervasive.Equallydominatewasathreadpro‐motingsystemscienceorasystemviewofgeospace.Spaceweather,sciencefromincoherentscat‐terradars,andeducationofthenextgenerationofgeospacescientistswerealsocommonthreads.
Becauseacommon‐ideasearchhasadegreeofsubjectivity,asecondobjectiveanalysisemploy‐ingacomputerizedsearchforcommonwordsviatheWORDLappwasdevelopedbysubmittingaconcatenationofallemailcommentsto http://www.wordle.net//.Theresultisanimpressionof
3 http://www.nsf.gov/geo/ags/geospace‐portfolio‐review‐2015/index.jsp
Figure 2.1.Wordl cloud of the most frequently used words in the 45 email comments received from the geo‐space research community. Size of a word in the cloud is a measure of its frequency of use. Some authors use a given word many times, so frequency of use in the concatena‐tion of comments differs from the number of separate re‐sponses that use a given word at least once.
Final 11 GS Portfolio Review
communityinputintheformofawordcloudasshowninFigure2.1.Inthisgraphicalhistogramthemostrepeatedwordsareinthelargestfont.Fromsuchagraphic,onecouldconcludethatthewhitepaperrespondentsbelievethat:NSF[should]providenewfacilities,data,measurements[and]obser‐vations[to]supportcommunityresearchingeospace,atmosphereandsolarscience.
Thecommittee’smoredetailedreviewoftheemailcommentsgroupedtheminto4broadthemes(#indicatescount):GSmanagementandprocess(11);programmaticsotherthanfacilities(13);existingfacilities,observatoriesandinfrastructure(19)andnewfacilities,observatoriesandinfrastructure(17).Somecommentsaddressedmultiplethemes.
Themeswithineachcategoryincluded:
1. GSmanagementandprocess:GSfundingprioritiesandreviewprocess(7);advocacyforaperi‐odicseniorreviewprocess(5);advocacyforaCubeSatprogramreview(1).
2. Programmaticsotherthanfacilities:StrongadvocacyforCEDAR,GEMandSHINEprograms(4);advocacyforcross‐cutting,systemscienceandcross‐agencyscience(4);advocacyfortheFac‐ultyDevelopmentinSpaceScienceprogram(1);advocacyfortheCubeSatprogram(1).
3. Existingfacilities,observatoriesandinfrastructure:Strongadvocacyforincoherentscatterra‐dars(7),butalsoconcernsthatISRgoalsarefragmentedandintrospective(3)andsomeISRsarenolongerproducingfrontierscience(1);advocacyforexistingandnewdistributedground‐basedobservatories,synopticobservationsandtheirdataproducts(8).
4. Newfacilities,observatoriesandinfrastructure:AdvocacyforHAARP,anewCoronalMassEjec‐tionradar,magnetometerobservatoriesasacomponentoftheGSfacilitiesprogram,neutronmonitors,apole‐to‐poleFabry‐Perotinterferometerchainandaverylarge‐apertureLIDARob‐servatory(11);advocacyfortheFASRandCOSMOsolarfacilitiesmentionedintheDS(3);andadvocacyforuseofadvancedinformaticsindevelopingGSdataproducts(3).
Thesethoughtfulresponses,themanycommentsmadeatthethreeTownHallsandindividualexchangesamongPRCandcommunitymembersinformedthePRC’sconsiderationsandrecom‐mendations.
2.4 Guiding Principles
Indevelopingrecommendationsforportfolioinvestmentsoverthenextdecade,thePRCadoptedthefollowingprinciples:
Enablediscoveriesthattransformourunderstandingofgeospace.Discoveriesinaero‐nomy,magnetosphericphysics,solar‐terrestrialphysicsandscienceapplicabletospaceweatherwillcontinueunabatedinthenextdecade,but,asindicatedinthe2012DecadalSurvey,theim‐portanceofintegrativegeospacesciencewillbecomeincreasinglyprominentandinformfuturedi‐rectionsofdisciplinaryinvestigationanddiscovery.Thustheportfoliomust1)maintainstate‐of‐the‐artinstrumentation,facilitiesandcomputationalmodelsthatenablediscoveryinnewphysicalregimesandnewunderstandingofsystem‐levelbehavior;and2)includeprogramelementsthatpromotesynthesisandintegrationofnewdisciplinaryknowledge.Geospacescienceunderpinsim‐portantapplicationsinspaceweather,anditstrajectorymustremainalignedwithnationalneedsindeterminingandpredictingtheimpactsofspaceweather.
AlignGSinvestmentswithdecadalsciencegoals.TheSurvey’stop‐levelsciencegoalsare
Final 12 GS Portfolio Review
theprimarytouchstonesforthisreviewandthebasisforthePRC’srecommendationsforabal‐ancedGSportfolio.Throughoutitsevaluationprocess,thePRCavoidedrevisitingormodifyingtheSurvey’ssciencegoals,whichrepresentabroadconsensusofthe85solarandgeospacescientistsoftheGScommunitythatparticipatedinthereview.TheSurvey’srecommendedinvestmentsinfacili‐tiesandprogramsrelevanttoNSF,atfacevalue,exceedthecurrentoutlookforbudgetcapacityofGSforthenextdecade.Consistentwithitscharge,thisreviewstrivestoidentifyandprioritizethecriticalcapabilitiesthatwillenableprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedinChapter1oftheSurvey.
Achievebalanceacrosstheentireportfolioofactivities.TomaximizeprogressontheSur‐vey’sscienceprogram,GSinvestmentsmuststrikeabalanceacrossitssciencethrustsandamonginvestmentsininfrastructureandfacilities,workforce,coreandtargetedgrantsprograms,anddis‐ciplinaryandintegrativeprogramelements.Theseinvestmentsmustcontinuetosupporttime‐testedandhighlyrefinedobservationalandmodelingapproacheswhilecreatingspacefornovelandsometimesunanticipatedapproachesandmeasurementtechniques.Theportfoliorecom‐mendedforthenextdecadestrivestoachieveanoptimalbalanceamongtheseprogramobjectives.
Maintainflexibilityinadaptingtonewcapabilities.Infrastructureforfacilitiesandpro‐gramsrequiresconsiderabletimeandresourcestodevelopandmaintain,anditsvalueinongoingscientificinvestigationisundeniable.However,whenthecostofmaintaininglongstandinginfra‐structureandprogramsunderminesthefield’sabilitytopursuenewopportunitiesforinnovativescience,thevaluepropositionforthestatusquomayreachdiminishingreturns.Insomecases,modestinvestmentsinexistingfacilitiesmayimprovetheperformanceandsensitivityofthemeas‐urementtechniquesorevenaddimportantnewcapabilities.Understandingthetradespacefornewinvestments,reinvestmentsorupgradesanddivestmentsisacrucialaspectofthisreview.Optimi‐zationofthistradespaceisessentialinmaintainingaflexibleportfolioinaflat‐budgetenviron‐ment.
LeverageGSinvestments.TheGeospaceSectionisoneofmanyUSsponsorsofsolarandspacephysicsresearch,butithaschosentoinvestinprogramelementsandfacilitiesthatareuniqueandcomplementarytothosesponsoredbyotherentities.Someoftheseinvestmentsarealsocomple‐mentedbysimilarinvestmentsbynon‐USsponsorsofsolarandspacephysicsresearch.Thescien‐tificreturnonGSinvestmentshasbeenandshouldcontinuetobeleveragedthroughresourceshar‐ingamongbroaderNSF,commercial,cross‐agencyandinternationalpartners.IndetermininghowtomaximizeprogressontheSurvey’sscienceprogram,thisreviewlookedfornascentorexistingsynergieswithintheextendednon‐GScommunitythatmightallowmoreeffectiveuseoflimitedGSresources.
Valuepeer‐reviewedcompetition.Peerreviewinawardinggrantsisatime‐honoredprocessforfindingthebestinvestmentsinscience.ThisprinciplewascentraltothePRC’sconsiderationsofnewprogramelementsthatwouldenableprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedintheDeca‐dalSurveyandhowGScouldbestfundnewmodesofresearch,facilityandmodelupgrades,andnewinstrumentationandinstrumentnetworks.
Promoteopenaccesstodataanddatastandards.OpenaccesstoscientificdataderivedfromanNSFgrantisnowarequirement.However,openaccesspoliciesdonotnecessarilyspecifyre‐quirementsfortimelinessofaccessorusabilityofthedata.Raw(level0)dataarestraightforwardtoarchive,buttheyarerarelyusablewithoutadditionalprocessingbyinstrument,modeland/or
Final 13 GS Portfolio Review
dataspecialists.Makingdataopenandreadilyusablebyanyonewithaccesstothedataservershasenormousleveragingpowerinthescientificenterprise.Scientificinvestigationssponsoredbynon‐GSresourcessignificantlyaugmentthescientificknowledgederivedfromGS‐sponsoreddata.Alt‐houghsomeGSprogramactivitieshavebeenmovinginthisdirectionforsometime,newprogramelementsthatdirectmodestGSresourcestothedevelopmentofhigherlevelandmoreuseabledataproductshavethecapacitytoaccelerateprogressonthescienceprogramoftheDS.
Provideexcellenttrainingandcareeropportunities.Thequalityofscientificachievementsdependscruciallyontheintellectualcapacity,creativityanddedicationofparticipatingscientists.Preparingthenextgenerationofgeospacescientiststodiscoverandapplynewknowledgeinthefieldandpreparingthemforabroadrangeofcareeroptionsareessentialinmaintainingthevitalityofgeospacescience.
Inspireandinformpublicinterest.Thesubtitleofthe2013DecadalSurvey,“AScienceforaTechnologicalSociety”,emphasizestheroleandimportanceofgeospacescienceinthenationalin‐terest.ToborrowrecentlypublicizedlanguagefromtheUSHouseofRepresentativesScienceCom‐mittee,“fundingprioritiesmustensurethatAmericaremainsfirstintheglobalmarketplaceofbasicresearchandtechnologicalinnovation.Investmentsinbasicresearchcanleadtodiscoveriesthatchangeourworld,expandourhorizonsandsavelives.”Publicinterestingeospacesciencedependscruciallyonourabilitytoprovideclear,non‐technicalexplanationsofresearchprojectsthatdetailhoweachprojectmeetsintellectualmeritcriteria,isconsistentwithNSF’smission,andsupportsthenationalinterest.AllGSprogramelementsmustencourageparticipatingscientiststocommuni‐cate1)theexcitementofnewdiscoveriesingeospacescience,enabledbystate‐of‐the‐artinstru‐mentationandtechnology,and2)thevaluetosocietyofapplicablegeospacescienceleadingtoad‐vancesinpredictionandunderstandingoftheimpactsofspaceweatherandinunderstandingtheinfluenceonclimateofdownwardcouplingfromgeospacetoEarth’satmosphere.
Promotetransparency.Trustandunderstandingflowfromtransparency.ThePRCstrivestobetransparentinthisreview.PortfolioreviewrecommendationsregardingmanagementofNSFre‐sourcesforgeospacescienceaimforthesametransparencyfromtheGeospaceSection.
Final 14 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 3. Budget Overview and Projections
3.1 Budget Summary for Current GS Portfolio
TheGSportfoliohasthreeprimarysciencethrusts–Aeronomy(AER),MagnetosphericPhysics(MAG)andSolarandSolar‐TerrestrialResearch(STR)–andaSpaceWeatherResearch(SWR)pro‐gram,whichspansand,tosomeextent,integratesacrossthethreeprimarythrusts.Theprimarysciencethrustsincludeacoreresearchprogramandatargetedresearchprogramineacharea.ThetargetedprogramsincludetheCoupling,EnergeticsandDynamicsofAtmosphericRegions(CEDAR)program,theGeospaceEnvironmentModeling(GEM)programandtheSolar,HeliosphericandIn‐terplanetaryEnvironment(SHINE)program.TheNSF/DOEPartnershipinBasicPlasmaScienceandEngineeringisfundedthroughoneormoreofthecoreprograms.
TheSWRprogram,ascurrentlyconfigured,isanumbrellaadministrativestructurewithre‐sponsibilityfortheNASA/NSFCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelingProgram(SWM),aCubeSatprogram,theFacultyDevelopmentinSpaceSciences(FDSS)programandClass2geospacefacili‐ties.Itdoesnothaveacoreresearchprogram,anditsoverallfundingissmall(13%)comparedtotheprimaryscienceandClass1facilitiesprograms.
Class1facilities(seeSection7.2.3)includesixincoherentscatterradars:Arecibo,Jicamarca,MillstoneHill,PFISR,RISR‐NandSondrestrom.Class2facilities(Section7.2.3)includeSuperDARN,AMPERE,SuperMagandtheCommunityCoordinatedModelingCenter(CCMC).AcollaborativePI‐ledresearchproject,theConsortiumofResonanceandRayleighLIDARs(CRRL),isalsofundedbytheGSFacilitiesprogram.
ThebudgetallocationsfortheseprogramelementsareshowninFigure3.1.ThetotalGSbudgetforFY15is$43.56M.ThePRCwaschargedtoassumethatGSbudgetswouldbeflatoutto2025,cappedattheFY15value,withallowanceforinflationaryincreasesinfuturebudgets.
3.2 Budget Implications of DS Rec‐
ommendations
Chapter5oftheDSoffersspecificguidancetoNSFinimplementingrecommendationsrele‐vanttogeospacescience.DSChapter4alsoconcludesthatmaintainingandgrowingthebasicresearchprogramsatNSF(andatNASA,AFOSRandONR)areneededforamoreeffec‐tivetransitionfrombasicresearchtospaceweatherforecastingapplications,althoughnospecificbudgetguidanceisprovidedre‐gardinggrowth.TheserecommendationshavebudgetimplicationsforNSF,someex‐plicitlystated,othersimplied.Specificbudgetrecommendationsarelistedbelow,alongwithPRCestimates(denotedwith‘?’)
FACILITIES38%
STRATEGIC28%
CORE33%
GS Total$43.56M
FY15 BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
GS Reserve1%CRRL
3%
AER14%
MAG9%
STR10%
GEM6%SHINE
7%
SWM3½%
SWR
CubeSat3½%FDSS
1%
Class 25%
Class 130%
CEDAR7%
RWRRSWSWSS
Figure 3.1. FY15 GS budget allocations for Core,
Strategic and Facilities program elements.
Final 15 GS Portfolio Review
forDSrecommendationsthatdidnotspecifytargetfundinglevels.
Supportkeyexistingground‐basedfacilitiesandcompleteprogramsinadvancedstagesofim‐plementation,e.g.,RISR,PFISR,Sondrestrom,MillstoneHill,AreciboObservatory,Jicamarca,Su‐perDARN|NRAO,WSO,NSOSP/KP,SFO,BBSO,MLSO,NSODKIST (formerlyATST).Thefacili‐tiesafter“|”arefundedbyNSFandotherprogramsoutsidetheGeospaceSectionandarenotincludedinitsFY2015of$43.6M.ButasdiscussedinChapter6and8,theyareimportantdatasourcesforsolarandgeospacescience.Inaflat‐budgetscenario,thisrecommendationimplies,atfacevalue,thattheGScontinueallofitsexistingprogramsandfacilities,withabudgetof$43.6Mperyearin2015dollarsifnoneofrecommendationsfornewfacilitiesorprogramslistedbelowweretobeimplemented.
DataExploitation:Maintainanddevelop,asnecessary,systemsforaccessing,archiving,andminingsynopticandlong‐termdatasets,especiallytofacilitatesynergiesbetweenground‐andspace‐basedobservations($0.5Mperyear?)
DSrecommendationsemphasizetheimportanceofNSFinprovidingtheDKISTwithbasefund‐ingsufficientforoperation,dataanalysisanddistribution,anddevelopmentofadvancedinstru‐mentationfortheDKISTinordertorealizethescientificbenefitsofthismajornationalinvest‐ment.(ItisnotclearifthisrecommendationisaddressedspecificallytotheASTortheAGSDivi‐sion.DKISTiscurrentlybeingdevelopedbyNSOandwillmanagedbyNSOwithbasefundingfromASTwhenitbecomesoperational.)
MidscaleprojectlineforSSP($4‐30M,e.g.,a$30Mprojectfundedat$5‐6Mperyearover5yearsorsmallermidscaleprojectsfundedmorefrequently).
CubeSats($2.5Mperyear,anaugmentationof$1Mperyear)
Internationalcollaborations,e.g.,EISCAT‐3D($1Mperyear?)
Multidisciplinaryresearch:EncourageresearchthatfallsbetweenNSFsections,divisions,anddirectorates.Implement“HeliophysicsScienceCenters”@$1‐3Mperyearforeachcenter(e.g.,NSFcontributionto1or2centersat$2M?peryear)
MaintainandgrowtheSWresearchprogram(+$1Mperyear?)
Education:ContinuetheGSprogramforFacultyDevelopmentinSpaceSciences(FDSS)andsupportdevelopmentofacomplementarycurriculumprogram.Four‐yearinstitutionsofhighereducationshouldbeconsideredeligibleforFDSSawardsasameanstofurtherbroadenanddi‐versifythefield.MaintainthevarioussummerschoolofferingssupportedbyNSF(ascurrentlyfunded).
GuidancetoNSFfromtheDSinimplementingGS‐relevantrecommendationsimplyanestimatedbudgetaugmentationabovethecurrentlevelofabout$11Mperyear,a25%increase.Givenitscharge,thePRCwasfacedwith2GSscenarios:Recommendastatusquoprogramat$43.6M(i.e.,completethecurrentprogram)ormaintainasubsetofthemostproductive,existingfacilitiesandprogramsandphase‐outorreducefundingforlessproductiveelementstomakeroomintheflatbudgetforneworaugmentedprogramelementsandfacilities.ThePRCchargetorecommendthecriticalcapabilitiesneededovertheperiodfrom2016to2025thatwillenableprogressonthesci‐enceprogramarticulatedintheDSwasappliedindecidingbetweenthesetwoscenarios.
Final 16 GS Portfolio Review
3.3 Future Impacts of Past GS Budget Trends
TeasingoutobjectiveGSbudgettrendsfrom1999forwardiscomplicatedbytheadditionofnewprogramsandfacilities(particularlyClass2)duringthisperiod.Insomecases,thefacilitiesandprogramswereinitiallyfundedeitherseparatelyorjointlybybaseprogramsandthenlaterwereadministeredbytheSpaceWeatherResearch(SWR)programcreatedin2013.In2015,about25‐33%ofthebudgetallocatedtotheSWRprogramsupportsclearlydifferentiatedspaceweatheractivities(SWM),withthisfractionbeingaugmentedbyinvestmentsinClass2facilitiesandtheCu‐beSatandFDSSprograms,someportionofwhichsupportsspaceweatherresearch.ThebudgetsforthesevariousprogramelementsarekeptintheSWRprogramprimarilyforadministrativepur‐poses.ThePRCdoesnotquestiontheadministrativeutilityofthisorganization,butitdoesnotethatthisarrangementprovideslessthanoptimumtransparency.AsdiscussedinChapter7onGSFacilities,fundingforfacilitiesandresearchisalsosomewhatblurredbythefactthatresearchfundingisembeddedwithinawardstooperateandmaintain(O&M)facilities.ThuscautionshouldbeexercisedinrigidlyinterpretingpastGSbudgettrends.Nevertheless,thePRCidentifiedseveraltrendsthat,ifcontinued,willimpactGScapabilitiestoenablefutureprogressonthesciencepro‐gramoftheDS.
1. TheGSbudgethasbeenrelativelyflatforatleastadecadewhenthebumpfromtheAmeri‐canRecoveryandReinvestmentActof2009(ARRA)issubtractedinFigure3.2.GShasaddednewprogramsandfacilitiesduringthistimewithoutterminatingexistingprograms.
Figure 3.2. GS Budget from 1999 to 2015. Projected budgets are flat in FY 2015 dollars. The Space
Weather Research program was created in 2013 from an amalgamation of existing program ele‐
ments, such as FDSS and CubeSats, and activities that were previously funded via base programs.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
GS Reserve
Aeronomy
ARRA
Flat Budget Projection $43.6M
GS Facilities
Space Weather
FY 2015 Dollars
Solar‐Terrestrial Research
Magnetospheric Physics
Final 17 GS Portfolio Review
ThistrendsuggeststhatGShasadapteditsfundingstrategiestothegrowingaspirationsofthegeospacesciencecommunity.Thispracticetendstosqueezefundsforallprograms.
2. FundingforsciencegrantsadministeredbythecombinedcoreandtargetedprogramsofAER,MAGandSTRhasbeenprogressivelydecreasing.Inthepast,fundingstreamsforfacil‐itiesandgrantsprogramswerefairlydistinct.TheadventofClass2facilities,whichwerenotintheGSfacilitiesbudget,hasblurredthisdistinction.Educationandworkforcedevel‐opmentpreviouslyandcurrentlyareaccomplishedbysponsoringstudentsandpostdocsviathebasegrantprograms.Today,however,wholenewGSprogramelementssuchasFDSSandCubeSatsaugmentsupportforthiscoreaspectofNSF’smission.
3. ThenumberofGSfacilities(Class1and2)hasincreasedovertime.ThebudgetforGSfacili‐tieshasalsoincreasedovertimebutnotnecessarilyatarateneededtomaintainthestate‐of‐the‐artintechnicalandscientificcapabilitiesofthefacilities.Addingnewfacilitieswhilecontinuingtooperateolderfacilitiesinaflat‐budgetenvironmentrequiresreductionsinotherprogramsorsub‐optimumfundingofmaintenance,operationsandupgradesofGSfa‐cilities.Thissituationhasbeenexacerbatedbytheredistributionofcost‐sharingforM&OofAreciboObservatorybetweenASTandAGS.TheGSinvestmentinAOincreasedfrom$1.8MinFY2008to$4.1MinFY2016,amountingto32%oftotalAOfundingatthistime.
ThePRCfindsthesetrendstobeproblematicforachievingleading‐edgescienceinthenextdec‐ade.Futureimpactsincludefewerorsmallergrantsforscientificinvestigationsandalikelyinabil‐itytoadvancefacilities,instrumentsandsimulationmodelstomaintainthestate‐of‐the‐artinex‐perimental,observationalandmodelingscience.Ontheplusside,GShasimproveditscapacityforeducationandworkforcedevelopment.However,agreaternumberofemergingresearchersarenowchasingdiminishedfundingopportunities.Furthermore,GSdoesnothaveadequateresourcestoallowitsresearchcommunitytopursuenew,innovativemethodologiesandobservationaltech‐niques.TheseissuesindicatethatthestatusquointheGSprogramcannotprovidethecriticalcapa‐bilitiestoenableoptimalprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedintheDS.
3.4 Additional NSF Investments in Geospace Science
ThePRCreviewedNSFinvestmentsinprogramsandfacilitiesexternaltoAGSthatalsocontrib‐utetotheadvancementofgeospacescience.Theseprogramsinclude:
– NationalSolarObservatory(NSO):TheASTdivisionfundsfacilitiesadministeredbyNSOat$13Mperyear.ThesefacilitiesincludetheDunnSolarTelescopeandtheEvansSolarFacil‐itybothonSacramentoPeak(phasingoutby2019),aspecialfacilityforSynopticOpticalLong‐termInvestigationsoftheSun(SOLIS)andtheMcMath‐PierceSolarTelescope(rec‐ommendedfordivestmentin2017bythe2012ASTportfolioreview)bothonKittPeak,thedistributedGlobalOscillationNetworkGroup(GONG)andtheDanielKInouyeSolarTelescope(DKIST)withdesignandimplementationfundedbyanMREFCgrantwithopera‐tionsexpectedtobeginin2019.NSOalsohostsanumberofsmallersolarobservingpro‐jectsandprogramswithASTsupport.TheASTalsosupportstheNationalRadioAstron‐omyObservatory(NRAO),whichoperatestheVeryLargeArray(VLA),andtheGreenBankSolarRadioBurstSpectrometer.TheASTportfolioreviewnotedthatthesefacilitiesarejoinedbyfivepublic/privatesolarobservatories,ofwhichtheBigBearSolarObservatory(operatedbyNewJerseyInstituteofTechnology)possessesthelargesttelescope(theNew
Final 18 GS Portfolio Review
SolarTelescope,orNST,a1.6‐meteroff‐axisclearaperturetelescopewithadaptiveoptics),but,asindependentobservatories,allhavesomewhatfragilefundingstreams.ThePRClearnedthatgrantstousedatafromthesefacilitiesforsolarscienceisfundedlargelybytheSTRprogramofGS.Consequently,coordinationbetweenASTandAGSprogramofficersiscrucialinachievingthesolarscienceandspaceweatherprogramsadvocatedbytheDS.
– HighAltitudeObservatory(HAO):TheAGScooperativeagreementwiththeUniversityCor‐porationforAtmosphericScience(UCAR)fundstheNationalCenterforAtmosphericRe‐search(NCAR),andNCAR’sFY2015budgetincluded$6.2Mforavarietyofscienceactivi‐tiesatHAO.HAOoperatestheMaunaLoaSolarObservatory(MLSO)andsupportsasolarinstrumentationgroup.Asubstantialportionofitsbudgetsupportsresearchintolong‐termsolarvariability,solartransientsandspaceweather,andgeospacescience(upperat‐mospheric,ionosphericandmagnetosphericscience).NCAR’sComputationalInformationSystemsLaboratory(CISL)operatestheYellowstonesupercomputingfacilityandmakesavailabletoqualifiedNSFawardeeshigh‐performancecomputingallocationsonthismajorfacility.
– DivisionofPolarPrograms:ThisseparatedivisionwiththeGeosciencesDirectoratespon‐soredAntarcticAtmosphericandGeospaceScience(AAGS)inFY2015at$2.9M.Itsup‐portsoperationsfortwooftheSuperDARNHFradarsinthesouthernhemispherealongwithinstrumentdevelopment,deployment,operationandsciencefromanarrayofground‐basedinstrumentsontheAntarcticcontinent,includingriometers,magnetome‐ters,VLF/ULFreceivers,all‐skycameras,gravitywaveimagers,aFabry‐PerotInterferome‐ter,anFe‐BoltzmannLIDARandaneutronmonitor.
– Cross‐agencyPrograms:TheGeospaceSectionhasbenefitedfromavarietyofcross‐agencyfundingopportunities.SubstantialfundingforinterdisciplinaryGeospaceresearchbeenobtainedthroughtheEarthCube,FrontiersinEarthSystemDynamics(FESD),Inter‐disciplinaryResearchandEducation(INSPIRE),andMajorResearchInstrumentation(MRI)programs.
TheseadditionalfacilitiesandprogramsaugmentthescienceaccomplishedwithAGSinvest‐ments.However,AGSdoesnotcontrolthebudgetallocationstoorwithintheseindependentpro‐grams.
Final 19 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 4. Capabilities for a Vital Profession
Manyfactorsenteranassessmentofthevitalityofgeospacescienceasaprofession.Twoofthemostimportantarethequalityoftheworkforceandtheresourcesavailableforfrontierresearch.Advancingscientificknowledgerequiresinnovativethinkerswhobringabroadrangeofideasanddifferentperspectivestobearonkeyproblems.NSFhasalongstandingcommitmenttobroadeningparticipationinitsprogramsforgreaterdiversity.Manyadvantagesaccruetoorganizationswithadiverseworkforce.Inscientificendeavorsdiversityintheworkforcebringsdiversityinscientificperspectivesandapproachesand,therefore,itbroadensthepoolofideasforadvancingscience.Inassessingcapabilitiesforavitalprofession,dataondiversityhavebeenincludedwhensuchdataareavailable.Theveryactofacquiringandpostingdataondiversitywillusuallyencouragethepro‐gramdoingsotobroadenitsdemographicsofqualifiedparticipants.
4.1 Proposal Pressure
Areviewofthevitalityoftheprofessionstartswithanassessmentofthefundsavailabletoin‐vestigatorstoconductthehighestqualityresearch.Commonmetricstypicallyincludethefractionofhighlyrankedproposalsintheannualpoolofsubmissions,thelikelihoodthatahighlyrankedproposalwillbeselectedandtheaveragebudgetofanawardrelativetotheaverageproposedbudget.Allofthesefactorsinfluencewhatiscommonlytermed“proposalpressure”.
TheGSbudgethasbeenrelativelyconstant(ininflation‐adjusteddollars)withlessthan5%variationsince2003,withtheexceptionoffiscalyears2009‐2014(Figure3.2).Thepulseoftempo‐raryfundingfromtheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestmentActof2009(ARRA)produceda46%distortioninthebudgetin2009thatdidnotfullysubsideuntil2014whenallARRA‐fundedpro‐jectswerecompleted.ThiscashinflowsignificantlyinflatedthenumberandamountofGSawards,whichcomplicatesalongitudinalanalysisoftheGSgrantsprofileintermsofnumberandsizeofawards.
TheGeospaceSectionprovidedaggregatedgrantdatafromtheNSFOfficeofBudget,FinanceandAwardManagement(OBFAM)fortheAeronomy(includingCEDAR),MagnetosphericPhysics(includingGEM)andSolar‐TerrestrialResearch(includingSHINE)programs.Thenumberofcom‐petingproposalsawardedbyfiscalyear,themeandurationoftheawards,thetotalofallobligatedawards,andtheannualizedmean$valueofawardsforproposalactionsinthefiscalyears2011‐2015aregivenforeachprograminFigure4.1.Grantsforconferencesarenotincludedinthesedata,andprojectsinvolvingtwoormoreproposalsfromparticipatingcollaboratorsarecountedasoneproposalandawardbyOBFAMinalldatainthefigure.
Theprecipitousdropin#competingproposalsawardedandintotalobligatedawardsin2013(Fig.4.1a,b)areduemainlytoaredirectionofawardsforSpaceWeatherModeling,AMPERE,Su‐perDARN,SuperMag,CCMC,CubeSatsandFDSSintoathennewlycreatedSWRprogram(seeFigure3.2)thatwerepreviouslyfundedfromthecoreplustargeted(CEDAR,GEM,SHINE)grantspro‐grams.WiththisreprogrammingtheSectionwasabletoprovideamoretransparentaccountingoftheactualfundsavailableinthegrantsprograms
Severaltrendsemergefromthesedata.
1. ThenumberofcoreplustargetedGSgrantsawardshasbeenprogressivelydecreasing,evenintheyearsaftertheredirectionofprojectsintotheSWRprogram.From2013to2015boththetotalvalueofobligatedawardsandthenumberofawardsdecreasedbyabout15%.
Final 20 GS Portfolio Review
Figure 4.1 GS grant funding by program and overall for 2011‐2015. All data refer to proposal actions in the fiscal
year that resulted in an award. (a) Number of competing proposals awarded. (b) Total obligated awards is the total
obligation value of all awards including all years of the awards in CPI inflation‐adjusted dollars x 1000. (c) Annual‐
ized mean award size is the mean of annualized award sizes including all years for each in CPI inflation‐adjusted
dollars. CPI factors used for inflation adjustment: 1.04 (2011), 1.02 (2012), 1.01 (2013) and 0.99 (2014) of OBFAM
data.
2. TheannualizedmeanawardsizeforGSoverallhasbeenessentiallyflatfrom2013onwardandislargerthanthemeansizein2011and2012.4Thisstabilityinawardsizesafter2012canbetracedtothefactthatthenumberofawardsandthetotalawardobligationshavebeendecreas‐ingintandemduringthattime.Theincreaseinmeanawardsizeafter2012isdueinparttoanincreaseinthenumberoflargecollaborativeprojectswithmultipleinvestigators.Theaward
4 In fact, the total mean obligation per award for these combined grants programs (Total obligated awards/Num‐ber competitive awards) has been essentially flat at $406k ± 3% in inflation‐adjusted dollars from 2011 to 2015.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
STR 19 23 13 19 15
MAG 24 26 14 19 10
AER 29 27 26 15 20
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
# Competing Proposals Awarded
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
STR $8,401 $8,926 $6,475 $6,895 $6,330
MAG $8,374 $9,863 $4,246 $7,146 $3,714
AER $12,436 $11,672 $10,119 $7,298 $8,798
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
Total Obligated Awards, 2015 k$
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
AER $101,388 $144,234 $111,874 $142,908 $126,130
MAG $89,549 $85,937 $109,118 $122,504 $117,025
STR $121,012 $106,224 $165,230 $114,320 $129,696
GS $102,620 $112,787 $124,233 $125,345 $125,295
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$140,000
$160,000
$180,000
Annualized Mean Award Size, 2015 $
(a) (b)
(c)
Final 21 GS Portfolio Review
sizefortheseprojectsistypicallygreaterthanforasinglePIresearchgrant.ThuseventhoughtheawardtoindividualPIsorindividualCoIsincollaborativeprojectsmaybedecreasing,OB‐FAM’spracticeofcountingacollaborativeprojectasasinglegrantrecordsalargermeangrantsize.
DataforproposalsuccessratesinGSdisciplinaryprogramsaregiveninFigure4.2forFY2011‐2015.AsinFigure4.1,conferenceproposalsarenotincludedinthesedata.Indeterminingsuccessrates,separateproposalsthatarepartofcollaborativeprojectsarecountedinthenumberofproposalactionsandawards.ThusthebasisforsuccessratesinFigure4.2islargerthanthebasisOBFAMusestocalculatemeanawardsizes,duration,etc.inFigure4.1.(Compare#awardsinFig4.2tothatinFig.4.1.)ThePRCwasunabletoobtaindatafromNSFthatusesthesamebasisfornumberofcompetitiveawardsinthecalculationsofmeanawardsizesanddurationandinproposalsuccess.5ThebasisforthedatainFigure4.2isrepresentativeofthesuccessrateindividualPIscanexpectregardlessofwhethertheirproposalisasingle‐investigatorprojectoralargemulti‐investigatorcollaborativeproject.However,tothePRC’sknowledgethesuccessoflargecollaborativeproposalsrelativetosmallersingle‐PIproposalshasnotbeenstudied.
Figure 4.2. Number of GS proposal actions, awards and proposal success rates for competing proposals acted on in
2011‐15. All data refer to proposal actions in the fiscal year that resulted in an award. (a) Number competing pro‐
posal actions is the number of decisions on competitive proposals made in the given fiscal year regardless of the
year the proposal was submitted. This number includes carryover proposals from a previous fiscal year that are
decided in the current fiscal year, but it does not include proposals that are submitted in the current fiscal year and
that are decided in a future fiscal year. Number of awards is the number of actions in the fiscal year that result in a
funded proposal. (b) Success rate is the ratio of awards to actions in the fiscal year.
Twoobservationsaremade:
1. Theunusuallylargeuptickinsuccessratefrom2014to2015intheMAGprogram,withamodestuptickinGSoverall,wasduetoshortstaffingintheSectionin2015.AlthoughthebulkofMAGawardswereprocessedinFY15,thedeclineswerehelduntilFY16,thusdistortingthe
5 Suggestions for improving NSF’s data collection for its grants programs are included in Section 9.6
2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015
STR 68 19 71 28 92 17 102 22 73 22
MAG 76 27 71 31 67 19 88 24 12 10
AER 55 37 70 46 108 36 66 22 100 30
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
# Proposal Actions and Awards
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
AER 67 66 33 33 30
MAG 36 44 28 27 83
STR 28 39 18 22 30
GS Avg 42 50 27 27 34
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Proposal Success Rates, %(a) (b)
Actions
Awards
Final 22 GS Portfolio Review
fiscalyearsuccessrate.(CompareproposalactionsforMAGin2015withthenumberinpreviousyears.)
2. Itisnotentirelyclearwhythesuccessratedecreasedsomuchfrom2012to2013.Theproxi‐matecauseistheincreaseinthenumberofproposalssubmitted,withtheaveragenumbersub‐mittedin2013‐2014being25%largerthantheaveragein2011‐2012.AnadditionalfactormaybeduetothetransitionofClass2facilitiesprojects(tobediscussedinChapter7)outofthecoreplustargetedprogramsintothenewSWRprogramin2013.Sincefacilitiesproposalshavelittle‐to‐nocompetition,includingtheminthebaseprogramsprobablyproducedsomein‐flation,howevermodest,insuccessratesin2011and2012.TheARRAbump(Figure3.2)mayhavealsotemporarilyreducedproposalpressureongrantprogramfundsduringtheimmediatepost‐ARRAyears,withmoretypicalproposalpressurestartingtoreturnin2012.
SuccessrateshavebeenevenlowerintheGStargetedgrantsprograms(CEDAR,GEM,SHINE),whichreceivemorethan50%ofproposalstotheGSgrantsprograms(Figure4.3).Theproposaldeadlinesimposedontargetedgrantsprogramsmayunintentionallyencourageahigherrateofsubmissions.6
Figure 4.3. Number of GS proposal actions, awards and proposal success rates for competing proposals submitted
to the CEDAR, GEM and SHINE targeted grants programs and acted on in 2011‐15. The proposal basis and analysis
are similar to those in Figure 4.2.
ManyfactorsareatplayininterpretingthedatainFigures4.1–4.3:Standardvscontinuingawards;linkedproposalsvssub‐awardsforcollaborativeprojects;levelofpriorcommitmentsfromawardsgrowingintheout‐years;anddelaysinproposalprocessingduestaffshortages.Largeyear‐to‐yearoscillationstendtoobscuretrends.
Astrategyforoptimizingscienceadvancementthroughthegrantsprograms,inparticular,forenhancingprogressinachievingthesciencegoalsoftheDecadalSurvey,doesnotrevealitselfinthesedataalone.ThePRCdidnotacquiredataonproposalquality(rankings).Highlyranked
6 Report to the National Science Board on the National Science Foundation’s Merit Review Process, Fiscal Year 2014 (NSB‐2015‐14) p. 48‐49, Table 16. (http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2015/nsb201514.pdf).
2011 2011 2012 2012 2013 2013 2014 2014 2015 2015
SHINE 39 7 41 13 55 10 78 13 55 13
GEM 42 8 42 12 48 10 55 11 58 9
CEDAR 30 13 32 15 40 11 37 9 55 15
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
# Proposal Actions and Awards
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
CEDAR 43 47 28 24 27
GEM 19 29 21 20 16
SHINE 18 32 18 17 24
Targ Avg 25 35 22 19 22
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Proposal Success Rates, %(a) (b)
Actions
Awards
Final 23 GS Portfolio Review
proposalsmaybethemostmeritoriousforselection,buttheproposalrankingdoesnotnecessarilytranslatetoqualityofscientificadvancement.
SeveraltensionsareatplayintheGSgrantsprogramswhenthegrantsbudgetisflatordeclin‐ingasinFY2013‐15:
1. Engagingthegreatestnumberofresearcherswhosubmithighlyrankedproposalsincreasesthediversityofscientificideasandnewresultsandthelikelihoodofscientificbreakthroughs.ThenumberofPIsfundedbytheprogramcanalwaysbeincreasedbydecreasingtheaveragegrantsize.
2. ButwhentheaveragegrantsizedoesnotfullyfundthePI’sproposedwork,oronlyaportionofthePI’savailabletimeforresearch,thePItypicallymustdevelopandsubmitadditionalpro‐posalstoNSForelsewhere.TheeffortinpreparingadditionalproposalsreducesthePI’sre‐searchproductivity.Withmoreproposalschasinglimitedfunding,theadditionaltimeresearch‐ersdevotetotheproposalpeerreviewprocessalsodiminishesaverageproductivity.7
3. PIshaveatendencytosubmit‘safe’scienceproposalswhensuccessratesarelowandreview‐ershaveatendencytorecommendthemoverhigh‐risk,high‐rewardproposals.
4. ThePIs’,CoIs’andreviewers’effortsaccountformostofthecostinpreparingandevaluatingaproposalsubmittedtoafundingagency.8Asgrantsuccessfalls,andproposalnumbersin‐crease,thecommunity’soverheadinseekingfundingincreasesmarkedly.
5. Somemisalignmentinfundingamongsub‐disciplinesmaybeatplayintheGSaggregateawardsandsuccessrates.ThenumberofscientistsaffiliatedwithSpacePhysicsandAeronomysectionsofAGUfor20159were(primary/secondaryaffiliations)262/874forAeronomy,713/2477forMagnetosphericPhysicsand745/1811forSolarandHeliosphericPhysics,yettheGShistori‐callyhasinvestedproportionallymoreresourcesinitsAeronomyandCEDARgrantsprogramthaninitsothergrantsprograms(lesssoin2014inTable4.1).Somecaremustbeexercisedininterpretingthesenumbers,however,becauseifmoresupportisavailableforMagnetosphericandSolar‐Terrestrialresearchatotheragencies,especiallyNASA,thenthecurrentnumberofscientistsconductingresearchintheseareasmaybecorrespondinglylarger.Comparablefund‐ingportfoliosfromotheragencieswerenotavailabletothePRC.
6. Findinganoptimumbalancebetweentheaveragevalueofaresearchaward,thenumberofproposalsawardedandhighestscientificreturnforagivenbudgetandpopulationofresearch‐erscertainlydeservesfurtherstudybysocialscientists.10Theproblemiscompoundedwhenmultiplefundingagenciesareinvolved,e.g.,changesingrantawardpolicyforgeospacescienceatNASAimpactssubmissionsatNSFandviceversa.
Thisanalysisofthegrantportfolioisanimportantaspectofduediligenceoftheportfolioreview.ThePRChasnorecommendationstoofferonthiscomplicatedissueandconcludesits
7 P. Cushman et al. (2015). Impact of Declining Proposal Success Rates on Scientific Productivity, draft AAAC report at http://www.nsf.gov/attachments/134636/public/proposal_success_rates_aaac_final.pdf 8 T. von Hippel and C. von Hippel (2015). To Apply or Not to Apply: A Survey Analysis of Grant Writing Costs and Benefit, http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118494 9 http://spa.agu.org/spa‐section‐newsletter‐volume‐xxii‐issue‐71/ 10 NSF Report on Efficiency of Grant Size and Duration at http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2004/nsf04205/mathemat‐ica_nsfrptfinal6.pdf
Final 24 GS Portfolio Review
analysiswiththefollowingfinding:
Finding.Totalawardobligationsinthecoreplustargetedgrantsprogramshaveprogressivelydecreasedinthepastfiveyears,mostmarkedlyfrom2012to2013.GSprogrammanagershaveadaptedtothereducedinvestmentintheseprogramsbyacceptinglowerproposalsuccessratesonav‐eragesoastomaintainamoreorlessconstanttotalmeanobligationperaward(Totalobligatedawards/Numbercompetitiveawards)irrespectiveofawardduration.
ThePRCfindsthedecisiontomaintainhealthyawardsizesininflation‐adjusteddollars,eventhoughithastheundesirableeffectofreducingproposalsuccessrateswhentheoverallbudgetisflatordeclining,tobepreferabletoreducingawardsizessoastomaintainhigherproposalsuccessrates.Inthisregard,theGShasrecentlybeenbuckinganNSF‐widetrendwhereintheaveragenum‐berofmonthsofsalarysupportpergrantdecreasedbyroughly50%from2002to2014.11Recom‐mendationsforincreasingtherelativeinvestmentinGSstrategicgrantsprogramsareofferedinsubsequentchapter.
4.2 FDSS and CAREER Awards
ImportantexceptionstotheerosionofgrantsizesaretheFDSSandCAREERawards,whicharedesignedtoenhance,andfullysupport,anewfacultylineinacollegeoruniversity(FDSS),orama‐jormulti‐yeargranttoanearlycareerscientist(CAREER).Theseprogramsareextremelyeffectiveinallowingtherecipientstodeveloparespectableresearchprofile(andearntenure)andsubse‐quentlytobemorecompetitiveinsecuringsponsoredresearchfunds.Thenumberofawardsintheseprogramsislimited,buttheymakeahugedifferenceinthelivesoftherecipients.Thefacultyhiringandtenureprocessinuniversitiesisusuallyveryeffectiveinensuringthatawardrecipientsmeethighprofessionalandscientificstandards.
Finding.AnFDSSannouncementofopportunityhasbeenofferedtwice,in2005and2014.EightFDSSawardshavebeenmade(Table4.5)andallbuttwoprofessorsweretenured.Oneoftheappoint‐mentsleftbeforeachievingtenurebutwasreplacedwithatenuredprofessor;anotheronedidnotpasstenureevaluation.Moreimportantly,thisprogramhashelpedtwoinstitutionsachievea“criticalmass”ofresearchers.
Table 4.5. FDSS Awardees
Demographic Number
awarded
Now
tenured
Women 2 1
Hispanic 1 1
Other Minority 0 0
White Male 5 5
Inadditiontofundingthecareerdevelop‐mentandresearchofearly‐careerfacultyinthespacesciences,theprogramhasthebroaderimpactofestablishingbulwarksforspacescienceinuniversitydepartments.Thisimpactincludesthetransmissionofknow‐ledgeofthespaceenvironmentoftheEarthandsolarsystemtostudentsinastronomyandgeneralsciencecourses,whichoftendonotincorporatesuchknowledge.
TheDSrecommendedexpandingtheFDSSprogramtofour‐yearcolleges,tohelpimprovethepipelineofstudentseducatedinspacephysics.Acounterargumentisthatthoseteachersarefrequentlyrequiredtodevotemuchoftheirteachingtosubjectsthatdonotincludespacephysics 11 See Fig 12 in the NSF report to the NSB on Merit Review in FY 2014 at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publica‐tions/2015/nsb201514.pdf
Final 25 GS Portfolio Review
topics.AstronomyclassesincludeasectionontheSunbutrarelyincludemorethanabriefintroductiontothemagnetospheresoraurorasoftheEarthandplanets.ThePRCfearsthatwithoutadequateinstitutionalsupportforresearchandrelieffromthelargeteachingloadtypicaloffour‐yearcolleges,thesefacultywillhavedifficultysucceedinginanincreasinglycompetitiveresearchfundingclimate.
Finding.Inthepasttenyears,80GS‐relevantCAREERproposalsweresubmittedofwhich45wereselected.
Ofthese,thirteenreported“womeninvolvement”butonlythreechecked“minorityinvolve‐ment”(Table4.6).
Recommendation4.1.TheFDSSandCAREERprogramsshouldbecontinuedasresourcesallow.
Table 4.6. AGS CAREER Awardees 2005 ‐ 2015
Type AER MAG STR Total
Women 4 5 4 13
Minority 1 1 1 3
Neither 11 8 10 29
Total 16 14 15 45
4.3 AGS Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Program
TheAGSPostdoctoralResearchprogramisanexcellentwaytosupportandencouragepostdoc‐toralresearchers.Withproposalwriting,teaching,andcommitteeworkinabeyanceduringtheap‐pointment,post‐docscanbroadenanddeepentheirexperienceinpreparationforthenextcareerstep.Asacompetitiveprogram,themostqualifiedandself‐directedcandidatesarefundedtopur‐suearesearchagendalargelyoftheirowndesign.
Recommendation4.2.TheAGSPostdoctoralResearchFellowshipshouldbecontinuedasre‐sourcesallow.Allsuchfundedprogramsshouldcontinuetokeepmetricsonthediversityoftheparticipantsandreportthemannually.
4.4 NSF Graduate Research Fellowships Program
Similarly,theNSFGraduateResearchFellowshipprogramdirectlyfundstheresearchofgradu‐atestudentsinthefield.ThePRCdidnotacquiredataonthediversityofthegraduatestudentpop‐ulationinthisprogram.ThePRCcertainlyrecommendscontinuationoftheGraduateResearchFel‐lowshipsprogram,butthisprogramisfundedattheFoundationlevelratherthanSectionlevel,soarecommendationfortheGSisnotincludedhere.
4.5 Graduate Summer Schools and Workshops
Summerschoolprogramsandworkshopsbringgraduatestudentstogetherfromavarietyofinstitutionsforcomprehensiveeducationinasinglesubjectarea.Inaddition,liketheREUsre‐viewedbelow,theyprovidestudentswithinformalopportunitiestomakeimportantresearchcon‐nectionswithfuturementorsandemployers.
Summerschoolsinsolarandspacephysicsareanexcellentwaytoprovidebreadthinbasic
Final 26 GS Portfolio Review
sciencetopicsandresearchtechniques,especiallyforstudentsfrominstitutionsthatdonotoffermanyadvancedcoursesinsolarandspacephysics.Inaddition,sincethestudentsmeetresearchersandmanyotherstudentsinthefieldatthesummerschool,theinteractionencouragesthestudentstoremaininthefieldbylearningaboutcareerandemploymentopportunities.
TheGS‐sponsoredsummerschoolfromthelegacyCenterforIntegratedSpaceWeatherModel‐ing(CISM)providesparticipantswithanintroductiontothephenomenologicalandmodelingas‐pectsofspaceweather.Itfillsanimportantnicheamongthemanysummerschoolopportunitiesopentograduatestudentsandupperlevelundergraduates.Ithasbecomeincreasinglypopularandnowreceivesmoreapplicationsforparticipationthanitcanaccommodate.
TheGSalsosupportsasummerschoolintheuseofIncoherentScatterRadars(ISRs)andinter‐pretationofdatafromISRs.Thesesummerschoolsprovideanimportantservicetothecommunity.
Finding:TheDSrecommendedthatasuitablereplacement(orcontinuation)oftheNSFCenterforIntegratedSpaceWeatherModelingsummerschool(p92oftheSurvey)becompetitivelyse‐lected.Asofthisdate,theGShascontinuedtosupportthesummerschoolandhassatisfiedtheDSrecommendation.
Recommendation4.3.TheCISMsummerschoolandtheISRsummerschoolshouldbecontin‐ued,periodicallyassessedandcompetedforrenewal.Metricsonthediversityofthestudentpar‐ticipantsshouldbekeptandreportedannually.
TheGStargetedgrantsprogramsreviewedinChapter6includestudentsupporttoattendtheGEM,CEDARandSHINEcommunityworkshops.
Finding.TheDSrecommendedthatNSFshouldenableopportunitiesforfocusedcommunityworkshopsthatdirectlyaddressprofessionaldevelopmentskillsforgraduatestudents(DSp92).ThisactivitytakesplacetoalargeextentattheGS‐sponsoredCEDAR,GEMandSHINEsummerwork‐shops.Studentparticipationintheseworkshopsisverypopularandprovidesamoreresearchori‐entededucationalexperienceforstudentsthansummerschools.
Recommendation4.4.GSsupportforgraduateandadvancedundergraduatestudentstoattendtheGEM,CEDARandSHINEsummerworkshopsshouldbecontinuedasresourcesallow.Metricsonthediversityofthestudentparticipantsreceivingsupportshouldbekeptforeachworkshopandreportedannually.
4.6 Research Experiences for Undergraduates
NSF’sResearchExperiencesforUndergraduates(REU)programprovidescollegestudentsbe‐tweentheirjuniorandsenioryearwithtravelandstipendsupportforasummerresearchexperi‐enceatauniversityotherthantheirhomeinstitution.Thisexperiencehasbeensuccessfulinhelp‐ingstudentsgainconfidenceintheirscientificknowledgeandskillsandinlearningaboutresearchandcareeropportunitiesinfieldsofpotentialinterest.Italsohelpsthemmakeconnectionsandac‐quirerelevantresearchexperiencesothattheycanchooseagraduateschoolbestalignedwiththeirtalentsandinterests.
AGShassupportedfiveREUgrantsatthreeinstitutionsoverthepasttenyears.(Inaddition,someREUgrantsfromotherNSFdivisionshavesupportedstudentresearchinAGSscience).ThePrograminSolarandSpacePhysicsattheUniversityofColoradoBoulderisoneofthemost
Final 27 GS Portfolio Review
popularREUsandattractsabout30undergraduateseverysummer.ItallowsstudentstoworkwithscientistsatoneofthemanyspacescienceorganizationsinBoulder:UniversityofColorado’sLaboratoryforAtmosphericandSpacePhysics(LASP),NCAR’sHighAltitudeObservatory(HAO),NOAA’sSpaceWeatherPredictionCenter(SWPC),theSouthwestResearchInstitute(SwRI),NorthWestResearchAssociates(NWRA)andAtmosphericandEnvironmentalResearch(AER)orAtmospheric&SpaceTechnologyResearchAssociates(ASTRA).Summerprojectsspanthefieldofsolarandspacephysics,frominstrumenthardwaretodataanalysistomodelingoftheSun‐Earthsystem.ThenumberofparticipantsintheCUREUprogrambyyearappearsinTable4.7alongwithdiversitydata.Participationbywomenandotherunderrepresentedgroupsissignificant.
Table 4.7. Colorado REU students 2007‐2015
Year Males Females White† Hispanic Black† Asian Native
American
2007 12 2 12 0 2 0 0
2008 9 5 11 0 1 2 0
2009 6 5 9 0 1 1 0
2010 7 9 15 0 0 1 0
2011 7 9 13 1 0 2 0
2012 2 12 12 1 1 0 0
2013 7 10 12 2 0 2 1
2014 7 10 15 0 1 1 0
2015 6 10 12 1 1 2 0
Totals 63 72 111 5 7 11 1
† Non‐Hispanic
TheNASA/NSFsponsoredCommunityCoordinatedModelingCenterhoststheSpaceWeatherResearch,EducationandDevelopmentInitiative(SWREDI)whichprovideseducationalopportuni‐tiesforhighschool,undergraduateandgraduatestudents.Theprogram’sobjectivesareto:pro‐motespaceenvironmentawarenessasanimportantcomponentofthenewmillenniumcoreeduca‐tion;facilitateestablishmentofspaceweatherprogramsatuniversitiesworldwide;andprovideun‐dergraduatestudentinternshipopportunitiesatCCMC/SWRCtodevelopskillsbeneficialforanyfuturecareerpursuit.Thehigh‐schoolandcollege‐orientedprogramsupportsbothtwo‐weekedu‐cational“bootcamps”andinternships.With23internshipshostedin2014‐15,theSWREDIpro‐gramappearstobebothpopularandsuccessfulinmeetingitsgoals.Italsoappearstobedoingwellinfacilitatinggenderandethnicdiversityinthefield(Table4.8).
Finding.TheNSF‐sponsoredREUprogramandSWREDIprogramprovideundergraduateswithopportunitiestoexperienceresearchinthespacesciencesandtomakebetterinformedcareerdeci‐sions.Theseprogramsarealsodoingwellinpromotinggenderandethnicdiversitywhiletrainingthenextgenerationofresearchers.
Recommendation4.5.NSFsupportforREUprogramsinsolarandspacephysicsshouldbeen‐couraged.TheSWREDIprogramshouldbecontinuedasresourcesallow.Metricsonthediversityofparticipantsshouldbekeptonallsuchfundedprogramsandreportedannually.
Final 28 GS Portfolio Review
4.7 Workforce Diversity
ThefractionofwomenparticipatingasundergraduatestudentsintheColoradoREUprogramisquitelarge,mirroringtheunder‐graduatepopulationthatisnowmorethan50%women.However,thenumberoffemalegraduatestudentsdropstoaround30%,assuggestedbydataforstudentparticipationintheSHINEsummerworkshop(Table4.9).
Table 4.8. GS‐supported CCMC interns†, 2014‐15
Type Number Fraction
Women 6 0.26
Hispanic 0 0.00
American Indian 1 0.04
African‐American 2 0.09
White Male 9 0.39
Asian (male) 5 0.22
Total 23
† Two of these interns were graduate students.
Thefractionofwomenfallsstillfurtherinlatercareerstages,withlessthan30%CAREERawardeesbeingwomen(Table4.6),andonly25%asFDSSrecipients(Table4.5).ThefractionoffemaleGSPIsissignificantlyless.DiversitydataforGSgrantawardeesareincludedinAppendixD.Weexpectthenumberofwomeningeospacesciencetoincrease,asthisnewgenerationofre‐searchers“moveuptheranks”.Thefractionofotherminorities(excludingAsians)ismuchless.ParticipantsinstudentconferencessuchasSACNAS(SocietyforAdvancementofChicanos/Hispan‐icsandNativeAmericansinScience)showthatfarmoreHispanicsandNativeAmericansaredrawntothebiologicalsciencesthanthephysicalsciences,perhapsforculturalreasonsandperhapsbe‐causethesefieldsareconsideredlessmathematical,orjustbecauseofalackofrolemodels.
Finding.TheGShasbeenreasonablyeffectiveinfundingcompetitiveproposalsfromun‐derrepresentedgroups.However,thenumberofproposalsubmissionsfromdiversePIsisstillquitelow.
Table 4.9. SHINE students supported by NSF, 2006‐2009
Type 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total %
Women 8 14 15 16 15 15 16 16 14 129 31
Hispanic (M/F)⍭ 0 0/2 0/1 1/1 1/1 0/3 0/2 0/4 1/2 3/16 1/4
Other Minority 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ‐
White Male 29 23 21 39 34 34 27 38 40 285 68
Total 38 37 36 56 50 49 43 54 55 418 100 ⍭ Hispanic female students indicated here are included in the count of women in the line above.
Data for 2010 was not available
Recommendation4.6.TheGSandtheGScommunityshouldbeinthevanguardofNSFinitia‐tivestopromoteengagementofwomenandunder‐servedpopulationsinallaspectsofgeospacesciencefromschooltoresearchproposalwritingtoleadershipinGSactivities.
4.8 PhD Employment Opportunities
ThenumbersofPhDsinspacesciencehasincreasedfrom~35peryearin2000‐2005to~55peryearin2006‐201012(Figure4.4).Thesamestudysawthetypicalresearchandfacultyjoblist‐ingsdeclineinrealnumbersoverthesameperiod.Partofthedeclineinthenumbersofjobsposted
12 Moldwin, M. B., J. Torrence, L. A. Moldwin, C. Morrow (2013), Is there an appropriate balance between the num‐ber of solar and space physics PhDs and the jobs available?, Space Weather 11, 445–448, doi:10.1002/swe.20075.
Final 29 GS Portfolio Review
islikelyrelatedtorecentreductionsinsponsoredresearchforgeospacescienceasdiscussedinSection4.1.Manyoftheserecentgraduatesaregoingintootherfieldsortoindustry,or,amongin‐ternationalstudents,returningtotheirhomecountry.ThesestudentsadvancenewknowledgeofgeospacesciencewhileearningaPhD,eveniftheydonotcontinueingeospacesciencepost‐PhD.Thesubsetofgraduateswhoarepursuingsuccessfulcareersinindustryistestamenttothebroadutilityofaneducationingeospacescience.InternationalstudentswhopursueAGS‐relatedresearchafterreturningtotheirhomecountrybecomeinternationalcollaboratorsandfacilitateamuchneededglobalnetworkofgeospacescientists.
Finding.AGSappearstobeservingasanexcellentplatformfortrainingahighlyskilledwork‐force.Insodoing,itcontributestotheeconomyandtechnicalproductivityoftheNation.
Recommendation4.7.Wherepossible,thefirstemploymentstepofgeospacePhDstudentsshouldbetrackedtodetermineanddemonstratehowtheskilledworkforceisbeingutilized.Thisinfor‐mationcouldbeenteredinadata‐informationboxinthefinalgrantreport.
4.9 GS CubeSat Program and Education
AnextensivereviewoftheGSCubeSatprogramfollowsinSection6.6.Sincethischapterad‐dressesthevitalityoftheprofessionandworkforceissues,thesignificantroleofuniversityCubeSatprogramsisalsoemphasizedhere.UniversityCubeSatprogramsingeneralandtheGSCubeSatpro‐graminparticularhavebeenveryeffectiveinstimulatinginterestinSTEMeducationandinaero‐space‐relatedcareers.Indoingtheycontributetothedevelopmentofahighlyskilledworkforce.
Finding.CubeSatprojectsareanexcellentvehiclefortrainingstudentsonspacecraftinstrumen‐tationandsystems.AsdescribedinSection6.6,GSCubeSatprojectstodatehavegeneratedmoreengi‐neeringthansciencepublicationsandhavegarneredparticipationfrom6highschoolstudentsandmorethan250BSandMSstudents.Theyhaveprovidedthebasisfor15Ph.D.theses.
Figure 4.4. Left: Production of PhDs in Solar and Space Physics. Right: Job advertisements in Space
Physics and Aeronomy and the Solar Physics Division for US institutions.12
Final 30 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation4.8.TheGSshouldcontinueitsCubeSatprogramatthefundinglevelrecom‐mendedinSections6.6and9.3.GiventheeducationalandengineeringsuccessesoftheCubeSatprogram,theGSshouldcultivatepartnershipswiththeNSFEngineeringandEducationDirec‐toratestobroadenNSFinvestmentinCubeSatprogramsandexpandtheirreachacrossNSF.
4.10 Public Outreach
TheroleofoutreachininspiringyouthiscrucialincreatingandmaintaininginterestinSTEMsubjectsandSTEMcareers.NSFrequiresstatementsof“BroaderImpacts”inallnewproposals;however,manyoftheseeffortshavebeenlimitedinscopeand/orregionalinimpact.Similarly,CA‐REERgrantsalsorequireanoutreachcomponent.SciencecenterssuchasCISMhaveincludedcomprehensiveeducationandoutreachprogramsbuthavenowexpired.TheNSFInformalScienceDivisionhassponsoredanumberofexcellentplanetariumshowsthatshowcaseHeliophysicssci‐ence,andthesevenuescanreachmillions.Untilrecently,NASAmissionswere“taxed”1to3per‐centtosupportoutreachefforts.ThispracticewasrecentlyrescindedbytheCommitteeonScience,Technology,Engineering,andMathematics,andNASAoutreachfundingwillbeconcentratedinfewerprogramsbutwithamoreintegratedapproach.ThusoutreacheffortsfromNSFprogramsmaybeincreasinglyimportantinthefuture.
GSfundstwonoteworthyprojectsinthisregard.ItsSuperMagdatacenterengagesK‐12teach‐ersinitsactivities.Its“Aurorasaurus”projectisanexcellentcitizenscienceprogramtomonitortherealtimeaurora.Thesenovelprogramsforengagingandinforming“teacherscience”and“citi‐zenscience”improvevisibilityofthefield.
Recommendation4.9.Continuemodestinvestmentsinprojectsandprogramsthatinvolveteacherresearchandcitizenscienceandinformpublicinterestingeospaceandsolarscience.
4.11 Survey of Earned Doctorates
AsignificantdifficultyforsolarandspacephysicsisitsinvisibilityintheNSF‐sponsored“Sur‐veyofEarnedDoctorates”.TherecentstudyofPhDgraduatesreferencedabove4usedkeywordsinabstractstoidentifyrelevanttheses,butsomespacesciencethesesmayhavebeenmissed.Mostundergraduateshaveneverheardofsolarandspacephysicsasanoptionforgraduatestudy.Stu‐dentsapplyingforNSFGraduateResearchFellowshipstostudygeospacesciencemaybeatadisad‐vantageinthereviewprocesswithoutaclearcategoryfortheirproposedwork.
Finding.TheDecadalsurveyrecommendedhavingNSFimmediatelyimplementacategoryof“so‐larandspacephysics”.Itislikelythatothercompendiawouldfollowsuit.Thisproposalforasepa‐ratelistingcanevenbefoundinoneofthefirstdecadalreports:“SolarTerrestrialResearchforthe1980’s”[NRC,1981].
Recommendation4.10.TheGSshouldworkwiththeNSFofficethatmaintains“SurveyofEarnedDoctorates”toimplementimmediatelythecategory“SolarandSpacePhysics”(oran‐othernametobedetermined)intotheSurvey.
Final 31 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 5. Science Goals and Capabilities for SSP
Buildingontheextraordinaryadvancesinsolarandgeospacescienceofthepreviousdecade,theDecadalSurvey(DS)forSolarandSpacePhysics(SSP)recommendedacomprehensiveprogramofresearchto“improveunderstandingofthemechanismsthatdrivetheSun’sactivityandthefun‐damentalphysicalprocessesunderlyingnear‐Earthplasmadynamics;todeterminethephysicalin‐teractionsofEarth’satmosphericlayersinthecontextoftheconnectedSun‐Earthsystem;andtogreatlyenhancethecapabilitytoproviderealisticandspecificforecastsofEarth’sspaceenviron‐mentthatwillbetterservetheneedsofsociety.”TheoverarchingDSrecommendationscrystallizedwithfourkeysciencegoalsinChapter1oftheDSreport:
KeyScienceGoal1.DeterminetheoriginsoftheSun’sactivityandpredictthevariationsinthespaceenvironment.
KeyScienceGoal2.DeterminethedynamicsandcouplingofEarth’smagnetosphere,ionosphere,andatmosphereandtheirresponsetosolarandterrestrialinputs.
KeyScienceGoal3.DeterminetheinteractionoftheSunwiththesolarsystemandtheinterstellarmedium.
KeyScienceGoal4.Discoverandcharacterizefundamentalprocessesthatoccurbothwithintheheliosphereandthroughouttheuniverse.
ThesekeysciencegoalswerefurtherparsedinChapter2oftheDSreportinto12sciencechal‐lenges.Theflowdownfromkeysciencegoalstosciencechallenges–ineffectscienceobjectives–canbeusedtodeterminethecriticalcapabilitiesrequiredtoachieveDSgoalsandtherebymeetcharge(1)oftheportfolioreview.ThesechallengesarelistedinTable5.1.OtherchaptersoftheDSreportprovidemorespecificguidanceonvariousaspectsofthisreview.DSChapter4,Recommen‐dations,outlinesprogramelementsneededtoaccomplishthekeygoals;Chapter5,NSFProgramImplementation,providesspecificguidancetoNSFinimplementingenablingprogramelements;andChapter7,SpaceWeatherandSpaceClimatology:AVisionforFutureCapabilities,describestheenhancedcapabilitiesrequiredtoproviderealisticandspecificforecastsofEarth’sspaceenviron‐ment.ThePRCalsousedthethreeDSpanelreportsonAtmosphere‐Ionosphere‐MagnetosphereIn‐teractions,SolarWind–MagnetosphereInteractionsandSolarandHeliosphericPhysics,andtheirimperativesforNSFinitiatives,tofurtherinformitsreviewandassessmentofcriticalcapabilities.
ThePRCformedfoursciencesub‐committeestoidentifycriticalsciencecapabilities.Threeofthesub‐committeesaddressedcapabilitiesforsciencechallengeslistedinTable5.1forAtmos‐phere‐Ionosphere‐MagnetosphereInteractions,SolarWind‐Magnetosphere‐IonosphereInterac‐tionsandSolarandHeliosphericPhysics.Thefourthsub‐committeefocusedspecificallyonSpaceWeatherandPrediction,and,inkeepingwithDSdirectivesforadvancingintegrativescience,gavespecialattentiontothecapabilitiesneededtoaddresssciencechallenges thatspanacrossthetradi‐tionaldisciplinesandthatinvolveinteractionsoccurringwithintheconnectedSun‐Earthsystem.Thesefoursub‐committeesidentifiedthesubsetofcriticalcapabilities,withinthebroaderland‐scapeofsupportforSSP,thatliewithinthepurviewofthecurrentorfutureGSportfolio.Withtheassessmentsofthesesub‐committeesinhand,thePRCasawholereviewedandrankedthecriticalcapabilitiesforadvancingtheDSscientificagendausingobservations,instrumenttechniques,dataanalysis,theoreticalandmodelingapproachesandlaboratorymeasurements.
Final 32 GS Portfolio Review
TheDSsciencechallengesandthecriticalcapabilitiesrequiredtoaddressthemaresumma‐rizedinthenextfoursections.
5.1 Atmosphere‐Ionosphere‐Magnetosphere Interactions
AIMI‐1: Understand how the ionosphere‐thermosphere system responds to, and regulates,
magnetospheric forcing over global, regional, and local scales.
Thissciencechallengeembodiestherecognitionthatthemagnetosphere,ionosphere,andther‐mosphererespondasacoherentlyintegratedsystemtosolarforcing.Tounderstandandpredictvariabilitywithinthissystemrequiresadeepunderstandingofsolarwindforcing,energystorage
TABLE 5.1 Science Challenges for Solar and Space Physics from the 2012 Decadal Survey
Atmosphere‐Ionosphere‐Magnetosphere Interactions (AIMI)
AIMI‐1 Understand how the ionosphere‐thermosphere system responds to, and regulates, magnetospheric forc‐ing over global, regional, and local scales.
AIMI‐2 Understand the plasma‐neutral coupling processes that give rise to local, regional, and global‐scale struc‐tures and dynamics in the AIM system.
AIMI‐3 Understand how forcing from the lower atmosphere via tidal, planetary, and gravity waves influences the ionosphere and thermosphere.
AIMI‐4 Determine and identify the causes for long‐term (multi‐decadal) changes in the AIM system.
Solar Wind‐Magnetosphere Interactions (SWMI)
SWMI‐1 Establish how magnetic reconnection is triggered and how it evolves to drive mass, momentum, and en‐ergy transport.
SWMI‐2 Identify the mechanisms that control the production, loss, and energization of energetic particles in the magnetosphere.
SWMI‐3 Determine how coupling and feedback between the magnetosphere, ionosphere, and thermosphere govern the dynamics of the coupled system in its response to the variable solar wind.
SWMI‐4 Critically advance the physical understanding of magnetospheres and their coupling to ionospheres and thermospheres by comparing models against observations from different magnetospheric systems.
The Sun and Heliosphere (SHP)
SHP‐1 Understand how the Sun generates the quasi‐cyclical magnetic field that extends throughout the helio‐sphere.
SHP‐2 Determine how the Sun’s magnetism creates its hot, dynamic atmosphere.
SHP‐3 Determine how magnetic energy is stored and explosively released and how the resultant disturbances propagate through the heliosphere.
SHP‐4 Discover how the Sun interacts with the local interstellar medium.
Final 33 GS Portfolio Review
andrelease,feedbackpathways,preconditioning,andregulationmechanisms.TheAIMI‐1challengeservesasthe“Aeronomy”complementtoSWMI‐3,whichcaststhischallengefromthemagneto‐sphericperspective.TheshiftoftheAeronomyandMagnetosphericcommunitiestowardthe“sys‐temscience”paradigmisadirectconsequenceofthevastexpansionofcollaborativemeasurementsfromgroundandspaceovertheprecedingdecade,coupledwithcommensurateadvancesinassimi‐lativeandfirst‐principlesmodeling.FurtherprogresswillrequireinitiativesandcapabilitiesthattranscendtraditionalprogrammaticboundarieswithintheGeospaceSection.
AunifyingthemeunderAIMI‐1isthegeospacesystemresponsetogeomagneticstormsandsubstorms,whichareknowntohaveglobaleffectsontheAIMIsystemextendingfrompoletoequa‐tor,andareamajorcomponentofspaceweather.StructuringoftheconductancefieldbyparticleprecipitationpatternsaffectsthepartitioningandefficiencyofenergytransferintotheI‐Tsystem.Transmissionandreflectionofwavepowerfromthemagnetosphereoffersacomplementaryviewintotheseissues.Theresultantthermalexpansion,ambipolardiffusion,andstructuredconvectionpatternsconstituteaneffectivesystemofmassredistributionwithinthegeospacesystem.Freeen‐ergyarisingfromstormtimeinteractionsalsodrivesarichvarietyofinstabilities(e.g.,Langmuirturbulence,Farley‐Bunemanwaves,Rayleigh‐Taylorinstabilities,gradient‐driftinstabilities)whichadverselyimpactground‐spacecommunicationsandfurtheraffectenergyandmomentumtransferwithintheAIMIsystemthroughcross‐scalecoupling.Progresshasbeenmadeinaddressingtheseissues,bothintermsofglobalobservationalmeasurementsandinthedevelopmentofcoupled,large‐scalephysics‐basedandassimilativenumericalmodels;however,afullunderstandingandpredictivecapabilityofstormtimeeffectsonthenear‐Earthspaceenvironmentremaintobeachieved.
Geospacescienceshouldaggressivelycontinueitstrendtowarddistributedmeasurementscou‐pledthroughmulti‐scalephysicalmodels.DASI‐typemeasurementsandcoordinatedobservations(e.g.,TECmaps,ISRs,SuperDARN,ionosondes,passiveopticalnetworks,andsatellites)withthein‐ternationalcommunityarenecessarytoassessthetemporalandspatialchangesintheAIMsystemduringthecourseofamagneticstorm.Inparticular,thedirectconnectionbetweensolarwindpa‐rameters(density,velocity,andmagneticfield)at1AUandtheensuingdynamicswithintheAIMsystem.Additionally,fullyglobalmodelsoftheAIMsystemneedtobedevelopedwithinthe'sys‐temscience'approach,thatis,todeterminethecomplexnonlinearrelationshipsbetweenthediffer‐entcomponentsofthesystemasafunctionofspaceandtime.Inadditiontoconsideringtheessen‐tialphysicalprocessesinvolved,thereisaneedforhighspatialandtemporalresolutionincompu‐tationalmodelsthatislackinginmostmodelstoday.Forexample,thedevelopmentofionosphericirregularitiesonscalelengthsofafewkilometersneedstobemodeledtoassesstheirimpactonspace‐basednavigationandcommunicationsystemsduringmagneticstorms,yetmostglobalmod‐elshaveagridresolutionofafewhundredkilometers.
Importantquestionsthatneedtobeaddressedincludethefollowing:
1.Howdosolarwinddisturbancespropagatethroughthemagnetosphereandimpacttheiono‐sphere?
2.Howdoionosphericstormsdevelop,evolve,andrecover?
3.Whatphysicalprocessescontrolthespatialandtemporalextentofstorm‐timepenetrationelectricfieldsinthelow‐tomid‐latitudeionosphere?
4.Howdoneutralwinddynamicsimpacttheelectrodynamicsoftheglobalionosphereduring
Final 34 GS Portfolio Review
ionosphericstorms?
5.Howdosub‐auroraliondrifts(SAIDs)andsub‐auroralplasmastreams(SAPS)formandde‐velop?
6.HowdoAIMIinteractionsaffectmassredistributionwithinthegeospacesystem?
Criticalcapabilities.Thecriticalcapabilitiesneededtoaddressthischallengeentailsynergiesbetweenmeasurementandmodeling.Distributedmeasurementsofflows,temperatures,andcom‐positionsoftheplasmaandneutralgasesareneededforingestionintoassimilativemodels,andasconstraintsonfirst‐principlesmodels.Provisionofthesecapabilitiesultimatelyincludescollabora‐tivemeasurementsfromground‐basedandspace‐basedplatforms.
Specifichigh‐priorityobservationalcapabilitiesrelevanttoGSinclude:(1)densityandcompo‐sitionoftheneutralatmospherefrom0to1000kmaltitude,(2)measurementsofionosphericflowsat10kmand10sresolution,(3)mapsofionosphericconductanceatspace‐timescalesinher‐entinthephenomenon(contextdependent,but100mand1svariationsarepossible),and(4)cyberinfrastructurecapabilitiestooptimallyexploitthegrowingdatabaseofheterogeneous,multi‐scalemeasurements.
Modelingcapabilitiesinclude:(1)Amulti‐scalemodelingeffortisneededinconcertwiththeseobservationalcapabilities.(2)Bothregional(transport,flux‐tube)andglobal(multi‐fluid,MHD,GCMs)modelsoffirstprinciplesphysicsareneededtotestourphysicalunderstandingandtopre‐dictunobservableparametersinthesystem(e.g.,neutralabundances,ioncomposition).(3)Aglobalmodeloftheelectrodynamicsoftheionospherethatself‐consistentlyincludesthemajordrivers:thehigh‐latitudeRegion1and2currentsystemsandtheneutralwind.(4)Assimilativemodelsareneededtoevaluateself‐consistencyofheterogeneousdistributedmeasurements,andtomakereal‐timepredictionsofspaceweathereffectsonthegeospacesystem.
AIMI‐2. Understand the plasma‐neutral coupling processes that give rise to local, regional, and
global‐scale structures and dynamics in the AIM system.
Althoughionizedspeciesintheouteratmosphereareaminorconstituentintermsofmassden‐sity,theyhaveasignificantimpactonneutraldynamicsowingtotheefficacywithwhichtheymaybedrivenbyfreeenergyinthemagnetosphereandsolarwind.Conversely,neutralmotionsinflu‐encetheeffectiveconductivityandelectricfieldsprojectedintothemagnetosphere,aswellasserv‐ingasthereservoirforionosphericplasmaproduction.Ourunderstandingofplasma‐neutralinter‐actionsisincompleteatbest,basedinlargepartonthedifficultyofobservingtheneutralgas.
Untilrecently,theroleoftheneutralatmosphereonthegeospacesystemhasreceivedinade‐quateattention.Inagreatmanystudies,thereliabilityoftheMassSpectrometerandIncoherentScatterRadarmodel(MSIS)isacceptedasabaselineassumptionforstudiesdrivenbyobservationsofplasmaphenomena.ThispracticeisfollowednotbecauseMSISisreliable,butbecauseitspa‐rametersaredifficulttoquantifyexperimentally.TheforthcomingNASAmissionsICONandGOLDincludesubstantialfocusonplasma‐neutralinteractions.RecenteffortstodevelopimagingFabry‐Perotinterferometers(FPIs)anddeploysuchinstrumentsinnetworkedconfigurationsalongsideplasmadiagnosticswillalsocontributesubstantially.
Perhapsthedominantion‐neutralcouplingissueintheAIMIsystemisthegenerationoftheglobaldynamoelectricfieldassociatedwiththermosphericwindsintheEandFregions.This
Final 35 GS Portfolio Review
electricfieldisthedominanttransportmechanismofplasmatransversetothegeomagneticfieldviatheEBdrift,andisresponsibleforthegenerationoftheAppletonanomalypeaksinFregionaswellastheenhancementoftheupwardplasmadriftatsunsetwhichisamajorfactorinthegenerationofequatorialspreadF(ESF).Anotherimportantissueconcernstheinterplayofplasmaandneutralspeciesincontrollingtheionoutflow.Themechanicaltransferofelectromagneticpowertotheneutralwinddynamoathighlatitudesisalsopoorlyquantified.
Importantquestionsthatneedtobeaddressedarethefollowing:
1.Whatisthedominantneutralwindstructurethatcontrolsthestrengthofthepost‐sunsetpre‐reversalenhancement?
2.Whatchangesoccurduringperiodsoflowsolaractivitythatcauseapost‐midnightenhance‐mentoftheupwardplasmadriftandleadtopre‐dawndensitydepletions?
3.Whatroledothermosphericdriversplayinregulatingtheday‐to‐dayvariabilityoftheneu‐tralwindandlow‐latitudeelectricfield?
4.Whataretheprimaryprocessesthatcontrolthelongitudinalvariabilityofthegloballow‐lati‐tudeelectricfield?
5.Howdoesthermosphericcomposition,temperature,andbulkmotionaffectplasmaproduc‐tionandoutflow?
Toanswerthesequestionsrequiresknowledgeoftheglobalthermosphericwind.However,measurementsofthewindarerelativelysparsecomparedtomeasurementsofionosphericproper‐ties,andaglobalsystemofobservationsisneeded(e.g.,Fabry‐Perotinterferometers).Theupcom‐ingNASAICONmissionisdesignedtomakemeasurementsoftheneutralwindinthelow‐latitudeionosphereandwillprovideanimportantnewdataset.
Asidefromobservations,first‐principlesphysics‐basedmodelsarebeingusedtodeterminethethermosphericwind(e.g.,TIEGCM,TIMEGCM,WACCM‐X,WAM).Itisimportantthatthistypeofmodeldevelopmentbecontinuedandvalidatedtoprovidecriticalwinddataintheabsenceofmeasurements.
Criticalcapabilities.Inadditiontothegeneralframeworkformodelinganddistributedmeas‐urementspreviouslydiscussed,progressinunderstandingplasma‐neutralcouplingrequiresthefollowingcapabilities:(1)coordinatedmeasurementsofneutralandplasmadynamics.Thiscapa‐bilityincludesdistributedground‐basedmeasurementsofneutralwindsandtemperatures,andco‐ordinatedglobal‐scaleobservationsfromspace,(2)improvedhybridfluid‐kineticmodelscapableofcapturingmagnetosphere‐ionosphere‐thermosphere‐mesosphereinteractions,(3)experimen‐tallydrivenmethodologiesbywhichsmallscaleprocessesmaybeusedtodriveGCMandMHDmodelingefforts.
AIMI‐3. Understand how forcing from the lower atmosphere via tidal, planetary, and gravity
waves influences the ionosphere and thermosphere.
Inrecentyearstherehasbeenagrowingrecognitionthatthegeospacesystemcanbeeffec‐tivelyandsignificantlydriventhrough“couplingfrombelow.”Thefullimplicationsofloweratmos‐phericforcingarestillbeingexplored.Duringtherecentextendedsolarminimumperiod,theoc‐currenceofequatorialspreadF(ESF)occurredmorefrequentlyinthepost‐midnightperiodthan
Final 36 GS Portfolio Review
thepost‐sunsetperiod—amarkeddeparturefrom'normal'ESF.Althoughnotentirelyunderstood,itisconjecturedthatthechangesinthethermosphericwindbecauseoflowsolarirradianceandvarioustidalandgravitywavemotionsalteredtheglobalelectricfieldtofavorpost‐midnightF‐re‐gionirregularitiestodevelop(asnotedinAIMI‐2).Thisresultbecomesmoreimportanttothegeo‐spacecommunityinlightofpredictionsthatsolaractivitywillcontinuetodeclineandpossiblyreachsolarconditionssimilartotheMaunderminimumin2030.
Therehasalsobeenconsiderableinterestoflateintheimpactofsuddenstratosphericwarm‐ings(SSW)inthePolarRegionsontheglobalionosphere.Forexample,changesintheionosphericdriftvelocitieshavebeenobservedatJicamarcafollowingaSSWsuggestingaglobalcouplingofthepolarstratospheretotheequatorialionosphereassociatedwithalteredatmosphericwavepatterns.
Lastly,non‐migratingtidalmotionsgeneratedinthetropospherehavebeenconvincinglylinkedtotheso‐called'4wave'patternobservedinionosphericopticalemissionsandTECpatterns.Sub‐sequentsimulationstudieshavebeenabletoreproducethisbehavior.
TheNASAIonosphericConnectionExplorer(ICON),tobelaunchedin2016,andtheGlobal‐scaleObservationsoftheLimbandDisk(GOLD)missiontobelaunchedin2018,willcontributetothischallenge.ICON,inparticular,isspecificallydedicatedtoexploringconnectionsbetweenEarth’sweatherandspaceweather.Newmodelingefforts,suchastheWholeAtmosphereCommu‐nityClimateModel(WACCM)areemergingtomakequantitativepredictions.TheseeffortsareparticularlyimportantowingtotheunprecedentedchangesofEarth’sintrinsicmagneticfield.
Criticalcapabilities.Thescientificefficacyofthesespace‐basedandmodelingeffortswillbegreatlyenhancedthroughground‐basedmeasurementstraditionallysponsoredwithintheNSFAeronomyandFacilitiesPrograms.Ofparticularinterestare(1)opticaltechniques,suchasFabry‐PerotinterferometersandLIDARsand(2)neutralairglowmonitors,whichremaintheprincipaldi‐agnosticoftheneutralstateoftheouteratmosphere,(3)radarsystems(incoherentscatter,MF,meteor)whichcanusebackscatterfromionizedspeciesastracersofneutraldynamics,coupledwith(4)collaborativemeasurementsofloweratmosphericphenomena(forcingfromorographic,geological,anthropogenic,andweathersystemsources).
AIMI‐4. Determine and identify the causes for long‐term (multi‐decadal) changes in the AIM
system.
Understandinglong‐termtrendsintheloweratmospherehasbeenattheforefrontofresearchintheGeoscienceDirectoratefordecades.Climatechangehasimmediateglobalsocietalconse‐quences.Similareffortsaimedatunderstandingclimatologicaleffectsintheupperatmospheremayprovidecrucialadditionalinsightsintoourunderstandingofhowourhomeinspaceinteractswithourparentstar.
Criticalcapabilities.Althoughinvestmentsinlong‐termmeasurementsareneeded,thecom‐munityisstilldebatingwhichmeasurementsarehighestpriorityandviablegiventhesubstantialvariationincostdependingondiagnostictechnique.Candidatesinclude:(1)Calibratedlong‐termgloballydistributedmagnetometermeasurements(availablefromthemid1800’stopresent);(2)Opticalmeasurements(desirablebutexpensiveandchallengingintermsoflong‐termcalibration);(3)A50‐yeardatabaseofISRmeasurementsremainslargelyuntappedatpresentandisexpensivetomaintain.ThenewAMISRradarshavethepromisingcapabilityof“lowdutycycleopera‐tion.”Emergingnetworksofopticalinstrumentationareachievingsimilarcadence,albeitsubjectto
Final 37 GS Portfolio Review
weatherandobservingconditions.Theseelectronicallysteerablesystemscansampleionosphericstateparametersataregularcadence(typically10’sofsecondstominutes)withreasonableoper‐atingcost.Thesemeasurementswillneedtobesupportedbyappropriatedatabase,cyberinfra‐structure,andmodelingmethodologies,asdiscussedpreviously.
5.2 Solar Wind‐Magnetosphere‐Ionosphere Interactions
SWMI‐1. Establish how magnetic reconnection is triggered and how it evolves to drive mass,
momentum, and energy transport.
Whilethebroadviewofhowreconnectiontakesplaceanddrivesconvectioninthemagneto‐sphereisnowwellestablished,theunderlyingphysicsofmagneticreconnectioninthecollisionlessregimeofthemagnetosphereisnotyetunderstoodwellenoughtoenablepredictionofwhen,where,andhowfastthisprocesswilloccurandhowitcontributestomass,momentumandenergytransport.NASA’sMagnetosphericMultiscaleMission(MMS)waslaunchedafterthe2012DecadalSurveywascompletedandisnowconductingmeasurementsinsidereconnectiondiffusionregionstoresolvethecollisionlessmicrophysicsofreconnectioninEarth’smagnetosphere.
MMSinsitumeasurementswilldeterminehowreconnectionoccurs,butpredictionofitsonsetandspatialdistributionisinfluencedbybothlocalmicrophysicsandnonlocaleffectsofmagneto‐sphere‐ionospherecoupling.Reconnectionalsoimpactsthemagnetosphere‐ionospheresystem.Thespatialvariationinionosphericconductivityregulatestheionosphericloadonthesolarwinddynamoandtheclosureofelectriccurrentscouplesreconnectionregionstotheionosphere.Thetransportofionsfromtheionospheretothemagnetospherebecomesespeciallyintenseduringmagneticstormsandcanmodifylocalreconnectionratesbychangingthemasscompositionofre‐connectingplasmas.Thereconnectionprocessexhibitsdifferentdynamicsindifferentregionsofgeospace.Magnetotailreconnectionproducesburstsofhigh‐speedflowsinnarrowchannels.Day‐sidereconnectiongenerateslocalizedfluxtransfereventsthatproduceburstsofparticleprecipita‐tion,aurorallightandflowchannelsinandpolewardofthelow‐altitudecuspregion.Reconnectionproducesstructuredionosphericsignaturesinplasmaflowsanddensity,verticaltransport,Alf‐vénicactivityandcharged‐particleprecipitation,andthesesignaturesareprimarydiagnosticsoftheregionalandglobaldistributionsofreconnectionoccurringatthemagnetosphericboundary.Thusmeasurementsandmodelsoflow‐altitudesignaturesareneededtounderstandreconnectionwellenoughtobeabletopredictwhenandwhereitwilloccurandhowitevolvestodrivemass,momentumandenergytransport.
Criticalcapabilities.Dataandobservationalcapabilitiesinclude:(1)basicresearchandanaly‐sisofdatafromspacecraftandGBOsrelevanttoreconnectionprocesses;(2)measurementsnearthedaysideandnightsideconvectionthroatsintheionosphereofionosphericflows,precipitationinferredfromground‐basedimagers,magneticfieldperturbationsfromGBOsandlow‐altitudespacecraft(e.g.,AMPEREconstellation)toresolvecurrentsystems;(3)coherentscatterradarmeasurementsforresolvingglobalconvectionpatterns;(4)cyberinfrastructurecapabilitiestoex‐ploitthegrowingdatabaseofheterogeneous,multi‐scalemeasurements;
Modelingcapabilitiesinclude:(1)large‐scope3Dkineticsimulationstostudythemicrophysicsofreconnectiondiffusionregions;(2)regionalfluxtubesimulationstostudyAlfvénwavedynamics,charged‐particleprecipitationandionosphericoutflowsonandnearreconnectionfluxtubes;(3)
Final 38 GS Portfolio Review
globalMHDsimulationstostudynonlocalprocessescontrollingwhereandwhenreconnectionoc‐cursandtheinfluenceofMIcouplinginregulatingit.
SWMI‐2. Identify the mechanisms that control the production, loss, and energization of ener‐
getic particles in the magnetosphere.
Wave‐particleinteractions(WPIs)arekeydriversofparticleenergygainandlossintheradia‐tionbelts.WPIsandmixingofenergeticandlow‐energyplasmaspromotesandsustainsthevariousmodesofwaveturbulencethatpermeatetheringcurrentandradiationbelts.Itisnowunderstoodthatstorm‐timeparticledynamicsaretheresultofadelicatebalancebetweenaccelerationandlossofrelativisticparticlesmediatedbywavesproducedbylocalplasmainstabilities.TheefficiencyofWPIsdependscriticallyonthecoldplasmasphericpopulationthatundergoeserosionduringgeo‐magneticstormsandexhibitsprominentlongitudinalasymmetriesthatarepoorlyresolvedbyspacecraftmeasurements.NASA’sVanAllenProbesMissionhasbeenconductingmeasurementsinthiscriticalregionsincethecompletionoftheDecadalSurveyandhasobservedlocalaccelerationandradialdiffusion.
Magneticreconnectioninthemagnetotaildrivesconvectionthatcarriesenergeticparticlesearthward,wheretheyareinjectedandtrappedinorbitsaroundEarthtoformtheextraterrestrialringcurrent,aregionoverlappingtheradiationbelts.Energeticionsandelectronsarefoundatdis‐tancesof1to7REfromEarth’scenter.TheinnerextentcanoverlapLEOwhiletheouterextentofenergeticparticlescanoverlapstheorbitalradiusofgeostationarysatellites(6.6RE)wherethevastmajorityofcommunicationsandEarth‐monitoringspacecraftreside.Thesesatellitescanbedam‐agedbyenergeticradiationbeltelectronswhosefluxisstronglyenhancedduringintensesolarandgeomagneticactivity.Understandingchargedparticleacceleration,scattering,andloss,whichcon‐troltheintensificationanddepletionoftheradiationbelts,anddevelopingcapabilitiestopredicttheirdynamicsareprioritiesforsolarandspacephysics.
Criticalcapabilities.BasicresearchandanalysisofdatafromspacecraftandGBOsrelevanttoenergizationandlossprocessesareofhighestimportance;lossprocessesareunderstoodempiri‐cally,butbettertheoreticalunderstandingisneeded.Insitumeasurementsofbothparticlesandwavefieldsarecriticalindetermininglocalpropertiesofenergeticparticlesintheinnermagneto‐sphere,understandingthemechanismsthatcontroltheirproduction,loss,andenergization.Fullunderstandingalsorequiresdistributedcomplementaryground‐basedmeasurementsofprecipita‐tion(fromriometersandVLFnetworks),particle‐scatteringbyultralowfrequencywavefieldsex‐tendinguptotheioncyclotronfrequency(frommagnetometernetworks),ionosphericconvectioncontrollingthelocationoftheplasmapause(frommid‐latitudeISRmeasurements),andTotalElec‐tronContent(whosevariationshavebeenshowntomaptotheplasmadensitychangesinthemag‐netospherethatcontrolWPI).Low‐altitudepolarorbitingCubeSatsandballoon‐bornemeasure‐mentsofenergeticparticleprecipitationcanplayacomplementaryroleandaredesirable.Observa‐tionsareneededforavarietyofsolarwindconditionsandthroughouttheentiresolarcycle;itisalsoessentialtohaveobservationsinthesolarwindinordertocharacterizetheexternaldrivers,althoughprovisionofthisdataisnotwithintheGSpurview.
Modelingcapabilitiesinclude:(1)bounce‐averagedtransportmodelsthatincludepressureanisotropyandeffectsofWPI;(2)hybridsimulationcodestostudygrowthandpropagationofwavesandtheirinteractionswithchargedparticles;(3)globalMHDcodestosimulateULFwave
Final 39 GS Portfolio Review
variabilityandthestructureofmagnetosphericelectricandmagneticfieldsinresponsetointerplanetarydrivers;and(4)Assimilativemodelsof3Ddiffusion(inenergy,pitchangleandL*)thatingestboundarydatatoconstrainthesolution.
SWMI‐3. Determine how coupling and feedback between the magnetosphere, ionosphere and thermosphere govern the dynamics of the coupled system in its response to the variable
solar wind.
TheSWMI‐3sciencechallengeintersectswith,andiscomplementaryto,AIMI‐1,bothofwhichaddressfundamentalaspectsofKeyScienceGoal2.Thepastdecadehasseentremendousadvancesinunderstandinghowthemagnetosphereandionosphererespondtostorm‐timedisturbances,butthenonlinearlinkagesthatcontrolthecoupledsystemarerelativelyopaqueandnotreadilydeter‐minedfromobservationalone.Addressingthischallengerequiresaconcertedeffort.Datafromwidelydistributedobservations,insituandground‐based,mustbeintegratedandassimilatedintoincreasinglyrealisticdynamicmodelsandcomputersimulationsofgeospacetounderstandcauseandeffect.
Examplesoftheunderlyingcomplexityinclude:Electrodynamiccouplingbetweenthemagneto‐sphereandionospheremodifiesthesimpledissipativeresponseofthecoupledsystemindramaticways.Dynamiccharged‐particleprecipitationchangesthedistributionofionosphericconductanceandthusthepatternsofelectricalcurrentflowandJouledissipationintheionosphere.Themagne‐tosphericdynamosthatpowerdissipationintheionosphere‐thermospheremustthereforedynami‐callyadapttotheevolvingsitesofdissipation,andionosphericdynamosfeedbackonthemagneto‐sphericplasma.Theinteractionoftheringcurrentwiththeionosphereseverelydistortsinnermag‐netosphericconvection,whichfeedsbackontheringcurrentitself,skewingitspeaktowarddawn.Dusksideflowchannelsarisingfromionosphericcouplingremainlongpastperiodsofpeaksolarwinddriving.OutflowsofionsfromtheionosphereintothemagnetospherearesointenseduringmagneticstormsthationosphericO+candominatethering‐currentionpressures.Outflowofheavyionsalsoaltermagnetosphericdynamicsbymodifyingmagneticreconnectiononboththedaysideandthenightside.Sincethefeedbackoftheionosphereandthermosphereasasourceofplasmaanddissipationforthemagnetospherehassuchprofoundeffects,theevolutionoftheionosphereandmagnetospheremustbestudiedasagloballycoupledsystem.
Criticalcapabilities.Basicresearchandanalysisofdatafromthemultitudeofground‐andspace‐basedmeasurementsisessential.Distributedsynopticmeasurementsofthefollowingvaria‐blesathigh‐andmid‐latitudesarecritical:(1)Electriccurrentsflowingintoandthroughtheiono‐sphereandassociatedmagneticperturbations(frommagnetometersatGBOsandonlow‐altitudesatelliteconstellations);(2)convectiveelectricfields(fromradarmeasurements);(3)energyandfluxofcharged‐particleprecipitation(andideallytheirphasespace‐density),obtainedeitherfromdirectmeasurementoropticaltechniques(fromISRs,low‐altitudesatellitesandground‐basedim‐agers);(4)associatedionosphericconductivityandionosphericplasmadensity(fromISRsandmodelinversiontechniques);(5)fluxanddensityofupflowingandoutflowingionosphericionsandideallytheirphasespacedensity(fromISRs);and(6)thefrequencyandwavenumberspectrumofturbulentfluctuationsofelectromagneticfieldsandplasmavariables(fromlow‐altitudesatellitemeasurements).AllarewithinthepurviewofGSsponsorship.Distributedmeasurementsofturbu‐lentspectraiscurrentlyandwillcontinuetobeaverychallengingdiagnosticproblemformanyyearstocome.Theselow‐altitudedatashouldbecomplementedbyinsitudataobtainedfromother
Final 40 GS Portfolio Review
sources,especiallyupstreamsolarwinddataandmagnetosphericstatevariablesderivedfrommeasurementsonNASA,NOAAandDoDsatellites.
Modelingcapabilitiesinclude:(1)increasinglydetailedempiricalmodels(dynamicstatistical);(2)globalsimulationsofthecoupledsolarwind–magnetosphere–ionosphere–thermospherein‐teraction,extendedtoincludethegeneralizedOhm’slawanddriftkineticeffectsandcoupledtohigh‐resolutionglobalI‐Tmodelsthatincludefield‐alignedmasstransportbetweenthemagneto‐sphereandionosphere:(3)regionalmodelstostudydynamicsofactiveregionsintheoutermagne‐tosphere(magnetopause,magnetotail),generationofwavesinsuchregions,andwavepropagationtoandinteractionwiththeionosphere;and(4)Localandregionalthree‐dimensionalkineticandhybridsimulationstodeterminethemechanismsresponsibleforfield‐alignedaccelerationofelec‐tronsandionsandtransverseaccelerationofions.
SWMI‐4. Critically advance the physical understanding of magnetospheres and their coupling
to ionospheres and thermospheres by comparing models against observations from different
magnetospheric systems.
Jupiter’smoonIoisacopioussourceofneutralgas,which,uponionization,isadominantdragforceontherapidlyco‐rotatingmagneticfieldoftheplanet.Similarly,themoonsofSaturn,particu‐larlyTitanandEnceladus,aremajorsourcesofplasmathataffectsthedynamicsofSaturn’smagne‐tosphere,andaspectshavebeenstudiedwithdatafromtheCassiniandVoyagerspacecraft,thoughmuchremainsunexplained.ThemagnetospheresofUranusandNeptunearelargelyunexploredbutpresentuniquecasesthatwilllikelyfurtherchallengescientificunderstanding.Finally,thetinymagnetosphereofMercuryisanextremeexampleofamagnetosphericsystembecauseitpossessesnoionosphere.Insuchasituationthecouplingprocessesthatoperateareradicallydifferent.Theseothersystemspresentasuiteofvastlydifferentconfigurationsandtheopportunitytotestcurrenttheoriesandmodelsonthesewidelyvaryingsystems.
Criticalcapabilities.ThecapabilitieswithinthepurviewofGSsponsorshiprequiredtoad‐dressthissciencechallengeinclude(1)developmentoftheoreticalmodelsand(2)applicationofempiricalandfirst‐principlessimulationmodelsadaptedtothespecialcircumstancesthatmakeotherplanetarymagnetospheresdifferentfromEarth’s.
5.3 Solar and Heliospheric Physics
SHP‐1. Understand how the sun generates the quasi‐cyclical magnetic field that extends
throughout the heliosphere
ThefirstSolar‐Heliospheric(whichisessentiallyequivalentinscopetotheGSconceptofSolar‐Terrestrial)challengeraisedbytheDecadalSurveyaddressesboththeoriginsandtheimpactsofcyclingmagneticactivitythroughouttheheliosphere.Wehavebrokenthechallengeintothesetwocomponentsinordertofocusonthecapabilitiesandrequirementsdistincttoeach.
Howisthecyclingsolarmagneticfieldgenerated?Dynamomodelsrangefrommean‐fieldpa‐rameterizationstoglobalconvectivesimulations.Thesemodelshavehadsignificantrecentsuccessinexplainingmagneticfieldgeneration,cyclingfields,andeven“grandminima”(i.e.,extendedperi‐odsoflowsolaractivityinterruptingotherwisequasi‐regularsolarcycles).Observationsofsolaroscillations(helioseismology)andsurfaceflowshaveprovidednewdetailsaboutbothglobaland
Final 41 GS Portfolio Review
localstructureswithintheSun,andhigh‐resolutionobservationsandnumericalsimulationsofmagneticfluxemergencehaverevealedthephysicalprocessesatworkinsunspotfinestructure.Alongwithrecentstellarmeasurementsofthepropertiesofsolaranalogsrelatingrotation,convec‐tion,magnetism,andcyclicactivity,theseobservationsandsimulationshavebeenarichresourceforinspiringtheoryandconstrainingmodels.
However,fundamentalquestionsremainastotherolesplayedbythevariousphysicalpro‐cessespotentiallyinvolvedingeneratingmagnetism‐‐e.g.,convection,circulation,rotation,andfluxemergence‐‐andhowthesevarywithinandacrosssolaractivitycycles.Forexample,patternsofmeridionalcirculationwithlatitudeanddepth,andthedegreeofdiffusivityofflowsareessen‐tiallyunknownparameters.Similarly,uncertaintiesremainabouthowlocaldynamoeffectsmayimpacttheglobaldynamowhichgeneratesthecyclingsolarmagneticfield,andofhowsunspotsformandtowhatextenttheycontributetotheoperationoftheglobaldynamo.Untilandunlessthesequestionscanberesolved,ourabilitytopredictfuturesolaractivitylevelsisseverelylimited.
Criticalcapabilities.(1)Basicresearchanddevelopmentpertainingtodynamotheoryandmodelsremainsahighpriority.(2)Observationalanalysesofhelioseismologyandsurfacemagneticfieldsandflowscontinuetobeessential,and(3)effortsindataassimilationtodirectlyincorporatetheseobservationsintomodelsareofgrowingsignificance.(4)AnalysesofobservedSun‐likestarsprovideanexcellentmeansoftestingthephysicalityandgeneralityofdynamomodels.
Inwhatwayandtowhateffectdoesthesolarcyclevarythroughouttheheliosphere?Theimpactoftherecentprolongedsolarminimumwasfeltthroughouttheheliosphere,forcingustoreassessourexpectationsfora“typical”low‐activitytimeperiod.Forexample,galacticcosmicray(GCR)fluxesnearEarthreachedthehighestlevelsonrecord,andareductioninsolarUVheatingoftheEarth’supperatmosphereledtolessdragonsatellitesthaninpriorsolarminima.
Thepossibilityofanevenmoreextendedgrandminimuminthefutureraisesquestionsaboutimplicationsforbothterrestrialandspaceclimate.Recentterrestrialclimatemodelresultsindicatethatasustaineddecreaseintotalsolarirradiance(TSI)atlevelsexpectedforagrandminimumwouldhaveasmall‐‐buttemporary‐‐impactonupwardtrendsinglobalsurfacetemperature.Theimpactonspaceclimatewouldbegreater:sincevariationatshortwavelengthsismorestronglymodulatedbysolaractivitythanTSI,theupperatmospherewouldchangesignificantlyifUVradia‐tionwerediminishedforanextendedperiod(astherecentsolarminimumdemonstrated).Theef‐fectsofcouplingsbetweenspaceandterrestrialclimateareasyetlargelyundetermined.Underly‐ingtheseissuesarefundamentaluncertaintiesabouthowsolarmagneticvariabilitytranslatestochangesinspectralsolarirradiance–whichdependsonthedistributionofclosedmagneticfields,andinsolarwind/Heliosphericstructure–whichdependsonthedistributionofopenmagneticfields.
Criticalcapabilities.(1)Solar‐cycleanalysesareneededofboththecomprehensivespace‐agerecordofremote‐sensingandin‐situobservationsthatspantheheliosphere,andthelonger‐termhistoricalandgeologicalrecordofsolar‐cycleproxies.(2)High‐resolutionmagneticfluxemergenceobservationsand(3)radiative‐magnetohydrodynamic(R‐MHD)simulationsareneededtoconnectsolarmagneticdistributiontospectralirradiance.(4)ModelsthatlinkobservationsfromSuntoEarth‐‐e.g.,asprovidedbytheCommunityCoordinatedModelingCenter(CCMC)‐‐areimportantforrelatinglong‐livedheliosphericmagneticstructurestoperiodicsolar‐windforcingandassociatedgeospaceandGCRresponses.(5)Data‐exploitationeffortsareneededtoarchiveand
Final 42 GS Portfolio Review
cross‐calibrateobservationalrecords.
SHP‐2. Determine how the Sun’s magnetism creates its hot, dynamic atmosphere
Howisthesolaratmosphereheatedandthesolarwindaccelerated?Thefundamentalphysicalproblemsofhowthesolarcoronaisheatedtomillionsofdegrees,andhowthesolarwindisaccel‐eratedtosupersonicspeeds,arestilllargelyunsolved.Theseproblemsarerelatedthroughady‐namiccouplingbetweencoronaandsolarwind,withtheloweratmosphere(chromosphere)poten‐tiallyactingasasourceforheatandmassfluxes.Arangeofcoronalheatingmodelsbasedonnanoflares,turbulentcurrentsheets,and/orwaveshavebeenproposedandtosomeextentvali‐datedwithobservations.In‐situmeasurementsofthesolar‐windplasmavelocitydistributionfunc‐tionsandelectromagneticfluctuationshavebeenusedinstudiesofthegenerationanddissipationofAlfvénicfluctuationsandothertypesofsolar‐windturbulence,andnonthermalionandelectrondistributionfunctionshaveyieldedcluestohowandwhatkineticinstabilitiesmaydevelop.Recon‐nectioneventsinthesolarwindhavebeenstudied,withconnectionsmadetosolarphenomenain‐cludingplumes,spicules,andnanoflares.Finally,chargestateandcompositionmeasurementscou‐pledwithglobalmagneticmodelshavebeenusedtoconnectsolarwindobservationstotheirori‐ginsinthesolaratmosphere,withspecificsignaturesfoundforfast,slow,andtransientsolarwind.
Magnetismisthecommonthemeinalloftheseanalysesandlinksthemacrossmanyscales(temporalandspatial).However,modelsofcoronal/heliosphericmagneticfieldsgenerallydefinealowermagneticboundaryconditionusingobservationsofthephotospherewheretheplasmabetaisexpectedtobehigh,whichlimitstheirreliability.Thechromospheremaybeabetterboundaryconditiononmagneticmodels,anditclearlyplaysanimportantroleintheinjectionofenergyintothecoronaandsolarwind.However,thechromosphereisoneoftheleastwellunderstoodregimesinsolar‐terrestrialphysics.Ingeneral,amorecompleteunderstandingisneededofthephysicalmechanismormechanismsresponsibleforthetransferofenergyfromtheSun’sinteriorthroughitsatmospheretothesolarwind,andofhowsolarandheliosphericmagneticfieldscontrolandcon‐nectthesemechanisms.
Criticalcapabilities.(1)Analysesofhigh‐resolutionmeasurementsofplasmaandelectromag‐neticfluctuationsinthesolarwind,and(2)ofhighspatial/temporalresolutionobservationsatallheightsinthesolaratmosphereareneededtotestanddevelopmodelsofthephysicalmechanismsdrivingcoronalheatingandsolarwinddynamics.(3)Three‐dimensionalR‐MHDnumericalsimula‐tionsthatspantheupper‐convectionzonethroughthecoronaasacoherentsystemareimportantforprogress,asis(4)thedevelopmentofmethodologyfordrivingthesesimulationswithobserva‐tionsfrommultipleheightsofthesolaratmosphere.(5)Globalmagneticmodelsareimportantforcontextandtoconnectsolarwindtoitssources.
SHP‐3. Determine how magnetic energy is stored and explosively released and how the re‐
sultant disturbances propagate through the heliosphere.
Again,wehavebrokenthischallengeintotwocomponents,dealingwiththeformofexplosiveenergyreleaseandtheoriginsofgeoeffectiveness,inordertofocusonthecapabilitiesandrequire‐mentsdistincttoeach.
Inwhatformisenergyreleasedinflares/CMEs?Flowsatthesolarsurfaceandmagneticflux
Final 43 GS Portfolio Review
emergingfrombeneathittwistanddistortthecoronalmagneticfield,buildingupfreeenergyontimescalesofdays,weeks,orpossiblylonger.Thisfreeenergymaybeexplosivelyreleasedduringaflareand/orcoronalmassejection(CME)intheformofhigh‐speedflows,localplasmaheating,andtheaccelerationofparticlestohighenergies.CMEaccelerationhasbeenshowntobecloselysyn‐chronizedwithhigh‐energyreleaseinflares,implyingthatfastexpansioncreatesaflarecurrentsheetbelowaCME.Particleaccelerationisseenneartheflaresiteaspartofamagneticreconnec‐tionprocess,aswellasatcoronalandinterplanetaryshocksdrivenbyfastCMEs‐‐thelatterbeingtheprimarysourceoflargesolarenergeticparticle(SEP)eventsobservedinsituintheinterplane‐tarymediumandgeospace.MeasurementshaveindicatedthattheacceleratedrelativisticelectronsoftencontainhalfoftheenergyreleasedinaflarewhilealargefractionoftheCMEenergy(tensofpercent)iscommonlyimpartedtotheSEPs.
Whilethecombinationofmulti‐pointobservations,currentmodelsandtheoreticalcalculationshaveledtosignificantimprovementsinourunderstandingofflareandCMEgenerationaswellasparticleaccelerationandtransport,manyquestionsremainaboutthephysicalprocessesinvolved.Inparticular,howissuchalargefractionofthereleasedenergyconvertedintoparticleenergy?WhydoesSEPaccelerationandlongitudinaltransportefficiencyvarysogreatlyfromeventtoevent?WhataretherolesofprecedingCMEs,theconditionsoftheinterplanetarymedium,andthecharacteristicsofthesuprathermalseedparticlepopulationindeterminingthisefficiency?
Criticalcapabilities.(1)Analysisoftherichremotesensingandin‐situdatasetsobtainedthroughouttheheliosphereareneededtoconnectsourceconditionstoenergeticphenomena.(2)Modelsincorporatingmultiwavelengthobservationsofflaresandhightemporal/spatialresolutionmagnetometricobservationsofactiveregionsbefore,duringandaftereruptionsareneededtoun‐derstandenergybuildupandrelease.(3)Dataexploitationofthemeasurementsoftheevolutionofthehalosolarwindandsuprathermaltails,CMEsandtheirassociatedshocks,radiobursts,ener‐geticneutralatoms(ENAs),andSEPsisneededtoadvancemodelsofparticleaccelerationandtransport.(4)Makingthesemodelsavailabletothecommunity(e.g.,viatheCCMC)furtherin‐creasestheoverallscientificreturn.
WhataretheoriginsofflaresandCMEs,andhowdotheseresultingeo‐effectiveness?SubstantialrecentprogresshasbeenmadeincreatingmaturemodelsofCMEs,shocks,andSEPsfromsolareruptions(includingmodelsservedbytheCCMC).Thesuccessofsimulationsinreproducingobser‐vationsofCMEstestifiestoarobustscientificunderstandingofmanyoftheprocessesofmagneticstorageandrelease,andindeeditispossibletoidentifywhichareasontheSunaremostlikelytoproduceflaresandCMEs.Inaddition,observationscombinedwithoperationalmodelsgiveadvancewarningofpotentialspaceweatherhazards.Aninitial1‐3daywarningofimpendingshocksandCMEimpactsisprovidedbyaCME’slaunchandsubsequentobservedpropagation:recentworktri‐angulatingSTEREOobservationshassignificantlyreduceduncertaintiesinarrivaltimeforecasts.Morepreciseinformationcanbeobtainedfrom,e.g.,measurementsofrelativisticelectronswhicharriveapproximatelyonehourbeforetheSEPions.
However,wehavenotreachedapointwherewecanpredictwhenaneruptionwilloccur,orthelikelyseverityoftheeruption’simpactattheEarth,e.g.speed,mass,magneticfluxcontentand(mostsignificantly)magneticorientation(seeSWPbelowforfurtherdiscussion).Inaddition,recentstudiesshowing“sympatheticeruptions”indicateglobalconnectivitycanplayaroleintriggeringCMEs,andtheglobalmagneticenvironmentisknowntoinfluenceCMEsastheyerupt,e.g.throughrotation,deflection,and/orreconnection.SEPaccelerationandlongitudinaltransport
Final 44 GS Portfolio Review
efficiencysimilarlydependsuponspatialandtemporalcontext.AfullunderstandingofthephysicalenvironmentwithinandaroundCMEsourceregionsmaybeultimatelynecessaryforprediction.
Criticalcapabilities.(1)MHDmodelsfromactiveregiontoglobalscalesareneededtocoverthestorage,release,andpropagationstagesofCMEsasareobservationsofallofthesestagesfromSuntoEarth.(2)Time‐evolvingmeasurementsofplasmaandmagneticfieldsatmultipleheightsinthesolaratmosphereandcoveringtheglobalsolaratmosphere,alongwith(3)methodsfortheirincorporationintosolarmagneticmodels,arerequiredtoimprovethequalityofreal‐timemodelsandtoadvancetheforecastingofspace‐weathereventsandheliosphericconditions.
SHP‐4. Discover how the Sun interacts with the local interstellar medium
Whatisthenatureofstructureofthelocalinterstellarmediummagneticfield?Neutralsfromthelocalinterstellarmedium(LISM)entertheheliosphere,becomeionizedandarepickedupbythesolarwind.Thesesingly‐ionized‘pickupions’providemostofthepressureattheboundaryoftheheliosphere.ThestructureoftheinterfacebetweentheLISMandtheheliosphereregulatesthepen‐etrationofGCRs.DuringtherecentsolarminimumrecordhighintensitylevelsofGCRsweremeas‐ured,andadditionalanalysisofpastsolarcyclesindicatethatthismaybemore‘typical’offuturesolarminima.Ifthisprovestrue,evaluationsofsolarcycledependenceofradiationhazardsat1AUandespeciallyforlong‐term,mannedspace‐explorationmissionsmayhavetobesignificantlyre‐evaluated.Additionalsurprisescontinuetoemergefromthein‐situexplorationofthesolarwind‐LISMboundarybytheVoyagerspacecraft:examplesincludeloweramountsofsolarwindheatingattheheliopausethanexpected,thelackofaclearsourceforanomalouscosmicrays(ACRs),andanunexpectedmagneticfieldorientationintheheliosheath.TheseobservationsarecurrentlybeingcombinedwithneutralatommeasurementsbyIBEXandsensorsonCassinitogiveamoreglobalpictureofthestructureoftheheliosphere‐LISMinteraction.
UnfortunatelythestructureandorientationoftheLISMmagneticfieldispoorlyconstrainedbycurrentmeasurements.Severalnewtheorieshavebeendevelopedtoexplaintheunexpectedobser‐vations,butthisremainsaquicklyevolvingandactiveareaofsciencewithcontinuingnewmeas‐urements,modeldevelopmentandmodeltesting.
Criticalcapabilities.(1)ModeldevelopmentcombinedwithappropriatedataanalysisfromtheVoyagerandIBEXmissions,arerequiredtocorrectlyinterpretthenewobservationsandun‐derstandthetransportofbothcosmicraysandneutralatomsthroughouttheregion.(2)Methodsforassimilating/incorporatingthedataintothesemodelsneedtobedeveloped,andthemodelsul‐timatelymadeavailabletothecommunity(e.g.,viatheCCMC)inordertobetteradvanceourunder‐standingofACRacceleration,GCRpenetrationintoandpropagationthroughtheheliosphere,theinteractionofthesolarwindandLISM,andthepropagationofsolar/interplanetarydisturbancesouttotheboundaryandtheirimpactonitsstructure.
5.4 Space Weather and Prediction
Beginningwithitstitle,“SolarandSpacePhysics:AScienceforaTechnologicalSociety,”theDe‐cadalSurvey(DS)recognizestheimportanceoftheapplicationofspacesciencetoaddresssocietalneeds.Furthermore,KeyScienceGoal1aimsto“…predictthevariationsinthespaceenviron‐ment”.Predictionofthenear‐Earthspaceenvironment,onwhichsocietydepends,istantalizinglywithinreach.Yet,theDScommittee“foundthattheexistingadhocapproachtoprovidingspace
Final 45 GS Portfolio Review
weather‐relatedcapabilitiesisinadequate.”13
UnlikethesummariesoftheAIMI,SWMIandSHPchallenges,whichwereexplicitlycalledoutwithDSlabels(e.g.,AIMI‐1,SWMI‐3,SHP‐4,etc.),goalsandchallengesforSpaceWeatherandPre‐diction(SWP)werenotorganizedinthismanner.TheGS‐relevantchallengesforspaceweatherpredictionmaybederivedfromthefollowingoverarchingobjective.
SWP: Develop reliable predictive capabilities for when and in what direction major disturb‐
ances will be emitted by the Sun, and how they will affect the geospace environment when
coupled with inputs from Earth.
Majorsolardisturbancessuchasflares,CMEs,SEPs,andhigh‐speedsolarwindstreamsaretheoriginatorsofspaceweatherconditionsatEarthandininterplanetaryspacethatcanendangerhu‐mansinspaceanddamageorinterferewithtechnologicalsystemsinspaceandontheground.FlaresemitintenseX‐raysandultravioletradiationthatreachesEarthatthespeedoflight,affectingconditionsinEarth’sdaysideionosphereandupperatmosphere.CMEsandtheco‐rotatinginterac‐tionregionsformedwhenthehigh‐speedsolarwindencountersslowersolarwindaresourcesof:geomagneticstormsandtheirattendantcurrentsandaurora,atmosphericneutraldensityvaria‐tionsandgeomagneticallyinducedcurrents(GICs).WhenacteduponbysolarwinddisturbancesEarth’smagneticfieldactsasanaturalbuterraticparticleaccelerator;producingenhancementsanddepletionsoftheVanAllenradiationbeltsovershortandlongtimescales.Additionally,thenear‐Earthspaceenvironmentisinfluencedfrombelowbyphysicalandchemicalprocessesassoci‐atedwithatmospherictides,winds,gravitywaves,lightning,theoutflowofelectricallychargedpar‐ticlesfromEarth’sionosphereandneutralsfromtheatmosphere.
Satelliteoperations,orbitprediction,precisionnavigation/location/timingservices,astronautactivitiesinspace,andHFradiocommunicationswithairlinesareexamplesofactivitiesthatareaffectedbyspaceweatherdisturbances.AtEarth’ssurface,powergrids,communicationcablesandpipelinesareexamplesofinfrastructurethatcanbeaffectedbyGICs.Theradiationbeltsareoneoftheprincipalthreatstohumantechnologicalsystemsinspaceaswellashumansflyinginlow‐EarthsystemssuchastheInternationalSpaceStation.Numerousoperationalanomaliesandoutrightfail‐uresofspacecraftsystemsandsubsystemshavebeendirectlylinkedtoradiationbeltspaceweatherepisodes.
Itremainsasignificantchallengetopredictwithaccuracywhereandwhenaflarewilleruptandhowintenseitwillbe.Thereisessentiallyzeroleadtimeforwarningofthearrivaloftheflare’senergy.BecauseweknowSEPsareacceleratedinassociationwithflaresandatCMEshockfrontsastheypropagatethroughthebackgroundsolarwindwecanpotentiallyforecasttheirarrivalontimescalesofminutestohours,butitremainsachallengetopredictwithaccuracywhetherornotapar‐ticularflareorCMEwillresultinSEPsstrikingEarth,theintensityandenergyspectrumoftheSEPsandhowlongtheeventwilllast.WhilerecentMHDmodelsofCMEshaveimprovedtheaccuracyofwhetherornotaCMEwillstrikeEarthandwhenitwillarrive,therearemajorchallengesforbetterpredictionsandespeciallyforpredictingthevectormagneticfieldembeddedintheCME.Whileitisperhapseasiertopredictthearrivalofhigh‐speedstreams,therearestillsignificantchallengesforpredictingtheirtimingandintensity.
13 DS Chap. 7 page 139
Final 46 GS Portfolio Review
OnceadisturbancearrivesatEarththeresponsestilldependsonmanyfactorsuniquetothegeospacesystem.Solarcycleandseasonaleffects,aswellasthepreconditionedstateofmanyofthedifferentcomponentsofthegeospacesystem,areadditionalimportantfactorsthatrequirecon‐siderationandintegrationintoacoupledpredictivesystem.
Criticalcapabilities.CapabilitiesneededtoaddressthechallengesoutlinedabovecanbeachievedthroughavarietyofNSFGSprograms.Theseeffortscouldcombinetotargetspaceweatherpredictionsandcouldbenefitfromfeedbackbetweenresearchandoperationscommu‐nities.ManyofthecriticalcapabilitiesneededforthisSWPeffortaredescribedinthesections5.1‐5.3.Weextractthemostrelevantcapabilitiesandincludeothersthatareimportanttospaceweatherprediction.
Solar‐Heliosphere:(1)Modelsfromactive‐regiontoglobalscalesofthestorage,release,andpropagationphasesoferuptionsSun‐to‐Earth,andofperiodicsolar‐windforcingwithassoci‐atedgeospaceandGCRresponses(2)Detailedknowledgeofconditionsbefore,during,andaf‐tereruptionsfromSuntoEarth,andoftheglobalsolarandheliosphericmagneticfield
Magnetosphere:(1)GlobalsimulationsofthecoupledSW‐M‐I‐Tinteractionthatincluderecon‐nectionprocessesandmagnetosphericwavesandwavepropagationlinkedtointeractionwiththeI‐Tsystem.(2)Newpredictivemodelsthatcombineearthwardradialparticletransportwithlocalaccelerationandappropriatelyincorporatenonlinearprocesses,aswellasenergeticparticlelossmechanisms.(3)Detailedknowledgeofthemagneticfieldconfigurationduringdisturbedconditions,aswellasspectralinformationontherelevantplasmawavemodeswithrespecttolocaltimeandlatitude.
Space‐AtmosphereInteractionRegion:(1)Globalassimilativeandphysicsmodelsoftheelec‐trodynamicsoftheionospherethatself‐consistentlyincludethemajordriversofenergypro‐duction,transferandlossthroughoutthesystem(2)Multi‐scalefirst‐principlesmodelstopre‐dictunobservableparametersinthesystem(e.g.,neutralabundances,ioncomposition);(3)Modelingandmeasurementsofionosphericirregularities;(4)Modelingofupperatmosphericconductivity;(5)Measurementsandmodelingoflow‐andmid‐atmosphericphenomena(forc‐ingfromtidesandorographic/weathersystemsources).
Geospace‐Hazards:(1)Three‐dimensionalinductionmodelssupportedbydatafromglobalmagnetosphericMHDmodeloutput;(2)Mappingofthedetailed3‐Dgroundconductivitystruc‐turesingeomagnetically‐induced‐currentproneregions;and(3)measurementsofneutralden‐sity,windsandcompositionscientificstudiesrelatedtosatellitedraganddebrismitigation.
ObservationsandDataExploitation:(1)Time‐evolvingmeasurementsofplasmaandmagneticfieldsinthesolaratmosphere,Earth’sgeospaceandLEOenvironments;(2)Cyberinfrastruc‐turecapabilitiestoexploitthegrowingdatabaseofheterogeneous,multi‐scalemeasurements;(3)Dataexploitationofthemeasurementsoftheevolutionofthesolarwind,CMEsandtheirassociatedshocks,radiobursts,energeticneutralatoms(ENAs),andSEPsforadvancingmodelsofparticleaccelerationandtransport;(4)Coordinatedmeasurementsofneutralandplasmady‐namics,includingground‐basedmeasurementsofneutralwindsandtemperatures,andcoordi‐natedglobal‐scaleobservationsfromspace;(5)Measurementofsoftandhardprecipitatingparticles;(6)Data‐exploitationeffortstoarchiveandcross‐calibrateobservationalrecords.
Final 47 GS Portfolio Review
The above description of the overarching SWP objective, and associated capabilities, clearly shows that such an endeavor sits at the frontier of current GS-funded efforts and Grand Challenge Science, and also at the boundary of NSF GS- and USGS-funded ground-based observatories and NASA- and NOAA-funded space-based observatories, as well as assets from other nations. In Chap-ter 6 the PRC describes Grand Challenge Projects that illustrate frameworks for the science that sup-ports space weather prediction.
Similarly, the DS noted inadequacy for predicting “how changes on the Sun may affect Earth’s climate, atmosphere, and ionosphere.”14 Predicting such changes is frontier research and thus requires (1) modeling capabilities already under development with NCAR’s Whole Atmosphere Community Climate Model (supported by AGS), as well as global climate and chemistry models under develop-ment around the world; and (2) observational support for solar spectral irradiance supported by NASA. The Committee believes that GS support for coupling space weather and climate, particularly with respect to particle interactions, is more appropriate for a Grand Challenge Project effort de-scribed in Chapter 6 of this report.
14 DS Chap. 3, page 74
Final 48 GS Portfolio Review
5.5 Summary of Critical Capabilities
CapabilitiesrequiredtoaddresssciencegoalsandchallengesoftheAIMI,SWMI,SHPandSWPsciencethrustsoftheDSaresum‐marizedinTables5.2‐5.5.
Table 5.2 Summary of required capabilities and recommended investments for AIMI
Decadal Survey Challenge
Required Capabilities Recommended Investments
Observational Theory/Modeling Data Exploitation
AIMI‐1 M‐I‐T System
Distributed sampling from ground and space. Focus on conductance, electric field, and plasma and neutral com‐position, temperatures, densi‐ties, and velocities.
Development of advanced numerical algorithms and large‐scale integration of global assimilative, first‐principles, and space weather models
Innovative cloud‐based ap‐proach to data aggregation and assimilation
GS: AER core, CEDAR, DASI, CubeSats, CCMC, ISRs, Data systems, AMPERE, SuperDARN, SuperMAG
External/partner: EISCAT‐3D, EISCAT‐Svalbard, NCAR‐CISL, DOE/NSF, NASA
AIMI‐2 Plasma‐neutral
coupling
Coordinated measurements of plasma and neutral bulk prop‐erties
Regional and global mod‐els of the coupled plasma‐neutral system.
Innovative cloud‐based ap‐proach to data aggregation and assimilation
GS: AER core, CEDAR, DASI, CubeSats, CCMC, ISRs, Data systems, AMPERE, SuperDARN, SuperMAG
External/partner: EISCAT‐3D, EISCAT‐Svalbard, NCAR‐CISL, DOE/NSF, NASA
AIMI‐3 Lower atmospheric
coupling
Coordinated measurements of lower atmospheric phenom‐ena and geospace effects. Fo‐cus on neutral dynamics, with plasma dynamics as proxy.
Innovative methods for advanced whole atmos‐phere model develop‐ment.
Innovative cloud‐based ap‐proach to data aggregation and assimilation
GS: AER core, CEDAR, DASI, CubeSats, CCMC, ISRs, Data system
External/partner: NCAR‐CISL, DOE/NSF, NASA
AIMI‐4 Long‐term changes
Multi solar cycle observations of critical geospace parame‐ters (composition, densities, temperatures) at key locations
Coupling to climate mod‐els
Persistent long term measure‐ments of critical geospace pa‐rameters in cost effective man‐ner, e.g., maintain long term database (Madrigal) and pur‐sue data science initiatives
GS: AER core, CEDAR, DASI, CubeSats, CCMC, ISRs, Data systems, AMPERE, SuperDARN, SuperMAG
External/partner: EISCAT‐3D, EISCAT‐Svalbard, NCAR‐CISL, DOE/NSF, NASA
Final 49 GS Portfolio Review
Table 5.3 Summary of required capabilities and recommended investments for SWMI
Decadal Survey Challenge
Required Capabilities Recommended
Investments (Chapters 6‐9) Observational Theory/Modeling Data Exploitation
SWMI‐1 Magnetic
reconnection
Precipitation, ionospheric responses
from ISR and imager measurements
in dayside and nightside convection
throats; global and regional coher‐
ent scatter radar (CSR) measure‐
ments of high‐latitude flows; deter‐
mination of ionospheric currents
Large‐scope 3D kinetic simula‐
tions;regional flux tube simula‐
tions;Global MHD simulations;
high‐performance computing
Common database for
ground‐ and space‐
based measurements;
data analysis, visualiza‐
tion tools; innovative
cloud‐based approach
to data aggregation; de‐
velopment of data as‐
similation methods
GS:MAG core, GEM, GCP; PFISR,
RISR‐N; AMPERE, SuperDARN, Su‐
perMAG, CCMC; Data Systems,
DASI External/partner: RISR‐C, TREx,
NCAR‐CISL, DOE/NSF Partnership,
NASA, DoD
SWMI‐2 Particle
energization
Distributed ground‐based and low‐
altitude measurements of precipita‐
tion (imagers, riometers, CubeSats);
magnetic perturbations (magnetom‐
eters); ionospheric convection (ISR,
CSR); TEC;
Bounce‐averaged transport mod‐
els; kinetic and hybrid simulations;
global MHD simulations; assimila‐
tive and empirical models of waves
based on observations.
GS:MAG core, GEM, GCP, Cu‐
beSats; MH ISR; SuperMAG, Super‐
DARN, CCMC; Data Systems, DASI External/partner: EISCAT‐Svalbard,
EISCAT‐3D, TREx, NCAR‐CISL,
DOE/NSF Partnership, NASA, DoD
SWMI‐3 SW‐M‐I‐T coupling
High‐ and mid‐latitude synoptic
measurements of electric currents,
convective electric fields, energy and
flux of charged‐particle precipita‐
tion, ionospheric conductivities, ion‐
ospheric plasma density and number
flux of upflowing ions, frequency
and wavenumber spectrum of tur‐
bulent fluctuations
Global/regional simulations of SW‐
M‐I‐T interactions; MHD exten‐
sions with generalized Ohm’s law,
drift kinetics; local/ regional 3D ki‐
netic simulations of charged parti‐
cle energization; empirical models
GS:MAG core, AER core, GEM, CE‐
DAR, GCP, SWR; PFISR, RISR‐N, MH
ISR; AMPERE, SuperDARN, Super‐
MAG, CCMC; Data Systems, DASI External/partner: EISCAT‐Svalbard,
EISCAT‐3D, RISR‐C, TREx, NCAR‐
CISL, NASA, DoD
SWMI‐4 Comparative M‐I‐T
system science
Comparative theories and simula‐
tions models (MHD, hybrid, ki‐
netic); empirical models
GS:MAG core, possibly GCP
External/partner: NCAR‐CISL,
DOE/NSF Partnership, NASA
Final 50 GS Portfolio Review
Table 5.4 Summary of required capabilities and recommended investments for SHP
Decadal Survey Challenge
Required Capabilities Recommended
Investments (Chapters 6‐9) Observational Theory/Model Data Exploitation
SHP‐1 Solar cycle origins
Solar synoptic analyses ‐‐ helioseismology, surface
flows/magnetism; evaluation of constraints from Sun‐like
stars.
Dynamo theory/model devel‐
opment Data assimilation meth‐
ods for driving predic‐
tive dynamo and flux‐
transport models
GS: STR core, SHINE, GCP; CCMC;
Data Systems External/partner: NSO‐NIST, NOAO,
NASA
SHP‐1 Solar cycle impacts
Analyses of high temporal and spatial resolution observa‐
tions of solar plasma and magnetic fields. Analyses of
space‐age synoptic Sun‐to‐ Earth observations and histori‐
cal/geological solar‐cycle proxies. Global magnetometric
observations at multiple heights in atmosphere.
Models connecting observa‐
tions sun to earth; theory/
models connecting solar mag‐
netic variability to radiative and
particulate drivers at Earth.
Data archiving, cross‐
calibration GS: STR core, SHINE, GCP; CCMC;
Data Systems; Midscale
(COSMO,FASR) External/partner: NSO‐DKIST/NIST,
NCAR‐HAO, NRAO, NASA
SHP‐2 Coronal heating and solar wind acceleration
Analyses of high temporal and spatial resolution measure‐
ments of the solar wind and solar atmosphere, and of syn‐
optic observations connecting solar wind to sources.
Global magnetometric observations at multiple heights in
atmosphere
Coronal heating and solar wind
acceleration models; simula‐
tions spanning solar interior ‐
atmosphere; global models for
context.
Methods for driving
simulations with multi‐
height measurements
GS: STR core, SHINE, SWR, GCP;
CCMC; Data Systems; Midscale
(COSMO, FASR) External/partner: NSO‐DKIST/NIST,
NCAR‐HAO, NRAO, NASA
SHP‐3 Explosive
energy release
Analyses of remote sensing and in‐situ measurements of
flares, CMEs, shocks, suprathermal and energetic particles,
neutron monitors. Multi‐height solar atmospheric observa‐
tions. Active region magnetometry; electron beam and
shock observations.
Models of particle acceleration
and transport, and of storage
and release of magnetic energy
Development of data
assimilation methods
and cross‐calibration
analysis tools for mul‐
tipoint analysis
GS: STR core, SHINE, SWR, GCP;
CCMC; Data Systems; Midscale (FASR)
External/partner: NSO‐DKIST/NIST.
NCAR‐HAO, NRAO, GEO‐PLR‐AAGS
SHP‐3 Origins and
geoeffectiveness
of flares and CMEs
Analyses of observations before, during, and after erup‐
tions from Sun to Earth; multi‐height measurements con‐
straining solar magnetic field from local to global scales.
Global magnetometric observations at multiple heights in
atmosphere.
Models from active‐region to
global scales of the storage, re‐
lease, and propagation phases
of eruptions Sun‐to‐Earth
Analysis tools for multi‐
height measurements
and methods for assim‐
ilating into global mag‐
netic models
GS: STR core, SHINE, SWR, GCP;
CCMC; Data Systems; Midscale
(COSMO, FASR) External/partner: NSO‐NIST/DKIST,
NCAR‐HAO, NRAO
SHP‐4 Outer
heliosphere
Analyses of outer heliospheric observations Model development related to
transport of ACRs, GCRs and
ENA throughout the region
Development of data
assimilation methods GS: STR core, SHINE, GCP; CCMC;
Data Systems External/partner: NASA
Final 51 GS Portfolio Review
Table 5.5 Summary of required capabilities and recommended investments for SWP
SWP Challenge
Required Capabilities Recommended
Investments
(Chapters 6‐9) Observational Theory/Modeling Data Exploitation
Solar
Heliospheric
Multi‐height synoptic measure‐
ments constraining solar mag‐
netic field from local to global
scales. Remote sensing and in‐
situ measurements of flares,
CMEs, shocks, suprathermal and
energetic particles.
Models from active‐region to
global scales of the storage, re‐
lease, and propagation phases of
eruptions Sun‐to‐Earth, and of par‐
ticle acceleration and transport.
Common databases, data visu‐
alization, data assimilation into
global and eruptive models
GS: STR Core, SHINE; SWR,
GCP; CCMC; Data Systems;
Midscale (COSMO, FASR)
External: NSO‐NIST/DKIST,
NCAR‐CISL/HAO, NRAO,
GEO‐PLR‐AAGS, NASA
Magnetosphere
Measurements of trapped and
precipitating rad belt particles
(possibly from CubeSats); meas‐
urements from neutron moni‐
tors, riometers, and ground‐
based radar for context
Global SW‐M‐I‐T models; compre‐
hensive models of radiation belt
acceleration, radial transport and
loss (both atmospheric precipita‐
tion and magnetopause escape);
magnetospheric B‐field models
NSF‐supported data collections
(listed on left) must be fully ar‐
chived and made broadly avail‐
able
GS: Core, strategic grants;
GBOs (Obs. at left); Data Sys‐
tems; CCMC
External: NASA, NOAA, DOD
data; NCAR‐CISL
Space‐
Atmosphere
Interaction
Region
GB magnetometers, radars; syn‐
optic measurements of LEO ΔB, E
and particles; LIDARs, imagers,
DASI; GNSS scintillation; diagnos‐tics for lower atmosphere forcing
Predictive M‐I‐T models; global
conductivity models; models for
neutral density and charged parti‐
cle density to support satellite
drag and radio propagation needs
NSF‐supported data collections
(listed on left) must be fully ar‐
chived and made broadly avail‐
able; model visualization, vali‐
dation; improved data assimila‐
tion schemes
GS: Core, strategic grants;
DASI; CubeSat diagnostics;
synoptic observations; CCMC
External: NASA, NOAA, DOD
data; NCEI databases; NCAR‐
CISL
Geospace
Hazards
3‐D ground conductivity maps Linked MHD‐GIC models; for satel‐
lite drag see above
See above GS: Core, strategic grants;
CCMC
External: NASA, NOAA, USGS
data
Final 52 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 6. GS Core and Strategic Grants Programs
TheGSgrantsprogramsprovidemanyofthecriticalcapabilitiesneededtomakeprogressinachievingDSgoals.Theyarethelifebloodofthescientificenterprise,withoutwhichlittlescien‐tificadvancementcanoccur.
Thegrantsprogramssupportanalysisofscientificdataderivedfromalltypesofmeasure‐ments,notjustthosefromGS‐sponsoredfacilitiesandinstruments.Theysupportdevelopmentofnewtheoriesandcomputermodelsthatareessentialinadvancingscientificunderstandingofge‐ospaceandsolarprocesses.Thegrantsprogramssponsorearly‐phasedevelopmentprojectslead‐ingtoinnovativenewmeasurementtechniquesandsimulationcapabilitiesandlargecollabora‐tiveresearchprojects,somewhollyfundedbyNSF,otherscosponsoredbyinternationalpartnersandotherUSagencies.GSgrantsprovidethenucleusoffundingforGSinvestigatorstoparticipateinawidevarietyofworkforce,cross‐disciplinary,seedandtargetedresearchprogramsthatareinitiatedandco‐fundedbyotherNSFentitiesandthatleverageGSinvestments.Maintainingvi‐brant,peer‐reviewedgrantsprogramsisabsolutelycriticalforthefuturevitalityofgeospaceandsolarscience.
TheDecadalSurveyrecommendedimplementationofanew,integrated,multi‐agencyinitia‐tive(DRIVE—Diversify,Realize,Integrate,Venture,Educate)thatwilldevelopmorefullyandem‐ploymoreeffectivelythemanyexperimentalandtheoreticalassetsatNASA,NSF,andotheragen‐cies.TheDRIVErecommendationsareanimportanttouchstoneforPRCrecommendations.Forreferencelaterinthisandotherchapters,theNSF‐relevantDRIVErecommendationsarelistedinTABLE6.1.
TheSurvey’srecommendationsfortheDRIVEinitiativewerederivedfromdisciplinarypanelrecommendationsonscientificprioritiesandimperatives.ThePRCrecognizesthatpanel‐specificimperativesarenotequivalenttosurveyrecommendations.Neverthelesstheydoofferusefulin‐formationindetermininghowbesttoalignGSinvestmentsinsupportofcriticalcapabilities.TheSurvey’spanel‐specificimperativeswerealsoreviewedbythePRCtoinformitsrecommenda‐tions.
TwoimperativesadvocatedbytheSWMIpanelspecificallyaddressGS‐relevantSpaceWeatherresearch.Inparticular,theSWMIpanelencouragedallagenciestofosterinteractionsbe‐tweentheresearchandoperationalcommunitiesandtoidentifyfundingformaintainingahealthyresearch‐to‐operations/operations‐to‐researchprogram;andtoimplementaprogramtodetermine,basedonpastobservations,theoptimumsetofmeasurementsthatarerequiredtodrivehigh‐fidelitypredictivemodelsoftheenvironment.Additionally,initssummaryofApplica‐tionRecommendations,15theDSrecommendedthedevelopmentandmaintenanceofdistinctfundinglinesforbasicspacephysicsresearchandforspaceweatherspecificationandforecasting.
ThischaptersummarizesthePRC’sreviewofinvestmentsinGScoreandstrategicgrantspro‐gramsanditsrecommendationstoensureGSinvestmentsarepositionedtoprovidethecriticalcapabilitiesidentifiedinthepreviouschapter.CapabilitiesandrecommendationsforavitalGSworkforcewereaddressedinChapter4.Facilitiesand(non‐GS)programsthatleverageGSinvest‐mentsareaddressedinChapters7and8,respectively.
15 DS Executive Summary, p. 4
Final 53 GS Portfolio Review
TABLE 6.1 NSF‐Relevant DRIVE Initiatives
Diversify: Diversify Observing Platforms with Microsatellites and Midscale Ground‐Based Assets. D1. The National Science Foundation should create a new, competitively selected midscale project funding line in order to enable midscale projects and instrumentation for large projects. D2. NSF’s CubeSat program should be augmented to enable at least two new starts per year. Detailed metrics should be maintained, documenting the accomplishments of the program in terms of training, research, tech‐nology development, and contributions to space weather forecasting.
Realize: Realize Scientific Potential by Sufficiently Funding Operations and Data Analysis R1. NSF should provide funding sufficient for essential synoptic observations and for efficient and scientifically productive operation of the Advanced Technology Solar Telescope (ATST), which provides a revolutionary new window on the solar magnetic atmosphere. R2. Support a solar and space physics data environment that draws together new and archived satellite and ground‐based solar and space physics data sets and computational results from the research and operations communities for (i) coordinated development of a data systems infrastructure that includes data systems soft‐ware, data analysis tools, and training of personnel; (ii) community oversight of emerging, integrated data sys‐tems and interagency coordination of data policies; (iii) exploitation of emerging information technologies with‐out investment in their initial development; (iv) virtual observatories as a specific component of the solar and space physics research‐supporting infrastructure, rather than as a direct competitor for research funds; (v) community‐based development of software tools, including tools for data mining and assimilation; and (vi) Semantic technologies to enable cross‐discipline data access.
Integrate: Integrate Observing Platforms and Strengthen Ties Between Agency Disciplines I1. NASA should join with NSF and DOE in a multiagency program on laboratory plasma physics and spectros‐copy, with an expected NASA contribution ramping from $2 million per year (plus increases for inflation), in or‐der to obtain unique insights into fundamental physical processes. I2. NSF should ensure that funding is available for basic research in subjects that fall between sections, divi‐sions, and directorates, such as planetary magnetospheres and ionospheres, the Sun as a star, and the outer heliosphere. In particular, research on the outer heliosphere should be included explicitly in the scope of re‐search supported by the Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences Division at NSF. I3. NASA, NSF, and other agencies should coordinate ground‐ and space‐based solar‐terrestrial observational and technology programs and expand efforts to take advantage of the synergy gained by multiscale observa‐tions.
Venture: Venture Forward with Science Centers and Instrument and Technology Development V1. NASA and NSF together should create Heliophysics [geospace] science centers to tackle the key science problems of solar and space physics that require multidisciplinary teams of theorists, observers, modelers, and computer scientists, with annual funding in the range of $1 million to $3 million for each center for 6 years, re‐quiring NASA funds ramping to $8 million per year (plus increases for inflation).
Educate: Educate, Empower, and Inspire the Next Generation of Space Researchers (addressed in PR Ch 4)E1. The NSF Faculty Development in the Space Sciences (FDSS) program should be continued and be considered open to applications from 4‐year as well as Ph.D.‐granting institutions as a means to broaden and diversify the field. NSF should also support a curriculum development program to complement the FDSS program and to support its faculty. E2. A suitable replacement for the NSF Center for Integrated Space Weather Modeling summer school should be competitively selected, and NSF should enable opportunities for focused community workshops that directly address professional development skills for graduate students. E3. To further enhance the visibility of the field, NSF should recognize solar and space physics as a specifically named subdiscipline of physics and astronomy by adding it to the list of dissertation research areas in NSF’s an‐nual Survey of Earned Doctorates.
Final 54 GS Portfolio Review
Thenextsection(6.1)summarizesthePRC’sfindingsandrecommendationsongeneralas‐pectsoftheGSdisciplinaryprograms,andconnectionsbetweentheseandotherprogramsinter‐nalandexternaltoGS.FindingsandrecommendationsspecifictoGSgrantsprogramsinAero‐nomy(AER),MagnetosphericPhysics(MAG)andSolar‐TerrestrialResearch(STR)followinSec‐tions6.2‐6.4.FindingsandrecommendationspertainingtoIntegrativeGeospaceScienceisad‐dressedinSection6.5,totheCubeSatprogramSection6.6,andtotheneedforregularSeniorRe‐viewofthegrantsprogramsinSection6.7.
6.1 General Aspects of GS Grants Programs
Eachofthedisciplinaryprograms(AER,MAG,STR)includescoreandtargetedgrantpro‐grams.ThetargetedprogramsincludetheCoupling,EnergeticsandDynamicsofAtmosphericRe‐gions(CEDAR)ProgramadministeredbytheAERProgramManager(PM),theGeospaceEnviron‐mentModeling(GEM)ProgramadministeredbytheMAGPMandtheSolarHeliosphericandInter‐planetaryEnvironment(SHINE)ProgramadministeredbytheSTRPM.
Finding.ThecurrentstructureofGSCoreResearchprogram(AER,MAGandSTR)withassoci‐atedTargetedprograms(CEDAR,GEMandSHINE)supportsthezerothorderDSrecommendationtocompletethecurrentprogramandpartiallysatisfiestheDShigherlevelrecommendationstoimple‐mentDRIVEandextendmodeldevelopmenteffortstothepointthattheysupportforecastsofthedy‐namicsofthiscomplex,nonlinearsystemanditsimpactsonsociety.
Finding.Theaverageproposalsuccessrates(Section4.1)havebeenacceptableinthecoregrantsprograms(about1in4onaverage)andaremarginalinthetargetedgrantsprograms(closer1in5onaverage).However,theratesareunevenacrossindividualprograms,e.g.,thenumberofproposalssubmittedtotheSHINEprogramnearlydoubledfrom2012to2014whentheproposalsuccessratewentfrom32%to17%.
Successratesbelow20%havealotteryqualityandencouragePIstosubmithighlyrankedbutunsuccessfulproposalstootherprogramsoragenciesortothesameprogramatalaterdatewithupdatesand/ortweaks.ThispracticehasanadverseimpactonthescientificproductivityofthecommunityatlargeasdiscussedinSection4.1.
Recommendation6.1.AcollectivebudgetforcoreprogramsshouldbeapportionedamongAER,MAGandSTRaccordingtoproposalpressure(numberandquality)withoutfixedbudgetsforeachdiscipline.Similarprinciplesshouldbeappliedtothetargetedprograms.
Finding.ThecriticalcapabilitiesdescribedinChapter5placerequirementsonprogramsbeyondthedisciplinaryprograms,bothinternalandexternaltoGS.ExistingprogramsincludeelementsofIntegrativeGeospaceSciencesuchastheSpaceWeather(SW)program(describedinSection6.5),Cu‐beSats(describedinSection6.6),facilitiesandinfrastructures(describedinChapter7),andNSF‐wideprogramsandpartnershipswithotherentities(Chapter8).
Finding.SomeofthecriticalcapabilitiesdescribedinChapter5requirenewgrantsprogramele‐ments,includingtheGrandChallengeProjects(GCP)program(Section6.6),andnewfacilitiesandin‐frastructuresprograms(Section7.4).
Finding.Becauseoftheenormityandinaccessibilityofthegeospacesystemmuchofitssciencereliesonmodeling.ThephysicalsystemspansaspatialrangefromDebyelengths(assmallas10‐6m)to1AU(1011m)andspansatemporalrangefromchemicalreactions(asshortas10‐14sec)tothe
Final 55 GS Portfolio Review
electronplasmaperiod(asshortas10‐7sec)tothetransittimeofplasmafromtheSuntotheEarth(severaldays)tosolarcycletimescales.Additionally,differentphysicalprocessesdominateondiffer‐enttimeandlengthscales,andrequiredifferentphysicaldescriptions(e.g.,kinetic,hybrid,orfluid).Thischallengecanonlybeaccomplishedwithsophisticated,high‐levelcomputationalmodelsofthesystem,ratherthantryingtomodelitasacollectionoflooselyconnectedregions.Aconsiderableamountofresearchisrequiredtodevelopmodelsthattrulydescribethe'systemscience'oftheSun‐Earthsystem.
Recommendation6.2.ThePRCrecommendsthatGScontinuesupportofmulti‐scalephysics‐basedanddata‐assimilationmodelswithanemphasisonintegratedscienceandthecouplingofmodels.Opportunitiesformodeldevelopmentandimplementationcancomefromcoreandtar‐getedresearchaswellastheSpaceWeatherandGCPprograms,theCCMC,andtherecommendedInnovations&Vitalityline(Section7.4).
Recommendation6.3.AER/MAG/STRgrantsresearchalsoshouldcontinuetoserveasatech‐nologyincubator,fundingmodest‐scaleprojectsinexperimentalinstrumentdevelopmentwithafocusonnewscientificcapabilities.Asthesedevelopmenteffortsmature,theirfundingsourceshouldtransitionfromthecoreprogramstoprogramssuchastherecommendedInnovationandVitality(Section7.4.1)andDASI(Section7.4.3)programsandtheCubeSatprogram.TheGSshouldalsoencourageinstrumentdevelopmentprojectstoseekfundingthroughtheNSF‐wideMRIandMREFCprogramswhenappropriate(Section8.1).
6.1.1 Core Grants Programs
Finding.Thecoregrantsprogramsareunsolicitedgrantsprogramswithoutproposaldeadlines.PMssolicitpeerreviewsofproposalswithoutconveningfollow‐upreviewpanelsforfurtherevalua‐tion.
Recommendation6.4.ThePRCrecommendsthatGSmaintainitsCoreResearchProgramasaPriority1effort,withacollectivebudgetforallthreeprogramsnotlessthanthecurrentlevel.Thecoreprogramsshouldconductinnovativedataanalysisandexploitation,theory,modeling,develop‐mentandapplicationofnewinstrumentation,measurementtechniquesandlaboratoryexperi‐mentsalignedwiththecoregoalsofeachprogram,asarticulatedinfollowingsubsections.
Recommendation6.5.TheGSshouldcontinuetoencouragethegeospacesciencecommunitytoparticipateinleveraged,targetedresearchprograms,butcautionisadvisedwhentheleveragedfundingisderivedfromGScoreresearchprograms.Incommittingcoregrantsfundstothesetar‐getedopportunities,GSPMsshouldguardagainstscopecreepovertimethattendstodiminishun‐solicitedcorefundsavailableforcompetition.
6.1.2 Strategic Grants Programs
Finding.Thecurrentdisciplinarytargetedgrantsprograms(CEDAR/GEM/SHINE)arealsostra‐tegicresearchprograms.Theyadvanceresearchstrategiesbydevelopingcommunityconsensusaroundcriticalandtimelydirectionsforresearch.Theirmodusoperandiaretousecommunitywork‐shopstotargetandcoordinatespecificobservingandmodelingcampaigns,researchchallenges,eventstudies,focusgroupstudiesandworkshopsessionstoadvancestrategicresearchandtoex‐plorescientificissuesofimmediateconcern.
Final 56 GS Portfolio Review
Finding.TheworkshopssponsoredbyCEDAR,GEM,andSHINEareverypopularandwellat‐tended.TheyleveragescienceenabledbyGSinvestmentswithprograms,data,instruments,facilitiesandmissionssponsoredbyotheragencyandinternationalpartners.Theyareeffectiveinfacilitatingresearchcollaborations.Theyarealsoanimportantprofessionaldevelopmentopportunityforearlycareerscientists.
Recommendation6.6.TheGSshouldcontinuetosupportthethreetargetedresearchprogramsandtheirsummerworkshops(asalsorecommendedinSection4.8)andevaluatetheircontinuingalignmentwithGSgoalsatsemi‐decadalintervalsusingaSeniorReviewprocess(Section6.7).
Finding.ConsistentwiththeoverarchingthemeoftheDecadalSurvey,CEDAR,GEM,andSHINEhavemovedtowardssystemsscienceinrecentyears.CEDARandGEMinparticularhaveatraditionofworkingtogethertopromotecross‐disciplinaryinteractionsbetweenthemagnetosphericandaer‐onomycommunities.
Recommendation6.7.TheGSshouldencouragemultidisciplinaryresearchthatbridgesthetra‐ditionalprogramareaswithintheSection,inparticular,acrossthethreetargetedgrantspro‐grams.Overthenextdecadeandasappropriateprojectsemerge,aportionofthecurrentbudgetfortargetedgrantsprogramsshouldmigrateintotheIntegrativeGeospaceSciencegrantspro‐grams(Section6.5).(SeeChapter9regardingprovisionalbudgetrecommendations.)
Finding.Thetargetedgrantsprogramssolicitproposalsforopportunitieswithproposaldead‐lines,andtheyconvenereviewpanelstorecommendproposalselections.Panelreviewsareconsid‐eredtobeusefulinidentifyingproposalsthatarebestalignedwithstrategicresearchgoals.
Finding.Proposalsuccessratestendtobehigherinthecoregrantsprogramsthaninthetar‐getedgrantsprograms.
Recommendation6.8.TheGSshouldevaluatetheutilityofproposaldeadlinesinitstargetedgrantsprogramsanddeterminewhetherproposaldeadlinesmaybestimulatinganartificialinfla‐tioninproposalsubmissionsforthelimitedfundingavailableinthetargetedprograms,resultinginlowerproposalsuccessratesassuggestedinanexperimentundertakenbytheDivisionofEarthSciences.16Ifproposaldeadlinesdoresultininflatednumbersofproposalsubmissions,thentheGSshouldchargeitsCommitteesofVisitorstoevaluatethemeritofretainingproposaldeadlinesinitstargetedprograms.
Analternativetothecurrentmodeofsolicitingproposalswithadeadline,coupledwithpro‐posalreviewsandrecommendationsforproposalselectionsbyadhocpanels,mightinvolvecon‐veningvirtualpanelreviewsatregularintervalsthroughouttheyeartorecommendselectionsofunsolicitedproposalssubmittedtotargetedprograms.Thismodelwouldretainthedesiredeffectofhavingpanelsidentifyproposalsthatarebestalignedwithstrategicresearchgoals.
6.2 Aeronomy
Aeronomyisthescienceofplanetaryatmospheresinwhichthephysicalandchemicalpro‐cessesassociatedwithsolarradiationarepredominant.AtNSFtheAeronomyProgramsupports“researchfromthemesospheretotheouterreachesofthethermosphereandallregionsofthe
16 Report to the National Science Board on the National Science Foundation’s Merit Review Process, Fiscal Year 2014 (NSB‐2015‐14) p. 48‐49, Table 16. (http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2015/nsb201514.pdf)
Final 57 GS Portfolio Review
Earth'sionosphere.”TheAeronomyProgramseekstounderstandphenomenaofionization,re‐combination,chemicalreaction,photo‐emission,andthetransportofenergy,andmomentumwithinandbetweentheseregions.Theprogramalsosupportsresearchintothecouplingofthisglobalsystemtothestratosphereandtropospherebelowandmagnetosphereaboveandtheplasmaphysicsofphenomenamanifestedinthecoupledionosphere‐magnetospheresystem,in‐cludingtheeffectsofhigh‐powerradiowavemodification.”
Finding.TheresearchconductedwithinAERaddressesalloftheAIMIsciencechallengesandas‐pectsofKeyScienceGoals2and4oftheDecadalSurvey.
6.2.1 AER Core Program
TheAeronomyprogramsponsorsadiverserangeoftopicsrelatedtophenomenaoccurringbe‐tweentheatmospherewebreatheandtheinterplanetaryenvironment.Topicsinclude,butarenotlimitedto,instrumentdevelopment,laboratoryexperiments,comparativeaeronomy(withothersolarsystembodies),meteors,lightning,basicresearchontheionosphere,thermosphere,andmes‐osphere,plasmainstabilitiesandtheirsocietaleffects,neutralgasdynamics(waves,tides),andmagnetosphericinteractions.
Finding.Geospacefacilitieshavehistoricallybeendirectedtowardaeronomicalmeasurements(e.g.,ground‐basedradars,activeandpassiveopticalsystems,magnetometers).AssuchtherehasbeenacloseconnectionbetweentheAeronomyandFacilitiesProgramswithintheGeospaceSection.
Finding.ThegeneraltrajectoryoftheAeronomyprogram(andCEDAR)overthepast10yearshasbeentoward“systemscience”supportedbytheDistributedArraysofScientificInstruments(DASI)initiativeandparalleleffortsinassimilativeandfirst‐principlesmodeling.
Recommendation6.9.TheGSshouldencourageandfundAERresearchprojects,incollaborationwiththeMAGcommunity,forearlydevelopmentofDASIconceptsfordiagnosingupperatmos‐pheric,ionosphericandmagnetosphericprocesses,aswellasthedevelopmentofself‐consistentlycoupledphysics‐basedmodels.AstheDASIconceptsmature,theirfundingsourceshouldmigratetotheGSFacilitiesprogram(Section7.4.3).
6.2.2 CEDAR
TheprimarygoaloftheCEDARprogramresidingwithinAERisto“explainhowenergyistransferredbetweenatmosphericregionsbycombiningacomprehensiveobservationalprogramwiththeoreticalandempiricalmodelingefforts.”
TheCEDARprogramhasevolvedorganicallyoveritsthreedecadesofexistence.TheinitialgoaloftheprogramwastocoalesceasetofindividualPIssponsoredbysmallinstrumentgrants.ThemeetingsoonbecameavenueforgroupsofPIstoorganize“campaigns”targetingaspecificsciencetopicaddressedbyaspecificgroupofmeasurementsandmodels.
Finding.CEDARisbothacommunity‐drivenandtargetedelementoftheGeospaceSectionbudgetasdistinctfromthecore.ThebenefitsofafundedCEDARgrantsprograminclude(1)targetedfundingalignedwithacommunity‐drivenstrategicplan,(2)panelreviews,whichconsider~30proposalsatonetime,thatarebeneficialforcomparisonsandcommunitydiscussions,and(3)occasionalcross‐disciplinarycompetitions,suchastheCEDAR‐GEMM‐Icouplingcompetition.TheCEDARgrantsprogramhasbeennimbleandresponsivetochangesinsciencepriorities,technical
Final 58 GS Portfolio Review
capabilitiesandfundingrealities.
Finding.CEDARcurrentlysupportsanannualmeetingandagrantssolicitationwithnominaldeadlineofmid‐July.
Finding.Inrecentyears,theCEDAR“GrandChallengeWorkshops”haveengagedbroadsegmentsoftheCEDARandGEMcommunitiesingrass‐roots,collaborative,multi‐disciplinaryresearchcam‐paigns.TheseworkshopsaredistinctfromtheGrandChallengeProject(GCP)programrecommendedinSection6.5,althoughsuchworkshopsmayhelpdefinecandidatetopicsfortheGCPprogram.
Recommendation6.10.TheCEDARgrantsprogramshouldcontinuetosupportcommunity‐de‐fined“GrandChallengeWorkshops”,preferablyjointlywiththeGEMGrantsprogram.
6.3 Magnetospheric Physics
NSF’sMagnetosphericPhysicsProgram“supportsresearchonthemagnetizedplasmaenvelopeoftheouteratmosphere,includingenergizationbythesolarwind;theoriginofgeomagneticstormsandsubstorms;theplasmapopulationbysolarandionosphericsources;theoriginofelectricfields;thecouplingamongthemagnetosphere,ionosphere,andatmosphere;andwavesandinstabilitiesinthenaturalplasma.”
Finding.TheresearchconductedwithinMAGaddressesalloftheSWMIsciencechallengesandaspectsofKeyScienceGoals2and4oftheDecadalSurvey.
Finding.Thelow‐altituderegionsofgeospaceencompassingthethermosphereandionosphereanditsouterregionsincludingthesolarwind‐magnetosphereinteraction,themagnetosphereandmagnetotail,andtheinnermagnetosphereandplasmasphereareconnected.Consequently,somede‐greeofsynergybetweentheMAGprogramandtheAERandSTRprogramsisexpectedincross‐overareasofmutualinterest.
6.3.1 MAG Core Program
MAGcoregrantssupportdataanalysis,especiallycombiningground‐basedandsatellitedatasets,theoryandsimulationofmagnetosphericprocesses,anddataacquisitionandanalysisfromGBOstoinvestigatemagnetosphericprocesses.Itsupportsresearchintouniversalprocessessuchasmag‐neticreconnection,plasmaturbulence,transportandenergizationandwavesandinstabilitiesincollisionlessplasmas.Researchintootherplanetarymagnetosphereshasalsobeensupported.
Finding.Investmentsinobservationalcapabilitiesincludebothground‐basedobservationalpro‐gramsathighlatitudesandlaboratoryexperimentsapplicabletothegeospaceenvironment.Analysisofdatafromallsources,whetherground‐basedorfromspacecraft,andadvancementofnumericalsimulationsusingavarietyofMHD,hybridandparticlecodesarealsosupported.
Finding.LittleinstrumentdevelopmentissponsoredbytheMAGprogram,mostlikelybecauseitreceivesfewerproposalsforinstrumentdevelopmentthantheAERprogram.However,innovativepro‐jectslikeAMPERE,SuperDARNandSuperMagreceivedMAGcorefundingforearlyphasedevelopmentandoperationandhavenowbecomeClass2facilities,asreviewedinChapter7.
Finding.HistoricallytheMAGprogramhasfundeddeployment,maintenanceandoperationofGBOsformagnetometers,opticalimagersandradioreceivers,andacquisitionandanalysisofdataobtainedfromtheseinstruments.Italsofundssynopticstudiesrelevanttomagnetosphericprocesses
Final 59 GS Portfolio Review
usingdatafromISRs,andAMPEREandvariousDASIsincludingSuperDARN,magnetometersandimagers,togetherwithsatellitedataacquiredfromNASA,DODandNOAAmissions.
Recommendation6.11.TheGSshouldencourageandfundMAGresearchprojects,incollabora‐tionwiththeAERcommunity,forearlydevelopmentofDASIconceptsfordiagnosingupperatmos‐pheric,ionosphericandmagnetosphericprocesses.Astheconceptsmature,theirfundingsourceshouldmigratetotheGSFacilitiesprogram.
6.3.2 GEM
TheGeospaceEnvironmentModeling(GEM)ProgramisastrategicresearchelementoftheMagnetosphericPhysicsProgramwiththegoal“tounderstandthesolar‐terrestrialsystemwellenoughtobeabletoformulateamathematicalframeworkthatcanpredictthedeterministicprop‐ertiesofgeospace(‘weatherinspace’)andthestatisticalcharacteristicsofitsstochasticproperties(‘climateinspace’).”
TheGEMProgramsupportsglobalgeospacemodeldevelopmentandapplications,synopticground‐basedobservationsandtheacquisition,coordinationanduseofdatafromanysourcesthatadvancetheprogramgoal.LiketheCEDARProgram,GEMhasastrongfocusonintegrativegeo‐spacescience.Itssynergisticoutcomestypicallyculminateincommunity‐initiatedcampaignsandsciencechallenges.
Finding.Inadditiontoitsoverarchinggoalofdevelopingpredictivemodelsforgeospaceweatherandclimate,GEMresearchisorganizedaroundevolvingcommunity‐definedthemesthatculminatein(typically)five‐yeardurationGEMFocusGroupsselectedbytheGEMsteeringcommitteeatitsFallAGUmeeting.CompetitiveresearchproposalsforGEMfundingmustaddresseithersomeaspectofge‐ospacemodeldevelopment,modelvalidation,ortopicsrelevanttooneormoreofthecurrentlyactiveGEMFocusGroups.
Finding.GEMfocusgroupscoordinateobservationalandmodelingresearchandissueresearchchallengestothecommunityatlarge.Theresponsetopastchallengeshasbeensuccessfulinadvanc‐ingGEMgoals.ThesechallengessubstantiallyleveragethemodestinvestmentinGEMbyGSandat‐tractbroadinterestinintegrativesciencerelevanttoGEM.
Finding.TheGEMprogramfundsanannualcallforresearchproposalswithamid‐Octoberdead‐line,asummerworkshop,amini‐workshopheldinconjunctionwiththefallAGUmeetingandcommu‐nicationsforGEMnewsandworkshopsummaries.
Recommendation6.12.TheGEMgrantsprogramshouldcontinuetosupportcommunity‐definedresearchchallengesand,whenappropriate,“GrandChallengeWorkshops”jointlywiththeCEDARGrantsprogram.
6.4 Solar‐Terrestrial Research
TheSTRprogramsupportsresearchaimedatunderstandingtheflowofenergyfromtheSun,throughthesolarwind,totheEarthandbeyond.Specifically,STRresearchfocusesontheplasma,fields,andenergeticparticlesthatoriginateattheSunandpropagatetowardsEarthandthepro‐cessesthatgoverntheirgenerationandtransport.WhilemuchoftheSTRresearchisrelatedtospaceweatherandhassignificantpotentialforimprovingpredictivecapability,thefocusisonbasicresearchintoawiderangeofprocessesofsolar‐terrestrialphysics.
Final 60 GS Portfolio Review
Finding.TheresearchconductedwithinSTRaddressesalloftheSHPsciencechallengesandKeyScienceGoal1oftheDecadalSurvey,aswellasaspectsofKeyScienceGoals3and4.
6.4.1 STR Core Program
STRcoregrantssupportdataanalysisandexploitation,theoryandmodeling,andinstrumentdevel‐opment.Majortopicsincludethesolardynamo,thesolarcycle,helioseismology,magneticfluxemergence,solarflares,coronalmassejections,magneticreconnection,solarwind,interplanetarydisturbances,energeticparticles,shockacceleration,diffusion,magneticturbulence,thesolarwind/magnetosphereboundaryandspaceweathereffects.
Finding.InadditiontofundinginvestigationsfocusedonasingleaspectoftheSunorinterplan‐etaryspace,alargeportionofselectedproposalsstudytheSun‐Earthasasystem,combiningground‐andspace‐basedobservationswithsophisticatedmodels.Thismovementtowardssystemsciencehasbeenreflectedinthesteadyincreaseofcollaborativeproposalssubmittedtotheprogramoverthelastsixyears.
Finding.MostoftheobservationaldatarelevanttoSTRresearchareproducedbyfacilitiesop‐eratedbyentitiesoutsidetheGSsection.TheseincludeNSFsolarfacilitiesmanagedbytheASTDivi‐sion–theNationalSolarObservatory(NSO)andNationalRadioAstronomicalObservatory(NRAO)–andbytheAGSDivision’sNCAR/HAO–theMaunaLoaSolarObservatory(MLSO).Observationsofsolar‐analogstarsaretakenbytheNationalOpticalAstronomicalObservatory,alsomanagedbytheASTDivisionandmeasurementsrelevanttoenergeticparticlesareobtainedbyneutronmonitorssupportedbythePolarPrograms(PLR)DivisionoftheGeosciencesDirectorate.Solarsciencealsooftenreliesonvariousobservatoriesmanagedbyuniversities(oftenwithgrantsfromNSF),numer‐ousNASA‐runsatellites,ground‐basedtelescopesrunbytheAirForce,aswellasvariousinterna‐tionalassets.
Finding.TheSTRresearchprogramisimportantformaximizingthescientificreturnfromtheseexternalprogramsandconversely,theseobservationsarecriticaltomanySTR‐fundedstudies.Alt‐houghreviewofthemanagementofthesefacilitiesisbeyondthepurviewofthisPortfolioReview,itisemphasizedthatnon‐GSNSFassetsareessentialinprovidingcriticalcapabilitiesidentifiedinChapter5.
Recommendation6.13.STRgrantsprogramsshouldcontinuetosupportanalysesofimportantsynopticandhigh‐resolutionobservationsderivedfromobservatoriesoperatedexternaltoGS.
Recommendation6.14.TheSTRprogrammanagershouldcontinuetomeetregularlywithmanag‐ersofthevariousground‐basedtelescopesinordertocoordinateprioritiesandimprovecommuni‐cation.Sucheffortsmustcontinueinordertominimizeanyunintendedconsequencesofalteringtheprioritiesofdatacollectionatthesefacilities.
Finding.TheadventoftheDKISTunderdevelopmentbytheNSO,andtobeoperatedbytheNSO,presentsauniqueopportunityforexploitingatransformationalnewobservationalfacility.
Recommendation6.15.ToreapthefullpotentialofDKIST,theASTandAGSDivisionsshouldex‐ploremodesofcollaborationthatbestsupportsciencefromthisnewfacility.
Final 61 GS Portfolio Review
6.4.2 SHINE
TheSHINEprogramresidingwithinSTRbringstogetherresearchersfromthesolar,inter‐planetary,andheliosphericcommunities,inorderto“studytheprocessesbywhichenergyintheformofmagneticfieldsandparticlesareproducedbytheSunand/oracceleratedininterplane‐taryspaceandonthemechanismsbywhichthesefieldsandparticlesaretransportedtotheEarththroughtheinnerheliosphere.“
TheSHINEprogramandinparticularitsgrassroots‐createdworkshoporiginatedtobringscientistsworkingondifferentaspectsoftheSun‐Earthsystemtogetherinanenvironmentwhereactivediscussion,ratherthanpolishedtalks,werethemainfocus.TheSHINEworkshopsarethusanimportantvenueforSTcommunitybuildingandforstudenttraining(seeChapter4).
Finding.TheSHINEprogramfundsanannualcallforresearchproposalswithamid‐Decemberdeadline,aswellasanannualworkshop.Proposalsfocusontheprimarytopicsdiscussedatthean‐nualSHINEworkshop,includingtheSHPchallengesdescribedinSection5.3andaspectsofsolar‐ter‐restrialphysicsrelevanttospaceweather.
6.5 Integrative Geospace Science
PresidentJohnF.Kennedyinhis1963presentationtotheU.S.NationalAcademyofSciences,ontheoccasionofthe100thanniversaryofthatinstitution,asserted“…thatscienceisalreadymovingtoenlargeitsinfluenceinthreegeneralways:intheinterdisciplinaryarea,intheinterna‐tionalarea,andintheinterculturalarea.Forscienceisthemostpowerfulmeanswehavefortheunificationofknowledge,andamainobligationofitsfuturemustbetodealwithproblemswhichcutacrossboundaries,whetherboundariesbetweenthesciences,boundariesbetweennations,orboundariesbetweenman'sscientificandhishumaneconcerns.”17
OverthepastdecadesGShassupportedintensebasicscienceinvestigationsatthe“regional”levelsassociatedwiththedomainsofCEDAR‐Aeronomy,GEM‐Magnetosphere,andSHINE‐Solar
17 “A Century of Scientific Conquest by John F. Kennedy in The Scientific Endeavor, Centennial Celebration of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 1963
Figure 6.1. A GS framework that illustrates a vision for Integrative Geospace Science
Final 62 GS Portfolio Review
Terrestrial.Figure6.1depictsanIntegrativeSystemsScienceFrameworkfortheGeospaceSec‐ tion.Insomeways,thisframeworkrepresentstheworkcurrentlysupportedbytheGeospaceSci‐encesection,butmoreimportantlyitpresentsaviewthatcanservetoenhanceandencourageanewandinnovativeintegrativesystemsscienceemphasisandapproach.Itismeantasavisionandframeworkforfutureprogramsratherthanaprescribedadministrativestructurethatisbestlefttothosewhocarryoutday‐to‐daybusiness.TheintegrativeapproachrestsonafoundationofcoreresearchandfacilitiessupportedbyNSFGeospaceSectiongrantsintheareasofAeronomy,MagnetosphereandSolar‐Terrestrialinteractions.EachofthecoreareashasassociatedtargetedscienceprogramsrepresentedbyCEDAR,GEMandSHINEwherebothgrantsandconnectionstocommunityscienceprogramscometogethertoadvanceGeospaceSectiongoals.Alloftheseactiv‐itiesarethreadedbyoverarchingsystemscienceprogramsthatbuildontheelementsbelowbutplayanintegrativeroleandcutacrossdisciplineboundaries.
Finding.GSispoisedtofuseandintegratethegrowingknowledgebaseacrossthesedisciplinaryareastocreateanIntegratedGeospaceScience(IGS)Program,whichencompassesSpaceWeatherasasystemscience,aswellasGrandChallengeProjectswhichrequirescross‐disciplinaryinteractions.
6.5.1 Space Weather Research
Inthe1990’sGS(thenUpperAtmosphereSection)spearheadedtheefforttoestablishspaceweatherasaviablenewscienceandtookanactiveroleinestablishingtheNationalSpaceWeatherProgram.SpaceWeatherisanexampleofintegrativesystemssciencethatthreadsalltheelementsofresearchsupportedbytheGeospaceSection.IntheGS,“TheSpaceWeatherResearchprogramsupportsthedevelopmentofintegrativespacesciencemodels,extendednetworkobservingcapa‐bilities,andtargetededucationandoutreachwiththeoverarchinggoaltomeetsocietalneedsforimprovedmonitoringandadvancepredictionsofspaceweatherphenomenaandeffects.”Whilefundamentalspaceweathersciencecanbefocusedonindividualelementsofthesystem,itcanalsofocusonanintegrativeviewandinterdisciplinaryaspectsoftheheliosphericsystem.
Finding:WithcontributionsfromAFOSRandONR,theGSrananannualsolicitationforre‐searchinsupportoftheNationalSpaceWeatherProgramfrom1996through2010.Thisdedicatedfundinglinewasdiscontinuedin2011,atwhichtimeGSpositedthatresearchrelevanttospaceweatherhadstartedtoemergeintheCEDAR,GEMandSHINEprogramswithsomedegreeofobser‐vationalsupportcomingfromClass2facilities(reviewedinChapter7).InvestmentsinthisseminalspaceweatherresearchprogramweresubsequentlyredirectedintowhathasnowbecometheNASA/NSFCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelingprogram.
Finding.AscurrentlyconfiguredtheSpaceWeatherResearch(SWR)programisanadministra‐tivestructureformanagingavarietyofGSgrants(NASA/NSFCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModel‐ingandCubeSat),facilities(Class2facilitiesreviewedinChapter7)andworkforce(FDSSreviewedinChapter4)programs.AmongtheseprogramsasdescribedinChapter3,onlytheNASA/NSFCollabo‐rativeSpaceWeatherModelingprogramsupportsclearlydifferentiatedspaceweatherresearch.AnunspecifiedportionofthebudgetsforClass2facilitiesandtheCubeSatandFDSSprogramsaug‐mentsthisspaceweathermodelingeffort.
Finding.ProposalsaresolicitedeverythreetofiveyearsintheNASA/NSFCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelingProgramtoaddresstopics(“StrategicCapabilities”)establishedbytheSteeringCommitteefortheNASALivingWithaStarProgram.
Final 63 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation6.16ThePRCrecommendstheestablishmentofadistinctfundinglineforbasicspaceweatherresearchthatsupportsimprovedcapabilitiesinspaceweatherspecificationandforecasting,andsustainarobustspaceweatherandclimatologyprogramthatinvestsin“pre‐dictivespaceweatherscience”andactivitiesthat“optimizetheuseofresearchtoaddressnationalneeds.”
Recommendation6.17.ThePRCgenerallyendorsesacontinuationofthecurrentNASA/NSFCollaborativeModelingunderSpaceWeather.However,wellinadvanceofeachnewrequestforproposalstothisprogram,theGSPMforSWRshoulddetermineiftheNASAcallforproposalsonStrategicCapabilitiescontinuestobealignedwithGSprogramgoalsforSWR.IfthealignmentisconsistentwithGSprogramgoals,thencontinuationatappropriatefundinglevelsshouldbesus‐tained.Additionally,overtime,fundsinthislineshouldbemadeavailableforotherstrategicspaceweatherfocusedcapabilities.
Finding:TheacquisitionandimplementationofindividualmodelsatNASA’sCCMChavepro‐ducedavibrantandhighly‐productivefoundationforspaceweathermodelingatalllevels.GSsup‐portedscientists,asacommunity,havebenefitedfromCCMCactivitiessuchas“runs‐on‐re‐quest.”NSFGShasprovidedsignificantfinancialsupportforCCMCpersonnelandcomputersystems,thusstronglycontributingtoarobustspaceweatherandclimatologyprogramasrecommendedbytheDS.
Recommendation6.18.ThePRCrecommendsthatGSmaintainitssupporttoCCMCasaPriority1effortintheFacilitiesPrograminordertocontinueandenhanceeffortsinIntegrativeGeospaceScience.
Finding:NSFGSprovidedstrongsupportfortheGlobalOscillationNetworkGroup(GONG),whichmadesignificantcontributiontoactivitiesthatwouldnowbeconsideredpartofIGS.Theon‐goingsupportallowedGONGtodemonstrateitsutilityinreal‐timespaceweatherforecasting.GONGisnowsupportedinpartbyNOAAforcollectingandprocessingdataforspaceweatheroperationsandwillbemakingHalphaandCarringtonmapsavailabletothescientificcommunity.
Recommendation6.19.ThePRCrecommendsthatGSusetheproposedInnovationandVitalityProgram(Section7.4.1)toopenfundingpathsforscientificallyviablespaceweatherobservationsandplatformsthatcouldservedemonstratedreal‐timeIGSmonitoringneeds.
Finding.InOctober2015,theNationalScienceandTechnologyCouncilreleasedtheNationalSpaceWeatherStrategicPlanandNationalSpaceWeatherActionPlan.TheActionPlanannounces“newcommitmentsfromtheFederalandnon‐Federalsectorstoenhancenationalpreparednessforspaceweatherevents.”Theplanelaborates18actionsforNSF,onewithNSFhavingprimaryrespon‐sibilityandseventeenotherstobeimplementedincollaborationwithotheragencies.Manyoftheseactionshavemilestoneswithinthenextfewyears.OneofNSF’sprimaryresponsibilitiesisto“En‐hanceFundamentalUnderstandingofSpaceWeatherandItsDriverstoDevelopandContinuallyIm‐provePredictiveModels.”
Finding.OperationstoResearch(O2R)informssocietally‐relevantresearch;Researchtooperations(R2O)fulfillssocietalneeds.Throughcoreandtargetedresearch,aswellasinsomeaspectsofthecurrentspaceweatherprogram,NSFGSisdevotingresourcestocuriosity‐drivenbasicresearchrelatedtounderstandingandmodelingthefundamentalphysicsofthesolar‐terrestrialsystem.Insomecases,theresultsofthisworkrelatetoproblemsthatultimatelyhavenear‐term
Final 64 GS Portfolio Review
societalrelevanceandcanbejudgedascontributingto“broaderimpacts”asdefinedinNSFproposalcriteria.SomeoftheresearchandmodeldevelopmentsupportedbyNSFisclosetobeingripefortransitiontoanoperationalagencysuchasNOAAorDODwhereadditionaldevelopmentwillbeneedtobringnewideas,observationsandmodelsintooperationaluse.
Recommendation6.20.ThePRCendorsesNSF’scriticalroleincontributingtonationaleffortsforcoordinatedspace‐weatherpreparedness,andrecommendsthattheGSsectionpursueoppor‐tunitiesforcollaborationbetweenagencieswhichcanbeusedtofurtherNSFgoalsto"innovateforsociety,”aswellasDecadalgoalsrelatedtoDRIVE.
6.5.2 Grand Challenge Projects
AccordingtotheDS,“amechanismisneededforbringingtogethercriticallysizedteamsofob‐servers,theorists,modelers,andcomputerscientiststoaddressthemostchallengingproblemsinsolarandspacephysics.ThescopeoftheoryandmodelinginvestigationssupportedbytheNSFCEDAR,GEM,andSHINEprograms…shouldbeexpandedsoastoenabledeepandtransformativescience.‘Heliophysicssciencecenters’wouldbringscientiststogetherforsignificantcollabora‐tionstoaddressthemostpressingscientificissuesofHeliophysics,withsuccessjudgedaccordingtoprogressmadetowardresolvingtheprimarysciencegoals.Centersshouldconsistofmulti‐dis‐ciplinaryteamswithtwotothreeprimaryinstitutionsthatincludetheorists,modelers,algorithmdevelopers,andobservers.Resourcesshouldbefocusedonthecoreinstitutionstoavoidspread‐ingtheresourcestoobroadlyandtoachieveafocusedinvestigationofthetopic.Thecentersshouldbedesignedtohighlighttheexcitingscienceproblemsofthefieldtobolstertheinterestoffacultyatuniversitiesandtoattracttopstudentsintothefield.”
Finding.GrandChallengeProjectscouldaddresscriticalcapabilitiesgapsasdescribed,e.g.inTables5.2‐5.5.
Finding.TheDecadalSurveyrecommendedthatthesecentersshouldbejointlycreatedbyNASAandNSF,andterm‐limited,withasuggesteddurationofsixyears.
Recommendation6.21.TheIntegrativeGeospaceScienceprogramshouldalsobethehomeofanewGrandChallengeProjectsprogram.
Recommendation6.22.ThePRCrecommendsthatNASA/NSFexplorebestpracticesforcollabo‐rationonGrandChallengeProjects,perhapsalongthelinesoftheaforementionedNASA/NSFCol‐laborativeModelingunderSpaceWeather.Thebroadeningofthesecollaborativeeffortsem‐bracestheholisticscopeoftheDecadalSurvey.
ToaddsubstancetonotionofaGrandChallengeProject(GCP),afewillustrativeconceptsaresuggestedhere.Theyspanprojectsrangingfromuniversalprocess,toSun‐to‐Earthcouplings,tomoreregionallyfocusedproblemsthatneverthelessrequirecross‐disciplinaryinteractions.TheseconceptsaremeanttoillustratethetypeofquestionsthatcouldbeaddressedinGCPsandshouldnotbeinterpretedasaspecialvisionforthefuturecontentandscopeofGCPs.WhenaGrandChal‐lengeProjectsprogramislaunched,communityconceptsforthemostcompellingprojectsto‐getherwiththepeerreviewprocesswilldeterminethebestcandidates.
Understand Particle Acceleration/Transport (maps to DS Key Science Goals 3 & 4)
Particleaccelerationandtransportrepresentsauniversalplasmaprocesswithrelevancefrom
Final 65 GS Portfolio Review
theSun,throughthesolarwind,totheEarth’sradiationbeltsandaurora,totheouterhelio‐sphere.Majordevelopmentsareneededbothintermsofourbasicunderstandingoftheconnec‐tionsbetweensourceconditionsandpropertiesofenergeticphenomena,andintermsofourabil‐itytopredictthecharacteristicsoftheradiationenvironmentsthroughwhichastronautsandspacecraftfly.Significantprogressmightbemadethroughcoordinatedeffortsinfundamentalre‐searchanddevelopmentofparticleaccelerationandtransportmodels,observationalanalysesofremote‐sensingandin‐situdata,andadvancesincross‐calibrationofmultipointanalysisanddata‐assimilativemethodologies.
Connect Sun‐Geospace‐Climate (maps to DS Key Science Goals 1 & 2)
Althoughtheeffectoflong‐termsolarirradiancevariabilityontroposphericclimateisnotex‐pectedtobelarge,uncertaintiesremaininparticularregardingsensitivitiestoshortwavelengthradiationfromthesun.Inaddition,enhancedionizationfromenergeticparticleprecipitation(EPP)producesHOxandNOvariations,whichhavebeentracedtochangesinmiddleatmosphereozonebalance,thusprovidingapotentiallinktodynamicsandregionalclimate.Analysesstudy‐ingtheoriginsofsolarmagneticfieldsandhowtheirvariabilitytranslatestoradiative,particulateandpossiblyelectricalforcingsattheEarthareneeded,connectingfundamentaltheorytoobser‐vationalstudiesfromSuntoEarth.Coordinatedeffortscouldinvolvedevelopmentsincommunitymodels,data‐assimilation,andhigh‐performancecomputing,andpotentiallydrawonhistorical,geological,andsolar‐stellaranalogdata.
Predict the geoeffectiveness of solar drivers of space weather (maps to DS Key Science Goals 1 & 2)
Thischallengeisattheheartofspaceweatherprediction.Tofullyaddressit,theuppersolar‐convectionzonethroughthecoronatothesolarwind,geospace,andtheEarth’supperatmos‐phereneedstobeconsideredasacoherentsystem,acrossmultiplescales(temporalandspa‐tial).AnswersmustbesoughttoquestionsaboutreconnectionandexplosivereleasesofenergyattheSunandatEarthandthestateofthemediumthroughwhichsuchdisturbancespropa‐gate.ClosertoEarthitrequiresinvestigationsintosocietally‐relevantareasofgeomagneticallyinducedcurrents,spacecraftenvironmentandhealthandcommunicationsvulnerability.Signifi‐canteffortsindataassimilationandhigh‐performancecomputingareneeded,asaredevelopmentofdata‐analysisandinversiontools,fundamentalresearchintothephysicalmechanismsdrivingcoronalheatingandsolarwinddynamics,andobservationalstudiesatbothhightemporal/spatialresolutionandinvolvingongoingsynopticdata.
Develop capabilities for satellite drag and debris prediction and mitigation (maps to DS Key Science Goal 2)
Satellitedraganddebrismitigationaregrowingcommercial,governmentalanddefensecon‐cerns.Atmosphericdragisthelargestcontributoramongthemanyerrorsourcesinlow‐Earthor‐bit(LEO)orbitalestimationandisattherootofmanyissuesassociatedwithre‐entryprediction,tracking/identifyingactivepayloads,andcollisionavoidance.Presentlyorbitprojectionsarenotsufficientlyaccurate,nortimelyenough,todeterminewhetheranavoidancemaneuver,ifonecanbemade,isactuallywarranted.Investigationsrelatedtolongandshort‐termsolaremissions,M‐I‐Tcoupling,meso‐andsmall‐scalethermosphericstructuring,loweratmosphereforcingand,infra‐redradiativecoolingcouldallcontributetoaholisticaddressoftheproblem.Connectionsbe‐tweenmodelsandobservations,dataassimilationmethodologies,andhigh‐performancecompu‐tingarealsokeyelements.
Final 66 GS Portfolio Review
6.6 CubeSat Program
TheNSFCubeSatprogramgrewoutoftheJune2006“ReportoftheAssessmentCommitteefortheNationalSpaceWeatherProgram”(FCM‐R24‐2006).Theassessmentcommitteerecom‐mendedexploringtheuseofmicrosatellitestomakekeymeasurementsfrom—andabout—spaceinordertoadvanceunderstandingofbasicphysics,aswellasforaddressingkeyaspectsofspaceweatherobservations.TheGeospaceSection(UpperAtmosphereSectionatthattime)tookthatrecommendationtoheartandexhibitedvisionaryleadershipinbringingCubeSatstothenationalstageinsupportofGeospacescience.TheGS’seffortsinprovidingaccesstospacearewidelyrec‐ognizedingovernmentandacademiaasanenterprisingprogramforthegeospacesciences.AsanexploratoryprogramtheNSFGSCubeSatprogramhasbeenproductiveineducation,intraining,inengineeringdevelopment,andinsomeaspectsofbasicresearch.
SubsequenttotheMay2007communityworkshopaboutCubeSatmissionpossibilitiesandthefirstNSFsolicitationforCubeSatmissionideasinFebruary2008,dozensofCubeSatproposalshavebeensubmittedtoNSF.Theresulthasbeenanactivespaceflightprogrambuiltaroundsmallerspacecraftthatfitintocubesorstackedcubes.
RecognizingtheearlysuccessoftheNSFGSCubeSatexploratoryprogram,theDSmadetwoprimaryandonesecondaryCubeSatrecommendationstoNSF.Theserecommendationsweremadeduringaperiodwhenatleastmodestbudgetgrowthwasexpected.
1. “NSF’sCubeSatprogramshouldbeaugmentedtoenableatleasttwonewstartsperyear.”
2. “Detailedmetricsshouldbemaintained,documentingtheaccomplishmentsoftheprogramintermsoftraining,research,technologydevelopment,andcontributionstospaceweatherforecasting.”
3. “Asthisprogramgrows,itiscriticaltodevelopbest‐in‐classeducationalprogramsandtracktheimpactsofinvestmentsinthesepotentiallygame‐changingassets."
WithresourcescarvedoutofthepreviouscorescienceprogramandsupplementalfundingfromtheNSFEBSCoRprogram,theGShassupported12CubeSatmissionsplusthreenewstarts(AppendixE).Severaladditionalawardsarependingasofmid‐2015.CubeSatsupporthaspri‐marilybeentouniversitiesandsmallbusinesses.TotalexpendituresbyNSFfrom2008through2015forCubeSatmissionsandrelatedexpenseswereabout$15.6M,withannualexpensesvary‐ingfromyeartoyear,butontheorderof$1Mto$2M/year.Additionalfundingand/orin‐kindsupportfromNASAandDoDarenotreflectedinthenumbersabove.
SevenNSF‐sponsoredCubeSatmissions(tenspacecraft)havelaunched;threeareawaitinglaunch,twomissionsareinadvanceddesign,andthreemissionsareinearlystagedesign.Ofthesevenmissionsinspace,fivesuccessfullyacquiredpartoralloftheirintendeddata.Twomissionsexperiencedearlycommunicationsfailuresresultinginonly“firstlight”data.Threemissionsre‐turnedsciencedatafor18monthsormore.TheRadarAuroraleXplorer(RAX)andColoradoStu‐dentSpaceWeatherExplorer(CSSWE)generatedmorethantwo‐dozenrefereedscienceandengi‐neeringjournalpublications.Inparticular,CSSWEhascontributedsignificantlytointegrativesystemsciencecarriedoutbytheVanAllenProbemissionwithpapersappearinginjournalssuchasJGR‐SpaceandNature,andhassubmitteditssciencedatatoNASA’sNationalSpaceScienceDataCenter.Thefirsteightmissionscollectivelyhavecontributedto~15Ph.D.thesesandtheeduca‐tionofmorethan250BSandMSstudentsandatleastsixhighschoolstudents(Figure6.2).
Final 67 GS Portfolio Review
Finding.TheNSFGSinvestmentinCubeSatsisaparadigm‐shiftingefforttoshowthatGSsciencecanbeenabledandextendedbyreachingintospacewithinexpensiveCubeSats.Theprogrampavesapathforexpandingspace‐basedactivitiesmorebroadlyinNSFgrants,particularlyinEarthandOceanSciences,BiologicalSciencesandEngineering;andforexpandingopportunitiesforindustrialcollabo‐rationandcommercialinnovationandcross‐disciplinarytechnologydevelopment.
Finding.TheGSsectionhasdevelopedaCubeSatprogramthatleveragessupportfromNASA,DoDandinternationalpartners.NASAandDoDhaveprovidedandcontinuetoprovideCubeSat“ridestospace.”CurrentandfutureCubeSatmissionshaveNASApartnershipand/orfunding.About10%oftheNSFCubeSatbudgetgoestotheNASAWallopsFlightFacilityformissionsupport.18GSisfundingfourCubeSatsfortheEuropeanQB50mission.
Finding.TheNSFCubeSatprogramhasbeenaneducationalsuccessandhassupportedmanyen‐gineeringadvances.Sevenspacecrafthavelaunchedandnearly300studentshaveengagedinsome aspectofCubeSatdesignandoroperation.Theprogramhasdevelopedanextraordinarymodelfortrainingthenextgenerationofscientistsandengineersinspaceandforenhancinguniversityandstu‐dentparticipationinspaceactivities.StudentanduniversityenthusiasmfortheCubeSatprogramisveryhigh.Forafewstudentstheprogramoffersarare,end‐to‐endmissionexperience.Formanyotherstudentstheprogramprovidesanintroductiontospacemissiondevelopment,whichhasspurrednewexcitementforscienceandengineering.
18 NSF GS presentation to NRC dated June 22, 2015
Figure 6.2. Number of students involved in each of the first eight CubeSat missions (from NSF GS).
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
RAX DICE CINEMA CSSWE FIREBIRD FIREFLY EXOCUBE CADRE
Cubesat Student Involvment
High School BS/MS PhD
Final 68 GS Portfolio Review
Finding.TheCubeSatprogramhasproducedmorethan70refereedandproceedingspublicationsalongwithnumerouspressreleasesandwebpages.Intotalpublications,includingconferencepro‐ceedingsandjournalpublications,about80%oftheCubeSatpublicationsareinengineeringproceed‐ingsandjournalsvsabout20%insciencejournals(Figure6.3).
Finding.Ofthefivemissionscompletedornolongercollectingdata,twohavecontributedthebulkofarchivalengineeringandsciencepublicationsandprovideddatatoawebsiteorsciencedatacenter.TheCSSWEandRAXmissionscontributedtocollaborativeanalysestounderstandcomplexin‐terconnectedsystemsandhavepublishedarchivalresults.InthecaseofCSSWE,combininglow‐alti‐tudeenergeticparticleobservationswithelliptical‐orbitingVanAllenProbesdatahavecontributedtoradiationbeltscience.InthecaseofRAX,coordinationwithground‐basedradarshascontributedtoionosphericE‐regionscience.Twomissionsexperiencedearlycommunicationsfailure,assuchtheirpotentialforsciencecontributionswasnotrealized.
Finding.InharmonywiththeDecadalSurveyrecommendation,somecommunitywhitepaperssubmittedtothePRCsuggestthatGSshouldestablishamorerigorousdesignreviewprocesstoinsureCubeSatmissionsuccess.
Figure 6.3. Publications in science and engineering journals and conference proceedings for the first ten CubeSat missions. Many proceedings were associated with SmallSat Conferences. Data provided by
NSF and supplemented with searches at the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System and on the Web.
Final 69 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation6.23.TheCubeSatprogramshouldincludeadditionaldesignreviewsandover‐sightaimedatachievingmissionsuccessandbeevaluatedforimpactandeffectivenessinordertojustifytheinvestment.Thisoversightshouldbeimplementedinawaythatdoesnotunderminethehigh‐riskhigh‐payoffbenefitsofCubeSatprojects.
Recommendation6.24.CubeSatmissionsshouldcontributetheirdatatoasciencedatacenterorothercuratedarchive.
Finding.Aunified,tabulateddatabaseofCubeSatstatus,successes,challenges,fundingprofilesandproductivitywouldallowbettertrackingandcomparisonsofinvestments,consistentwiththeDSrecommendations.
Recommendation6.25.NSFGSshouldprovideanannual,tabulatedsetofdetailedmetrics,docu‐mentingtheaccomplishmentsandchallengesoftheprogramintermsoftraining,research,technol‐ogydevelopment,andcontributionstogeospacescienceand/orspaceweatherforecasting.
Finding.AnexaminationofpublicationsresultingfromtheNSFCubeSatprogramsuggeststhattheresultsarepredominantlyengineering‐orientedandthat,onaverage,basicscienceproductivityislowincomparisontothenumberofpublicationsonemightexpectfromthesamefinancialinvestmentinGSprogramsforcoreandtargetedresearchgrantsandfacilities.Whilemostmissionsgeneratemanyconferencepresentationsandproceedings,comparativelyfewerresultsshowupasrefereedpub‐licationscontributingtoarchivalknowledgeinbasicscience.Insomecases,missionsreturnedlittleornoscienceoronlylimitedsciencewaspublished.ThisfindingisconsistentwiththetypicaluniversitymodelforCubeSatdevelopmentinwhichmostoftheavailableresourcesaredevotedtodevelopingsci‐enceinstrumentsandspacecraftbusseswithanever‐changingstudentworkforce.Grantmoneymaylastlongenoughtoseethesesmallmissionstospace,butperhapsnotlongenoughtosupportarobustdataanalysisprogramatalevelsimilartocoreandtargetedgrantprograms.
Recommendation6.26.Inthisbudget‐constrainedenvironmentGSshouldcontinuetoinvestintheCubeSatprogramwithanenhancedfocusonscience/strategicinstrumentdevelopmentandlessfocusonthesatellitebusandsystemdevelopmentandstriveforgreaterscientificvaluefromthisinvestment.GSshouldalsocontinueitscollaborativeandpartneringeffortswithNASA,DoD,andinternationalpartnersandinvestigatepartneringopportunitieswithindustry.
Recommendation6.27.ItisthePRC’sviewthatadditionalcollaborationwithotherDirectoratesandNSFOffices,whoseactivitiesalignwitheducation,engineeringandmultidisciplinaryefforts(e.g.,NSFOfficeofEmergingFrontiersandMultidisciplinaryActivities)areneededfortheGSinitia‐tiveinCubeSatstocontinueasavibrantcross‐FoundationeffortandtoallowtheGSsectiontoaug‐mentNSF’sCubeSatprogramtosupport“twonewstartsperyear,”asrecommendedbytheDecadalSurvey.Shortofsuchwhole‐of‐Foundationsupportforthisfrontiereffort,thePRCmustrecom‐mendarebalancingoftheGSCubeSatefforttofocusonscienceandwithperhapsfewermissionsthanenvisionedbytheDecadalSurvey.
6.7 Senior Review of GS Grants Programs
RecommendedinvestmentsinGSCoreandStrategicGrantsPrograms,assummarizedinChap‐ter9tofollow,willrequireapproximately63%oftheGSbudgetoverthenextdecade,assumingtheinflation‐adjusted,flatbudgetscenarioforthisreview.ThisrecommendedportfoliofulfillsthePRC
Final 70 GS Portfolio Review
chargeto“recommendthebalanceofinvestmentsinthenewandinexistingfacilities,grantspro‐grams,andotheractivitiesthatwouldoptimallyimplementtheSurveyrecommendationsandachievethegoalsoftheGeospaceSection.”However,thebudgetlandscapeoverthedecadeoftherecommendedportfoliomaydeviatefromtheassumptionsofthereviewandpasttrendssuggestthatnewopportunitiesforscientificadvancementwillemergeduringthenextdecade.Aninterim(semi‐decadal)seniorreviewoftheGSportfoliowouldensurethattheportfolioremainsalignedwithresearchprioritiesandwouldprovidecommunityinputtoGSPMsinnavigatinganevolvingbudgetandresearchlandscape.
ThePRCconsideredthemeritsofasingleseniorreviewoftheentireportfolioversusseparatereviewsoftheGSGrantsPrograms(coreplusstrategicasreviewedinChapter6)andtheGSFacili‐tiesProgram(reviewedinChapter7).Asinglefullreviewhastheadvantageofexaminingthebal‐anceofinvestmentsacrossallprogramsanditsalignmentwithsciencegoalsandnewopportuni‐ties.Itsdisadvantageisthelargeandcomplicatedscopeofafullportfolioreview,towhichthisPRCcanattest.Separatereviewsofgrantsandfacilitiesprogramshavetwoadvantages:1)Theseparatereviewsarequitedifferentinscopeandhavedifferentmetrics,sotheseniorreviewcommitteescouldbeoptimizedforthenatureofthereviews,and2)thereviewprocessfortwoseparateseniorreviewcommitteeswouldbelessonerousthanafullportfolioreviewandcouldbecompletedmoreefficientlyandquickly.Theobviousdisadvantageofseparatereviewsisthepossibilityofproducingmyopicreviewsofthetwoseparateelementsratherthanaholisticportfolioreview.
Asrecommendedbelow,thePRCoptsfortwoseparatereviews,withtheprovisothatspecialattentionbegiventocrossoverissuesinbothreviews.Oneimportantissueconcernsthetransitionfromacoreorstrategicresearchactivitytoafacilitiesactivity.
Finding.ThegeospaceresearchcommunityisexpectedinthenextdecadetocontinueaggressivedevelopmentanddeploymentofnewDistributedArraysofScientificInstruments(DASI)andotherClass2facilitiesinordertoprovideemergingcriticalcapabilitiesforgeospacescienceandtoaddressthebigchallengesofgeospacesystemscience.
Finding.M&OforClass2facilitiesandnascentClass2facilities(Section7.2),especiallybutnotlimitedtoDASI(Section7.4.3),arecurrentlyfundedbyboththeGSGrantsProgramsandtheGSFacili‐tiesProgram.ThesegrantsincludewidelyvaryinglevelsofsupportforresearchwithinthefacilitiesorresearchawardfortheClass2facility.
Finding.TheGSdoesnothaveclearguidelinesfordelineatingi)whenfacility‐classresearch,de‐velopmentandoperationcrossesthetransomfromaPI‐ledresearchprojecttoaClass2communityfacilityasdiscussedinChapter7;ii)whenthefundingsourceforanemergentClass2facility,ortheportionofitsfundingspecificallyforM&O,shouldmigratefromtheGSGrantsProgramstotheGSFa‐cilitiesProgramandbereviewedseparatelyfromresearchproposedfortheClass2facility;andiii)anappropriatelevelofresearchfundingforinclusioninaClass2facilityaward.ThebudgetsforGSgrantsandfacilitiesprogramslosetransparencywithoutsuchguidelines.
TheseissuesaremainlyaddressedinthecontextoftheGSFacilitiesPrograminChapter7,andguidelineswillbepresentedthereforappropriateM&Osupportforfacility‐classactivities.TheseissuesclearlycrossoverintotheGSGrantsProgram,however.IdeallytheGSGrantsProgramssupportdevelopmentandapplicationofinnovativemeasurementtechniques;novelobservationstypicallyofmorelimitedscopeanddurationthanafacility‐classactivity;dataanalysisanddataexploitation;andmodelingandtheorythatadvanceandtransformourunderstandingofgeospace.
Final 71 GS Portfolio Review
RetainingM&Osupportforfacility‐classactivitiesintheGSgrantsprogramsdiminishesinvestmentincriticalcoreandstrategicgeospacescience.
Recommendation6.28.BeyondalevelofM&OsupportbytheGSFacilitiesProgramtobede‐scribedinChapter7,proposalsforresearchactivitiesassociatedwithfacilitiesshouldbepeer‐re‐viewedseparatelyfromfacilitiesproposalsandevaluatedagainstthesamescientificstandardsasanycompetitiveresearchproposalconductingthesameresearchwithdatafromthefacility.
Recommendation6.29.TheGSshouldchargeaseniorreviewcommitteetoconductaninterim,semi‐decadalreviewoftheGSCoreandStrategicGrantsPrograms.AseparateseniorreviewoftheGSFacilitiesProgramisalsorecommended,asdescribedinChapter7.
TheobjectivesoftheinterimSeniorReviewofGSGrantsprogramsareto:
1. Reviewthebalanceofinvestmentsincoreandstrategicgrantsprogramsinlightofthebudgetandresearchenvironmentatthetimeofthereview,evaluatetheprograms’effec‐tivenessinachievingSectionandDecadalSurveysciencegoalsand,inconsultationwithGSstaff,recommendadjustmentsinthedirectionandbalanceofthegrantsprogramsifsuchadjustmentswouldenhancetheoveralleffectivenessoftheGSGrantsProgramsinachiev‐ingSectionandDSsciencegoals.
2. FacilitatetransparencyinGSinvestmentsinitsgrantsprogramsbyevaluatingprogressoftheSectioninimplementingrecommendationsofthedecadalportfolioreviewandbyre‐viewingfundingallocationsinvariousgrantcategories,includingbutnotlimitedtograntsthatfundbothM&Oandresearchforemergingfacility‐classprojects.
Finding.Thepurposeofthisreview(andtherecommendedfacilities’seniorreview)isdistinctfromthemandatedperiodicreviewsconductedbyCommitteesofVisitors,whicharechargedwithprovidingassessmentsofthequalityandintegrityofprogramoperationsandprogram‐leveltechnicalandmanagerialmatterspertainingtoproposaldecisions.
Recommendation6.30.AdministrationanddecisionsonthestructureoftheSeniorReviewpro‐cessshouldresidewiththeGSHeadandProgramPMs.
Givenitsexperienceinconductingthisportfolioreview,thePRCcanoffersomesuggestionsforensuringthatthereviewismostefficientlyandeffectivelyconducted.SoonafteraSeniorReviewpanelforGSGrantsProgramsischarged,andwellbeforeitsscheduledmeetingatNSF,theGScouldprovidethepanelwiththefollowingdataonitsgrantsprograms:
1. BudgetsbyyearsincetheportfolioreviewforeachGSgrantprogram(AERcore,MAGcore,STRcore,CEDAR,GEM,SHINE,GCP,SWR,CubeSat, GrandChallengesandFDSS);
2. SeparatelistingsofgrantsfromtheNSFAwardsdatabasecurrentlyfundedbyeachoftheaforementionedgrantprograms;
3. StatusofallCubeSatmissionsfundedorco‐fundedbytheGS;
4. Proposalsuccessratesbyyearsincetheportfolioreviewforeachprogramwithareasona‐blydetaileddescriptionofthebasisforthesuccessrate andwithamethodologyconsistentwiththatemployedacrossNSF;and
5. IdentificationofprojectsthatmaybeonapathtobecomingaClass2facility.
Final 72 GS Portfolio Review
Annualpublicationofthedatain1‐4abovewouldkeepthecommunityinformed.Withthisinfor‐mationinhand,theSeniorReviewpanelwouldbeinagoodpositiontorequestadditionalinfor‐mationasneededinordertoconductacomprehensiveandefficientreview.
ThePRCrecognizesthemanychallengesofmanagingGSresearchandfacilitiesprograms.Effec‐tiveSectionadministrationmayrequireGSProgramManagerstoadministerbothresearchandfa‐cilitiesproposalsandgrants,withsomeoftheminGSprogramsoutsidethePM’sprimaryareaofresponsibility.ResourcesharingacrossGSprogramsmayalsobethebestwaytofunddeservingprojects,especiallycross‐disciplinaryprojects,whentheoverallbudgetisconstrained.Suchman‐agementdecisionsarebestlefttotheverycapableGSstaff.Onetheotherhand,transparencyinprogramadministrationisgreatlyfacilitatedwhenaprogramanditsaccountingincludes,tothefullestextentpossible,grantsdirectlyrelevantonlytothatprogramelement.Administrativecon‐structsliketheexistingSpaceWeatherProgram,whileadministrativelyexpedient,tendtoconfusetheresearchcommunityatlargeinunderstandinghowGSresourcesarebeingallocated;thePIsofgrantsadministeredbytheprogramwhomaybepursuingprojectsnotnecessarilyfocusedonspaceweatherresearch;andareviewcommitteelikethePRCwhichhasdifficultydisentanglingre‐sourceadministrationfromresourceallocationinitsreview.ThesameconfusionarisesforgrantsmanagedbyaPMforaprogramoutsidethatofthePM’sprimaryareaofresponsibilitye.g.,afacilitygrantmanagedbytheAERPM.Fromthecommunityperspective,themosttransparentaccountingofprograminvestmentsistolistfundedactivitieswiththeprogrammostrelevanttotheprojectra‐therthanwiththeprogramofthePMmanagingthegrant.Thispracticeappearstohavebeenfol‐lowedinmostbutnotallcasesintheprogramgrantlistingsprovidedtothePRC.Forcross‐discipli‐naryprojectsfundedbytwoormoreprograms,itwouldalsodesirabletoaccountfortheportionoffundingallocatedfromeachprogram,althoughthePRCrecognizesthatthislevelofdetailmaybedifficulttoachieveinpractice.
Final 73 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 7. GS Facilities and Infrastructure
ThemaintenanceoftheleadingpositionoftheU.S.ingeospacescientificresearchrequiresabroad‐basedprogramofactivitiesthatsupports,sustainsandstimulatesavibrant,novelscientificenterprise.ThisenterpriseincludesthreekeyresearchelementsthatthefutureGSresearchpro‐grammustencourage:
Curiosity‐drivenresearchdrivenbyproposalsfromprincipalinvestigators(PIs);
Acollectionoflarger‐scaleresearchinitiativesthataddressparticularlycompellingscientificquestionspoisedforsignificantadvancebutareinsize,cost,andcomplexitybeyondthescopeofaPI‐drivenproject;and
Strategicresearch,i.e.,sciencethatshoulddelivernewunderstandingthatwill,overtime,con‐tributetoaddressingsomeofthemajorresearchchallengesofthegeospaceenvironment,itsimpactsonotherpartsofourplanet,andresiliencetospaceweatherhazards.
Oneofthefundamentalrequirementsforinternational‐classscienceisforscientiststohavereadyaccesstointernational‐classfacilitiesandcapabilitiesinmodeling,theory,observationanddatamanagement.
AsdescribedinChapters5and6,increasingemphasison“systemscience”isexpectedoverthenextdecade.Thisapproachwillrequirebothsophisticatedsiteswithcolocationofmanyinstru‐mentsforcomprehensivemeasurementsofthelocalgeospaceenvironment,anddistributednet‐worksofinstrumentstoprovidearegionalandglobalcontextandperspectiveofgeospace.Com‐plementarymodelinganddatamanagementinitiativeswillbekeyelementstoo.Nationalandin‐ternationalpartnershipswillbeessentialinprovidingacomprehensiverangeofcapabilitiesandglobalcoverage(seeChapter8).
7.1 Recent History of GS Facilities
Intheearly1990s,theGeospaceFacilities(GF)program(thenknownasUpperAtmosphericFacilities,UAF),fundedprincipallyincoherentscatterradars(ISRs),e.g.,SondrestromFjord(Son‐drestrom),MillstoneHill,AreciboandJicamarca,andsomeinstrumentationclusteredaroundthosefacilities.Theannualfundingwasabout$9M.
Withtime,moreISRsandotherinstrumentsandinfrastructurewereaddedtoUAF,inparticu‐lar,USSuperDARN(polarandmidlatitudes),AdvancedModularISRs(AMISRs),namelyPokerFlatIncoherentScatterRadar(PFISR)andResoluteBayNorthFaceISR(RISR‐N),andtheConsortiumofResonanceandRayleighLIDARs(CRRL).By2008theUAFannualbudgetwasabout$14M.TheprincipalincreasewasfromtheadditionoftheAMISRs,whichhadbeeninplanningsincethe1990s.TheconstructionanddevelopmentofthesenewinstrumentswerefundedbytheformerAGSMid‐SizeInfrastructureProgramand/orARRA(AmericanRecoveryandReinvestmentActof2009),orwithfundingfromotheragenciesandNSFprograms,andnotwiththeUAF/GSfunds.
By2013,furtherfacilities,infrastructureandcapabilitieswereaddedtotheportfolio.Theseadditionsincluded:AMPERE(IandlaterII),SuperMag,CommunityCoordinatedModelingCenter(CCMC),andCubeSats,withtheannualbudgetrisingtoabout$18M.
TheannualGSbudgetforAreciboObservatoryjumpedfrom$1.8M($2Min2015dollars)in
Final 74 GS Portfolio Review
2008to$4.1Min2016assupportfromtheNSFAstronomyDivisionwassubstantiallydecreased.Atthesametime,otherISRsexperiencedabouta10%reductionrelativetotheirsupportpriorto2008.
ItisclearthattheGFprogramhasbeenexperiencinganevolutiontowardsincludingwhatwedefinehereas"Class2"facilities,inadditiontotheimplementationofnewClass1facilities.Thecharacteristicsoftheseclassesaregiveninsection7.2.3.
7.2 Characteristics of GS Facilities
NSFhaslongsupportedseverallargeincoherentscatterradarfacilities.SeveralofthelargeISRfacilitieshavebeeninheritedbytheNSFfromformerDepartmentofDefense(DoD)programs.Ingeneraltwoownershipmodelsoffacilitiesarefunded:
● FacilitiesownedbyNSFandoperatedandmaintainedbyexternalorganisations.
● FacilitiesfundedbyNSF,andnowownedbyexternalorganisations.
Someofthefacilitiesareprovidedtogivesupportandservicetoawidecommunity,whileoth‐ersarehighlyfocusedtomeettheneedsofaspecificPrincipalInvestigatororasmallgroupofre‐searchers.
7.2.1 Definition of a Community Facility
TheCommitteefoundthatNSF/GSdoesnothaveacleardefinitionofaCommunityFacility–whatitshouldprovideandhowitshouldinteractwithitsusers.ThecontributionofeachfacilitytoGSprogramgoalsandobjectivesdoesnotappeartobeconsistentlyevaluated,noritsperformanceinservingitsusercommunity.ThecontractualarrangementsbetweenfacilityPIsandNSFvarysig‐nificantlyfromfacilitytofacility,andfundingforscienceundertheprimarygrantorcooperativeagreementofeachfacilityalsovariessignificantlyamongthefacilities.Thispracticehasmeantthattheexpectationsofthefacilitiesandtheirmanagementisnotclearortransparent.
AsaresultofitsexaminationofNSF/GSpractisesregardingfacilities,theCommitteehasidenti‐fiedtheessentialcharacteristicsofaNSFGSfacility.
Recommendation7.1.Afacilityshouldexhibitthefollowingfunctions:
1. ServeacommunityofuserswellbeyondasinglePIorsmallgroupofinvestigators,i.e.,atleastnationalbutmaybeinternational;
2. Beoperatedinsuchawayastoensureresponsivenesstotheneedsoftheresearchcommu‐nitytosustaininternational‐classscientificproductivity;thuseachfacilityisexpectedtohavebothanadvisorygroupandauserforum,withmembershipnotselectedbyfacilitymanagement;
3. OperateformorethanoneawardcycleandtypicallysubstantiallylongerifwarrantedbytheSeniorReviewprocess(seeSection7.8);
4. Makealldataopenlyavailableandaccessibleinatimelyfashionaccordingtoapublisheddatadistributionanddisseminationplan;
5. Developanddeliveraneffectivelong‐termplantomaintainthefacilityataninternational
Final 75 GS Portfolio Review
cutting‐edgelevel;
6. CarryoutalimitedamountofsciencefundedfromtheMaintenanceandOperations(M&O)contract(seeSection7.5.2);
7. Supportthedeploymentandoperationsofco‐locatedinstrumentswiththefullcostscov‐eredbyeachco‐locatedinstrumentPrincipalInvestigator;
8. Deliversubstantialeducation,outreach,anddiversityprograms;and
9. Providecost‐effectiveoperations.
7.2.2 Community Facility: Funding and relationship with NSF
1. FacilitiesmaybeownedbyNSF,universitiesorresearchinstitutions.
2. Facilitiesareexpectedtohavemultiplefundingsourcesinvolvinginteragencyandinterna‐tionalpartners.
3. Facilitiesmaybefundedthrougheithercontinuinggrantsorcooperativeserviceagreements(CSAs).ACSAensuresappropriateNSFinvolvementinfacilityoperationanduse.
4. RecompetitionoftheCSAtypicallyoccurseveryfiveyearsforNSF‐ownedfacilities.Apeer‐reviewedproposalisrequiredforrenewalofacontinuinggrant.
5. TheentireportfolioofNSFGS(facilitiesandprograms)wouldbereviewedeveryfiveyears(seeSection7.8,SeniorReview).
7.2.3 Class 1 and Class 2 Community Facilities
ThePRCfoundithelpfultoconsidertheCommunityFacilitiesintwoclasses.AClass1facilityisamajor,complexfacilityatasinglesite.Itsinvestmentovertimetypicallyreachesmany$10sM,re‐quiressignificantM&Ofundsandaccommodatesavarietyofcomplementaryinstrumentsatorverynearthesite.Class1facilitiesmightbeexpectedtohavealifetimeof20+yearsfromfirstdeploy‐ment.Inthecurrentportfolio,alltheincoherentscatterradars(ISRs)areconsideredtobeClass1.
Class2facilitiesaremoremodestanddiverseinvestments.TheyincludedistributednetworksofinstrumentsthataresimplertooperatethanISRs(e.g.SuperDARN),facilitiesproducingvalue‐addedproductsfromdatafromothersources(e.g.SuperMAGandAMPERE),modelsupportforthecommunity(e.g.CCMC)anddatamanagement(MadrigalDatabase,currentlyfundedthroughtheMillstoneHillISRcontract).
ItisrecognisedthatmostUSfacilitiesoperateinaninternationalcontext.Thisimportantchar‐acteristicisaddressedfurtherinChapter8.
7.3 Current Investments and Capabilities
7.3.1 Evidence Used by the PRC
PriortothePRC’sfirstin‐personmeetingatNSFonApril6‐7,2015,theGSActingHeadmadeavailabletotheCommitteeawrittenintroductiontoeachfacilitypreparedbyitsPI.ThePRCsub‐sequentlyrequestedmoredetailedwritteninformationfromeachPIregardingthecurrentstatusof
Final 76 GS Portfolio Review
eachfacilityandfutureplans.Afterreceivingthewrittenresponsestotheserequests,thePRCtheninterviewedeachfacilityPIviawebconference(about1hourdurationeach)todelvedeeperintoissuesaddressedinthewrittenresponses;afewoftheseinterviewswerethensupplementedbyadditionalwritteninformationfromthePIs.Supplementaryinformation,suchasfundinglevels,wasprovidedbyNSF.ThePRCalsoheldawebconferenceinterviewwiththeDirectoroftheEuro‐peanIncoherentScatterFacility(EISCAT).OnthebasisofallthisinformationthePRCproducedthefollowingfindingsandrecommendations.
7.3.2 Class 1 Facilities: Summary
TheNSFGScurrentlyfundstheoperationsforsixIncoherentScatterRadar(ISR)facilities(Ta‐ble7.1).TheISRoperatingfrequency,power,sensitivityandthedataacquisitionandhandlingin‐frastructureateachofthesesixsitesvarywidely.Theirlocationsrangefromthegeomagneticpolarcapregion(ResoluteBay,Canada)tothegeomagneticequator(Jicamarca,Peru).TheoriginalISRs–stretchingfromSondrestrom,Greenland(geomagneticcuspregion),toMillstoneHill,Massachu‐setts(geomagneticmidlatitude),toArecibo,PuertoRico(geomagneticlowlatitude),andtoJica‐marca–havebeencalledalatitudinalarrayofISRsatvarioustimes.ThenewestISRsareAd‐vancedModularIncoherentScatterRadars(AMISRs).TheyarelocatedatResoluteBay(RISR‐N)andatthePokerFlatrocketrangeinChatanika,Alaska(PFISR).Arecentlybuilt14‐panelAMISRiscurrentlylocatedatJicamarca.ThePokerFlatrocketrange,locatedsome30milesnorthofFair‐banks,isoperatedbytheUniversityofAlaska.ThelocationsoftheGS‐fundedISRsalongwiththeirfieldsofviewareillustratedinFigure7.1.
TheoperationalcostsoftheISRfacilitiesisabout$13M/year,whichrepresentsabout30%oftheGSbudget.
7.3.3 Class 1 Facilities: Findings and recommendations
Finding.Littlesignificantsciencehasbeenproducedutilisingcollectivedatafromthe“latitudinalarray”ofISRs.Theimportanceofatmospheric/ionosphericcouplingduringSuddenStratosphericWarmingeventsisoneofthefewexamples.
Finding.TheISRfacilityatSondrestrom,Greenland,hasbeeninoperationforgeomagneticcuspstudiesfornearly35years(havingbeenmovedfromChatanika,Alaska,in1982).Itsmaintenanceandoperations(M&O)costsare$2.55M/year.Amongotherfeatures,theradaroperateswithklys‐trontechnology.Spareklystronsarenotavailableandrequirespecialbuilds.AcomprehensivesuiteofancillaryinstrumentationislocatedatSondrestrom.
Finding.AnumberofEuropeancountriesandcountriesfromtheFarEasthavedevelopedacoor‐dinatedsetofISRradars(EISCAT),deployedinnorthernScandinavia.EISCATprovidesanexcellentresearchcapabilityextendingfromsub‐aurorallatitudestothepolarcap.Awealthofancillaryre‐searchinstrumentation,includingahighpowerHFheater,arelocatedwithinthefieldsofviewoftheEISCATradars.USAPIsprovidesomeoftheseinstruments.
Finding.AconsortiumofEISCATcountrieshasrecentlyinitiateddevelopmentoftheEISCAT‐3Dradar.EISCAT‐3Dwillgiveunparalleled3‐Dspatialandtemporalmeasurementsofthegeospaceen‐vironmentespeciallyintheauroraloval.EISCAT‐3Dwillconsistoffivephased‐arrayantennafieldslocatedinthenorthernmostareasofFinland,NorwayandSweden,eachwitharound10,000crosseddipoleantennaelements.ThecoresiteatTromsø,Norway,willtransmitat233MHz.Allfivesites
Final 77 GS Portfolio Review
Table 7.1 Main characteristics of GS‐funded ISRs
ISR Owner Freq (MHz)
Antenna Type (s)
AntennaSize
PeakPower(MW)
DutyCycle%
InitialOper
GeomLat
ISROper
(hr/year)
Other Instruments & Infrastr
Coverage
MHO MIT 440 One steerable and one fixed parabolic dish
46 m steerable68 m fixed
2.5 6 1960 52.1oN 1000 Madrigal, Cluster
± 70o
JRO IGP 50 Square Phased array
290 m x 290 m 3 6 1961 0.3oN 1000 JULIA1, Cluster
± 3o on‐axis
AO NSF 440 Spherical dish 305 m 2.5 6 1962 27.6oN 1000 Heater, Cluster
± 15o
Sonde NSF 1290 Steerable parabolic dish
32 m 3.5 3 19832 72.6oN 2000 Cluster ± 45o
PFISR NSF 449 Phased array 32 m x 28 m 2 10 2007 65.4oN >6000 Rocket Range, Cluster
± 23o on‐axis
RISR‐N NSF 449 Phased array 32 m x 28 m 2 10 2010 >80oN 1000 Cluster ± 23o on‐axis
Abbreviations: Millstone Hill Observatory (MHO), Jicamarca Radio Observatory (JRO), Arecibo Observatory (AO), Sondrestrom
Geospace Facility (Sonde), AMISR at Poker Flat (PFISR), NSF AMISR at Resolute Bay (RISR‐N), Frequency (Freq), Operation
(Oper), Geomagnetic Latitude (Geom Lat) and Infrastructure (Infrastr)
1 JULIA is Jicamarca Unattended Long‐term Investigations of the Ionosphere and Atmosphere – a continuously operating meso‐
sphere, stratosphere, troposphere radar
2 Before 1983, it was at Chatanika, Alaska, and before that at Stanford University.
Figure 7.1. Locations of the Incoherent Scatter Radars and their fields of view. US funded radars in white (PFISR, RISR‐N, Sonde, MHO, AO and JR0), others in yellow (MU, IRIS, Kharkov, RISR‐C and EISCAT with two fields of view). Figure courtesy of C. Heinselmann
Final 78 GS Portfolio Review
willreceivethereturnedradiosignals.Instantaneouselectronicsteeringofthetransmittedbeamandmeasurementswillbeused.Smalleroutlyingarrayswillfacilitateaperturesynthesisimagingtoac‐quiresub‐beamspatialresolution.
Finding.TheEISCATconsortiumwillcontinuetooperateandenhanceitsfacilitiesatSvalbardinthecuspregion.
Finding.NoplansareinplaceforenablingU.S.investigatorstousetheEISCATortheEISCAT‐3Dfacilitiesforauroralorcuspstudies.
Recommendation7.2.TheISRfacilityatSondrestromshouldbeterminated,andscienceper‐formedatSondrestromshouldbecoveredbyparticipation,afterpeerreview,inEISCATandEIS‐CAT‐Svalbardforcuspstudies.
Recommendation7.3.AncillaryinstrumentationforgeosciencestudiesandtheiroperationalcostsatSondrestromshouldbebudgetedanddecidedbyapeerreviewprocessfromtheCoreorTargetedGSprograms.
Recommendation7.4.TheGSshouldinvestigatecostsandcontractualarrangementsforU.S.in‐vestigators’accesstotheexistingEISCATfacilitiesand,moreimportantly,totheplannedEISCAT3‐Dfacility(Seesection7.4.2forfurtherdetails).
Finding.TheAreciboISRisthemostsensitiveofanyISRintheworld,allowingthehighestalti‐tudeandtemporalresolution.
Finding.TheArecibo430MHztransmitteris50‐year‐old,vacuumtubeklystrontechnology.TheSRIReportofJune2012indicatesthatfivespareklystronsexistedatthattime(klystronsdonatedbytheU.S.AirForcefromtheirThule,Greenlandlocation).TheSRIReportofOctober2013statedthatthe“usefulpowerisabout1.25MW”.TheSRIReportofOctober2014statesthatthe“systemhascon‐tinuedtoachieve1.5MWofpower”.Thetransmittercanonlyoperateattheselowpowerlevels(lessthanhalftheoriginalratedpowerlevelof4MW)duetotheagingelectronics.
Finding.Theresearchprograminoptics(includingLIDAR)atArecibohasgreatlyexpandedinrecentyears,withopticsscientificpersonnelexceedingISRscientificpersonnel.
Finding.AnionosphereheatingfacilityhasbeenunderconstructionatAreciboforanumberofyears.Theheatingfacilitywasrecentlycompletedandpreliminaryexperimentshavebeencarriedout.M&OfundshavenotbeendesignatedbyNSFforitsuse.
Finding.TheFY2016M&OcostofArecibofromtheGSbudgetis$4.1M,whichiscurrentlymatchedbytheAstronomySection(AST)oftheNSF.NASAprovidesminimalM&OsupportforitsuseofArecibo.GSincreaseditsM&Ocontributiontothe$4.1Mlevelfromanoriginal$1.8Min2008.The2012ASTPortfolioReviewrecommendedthatASTshouldre‐evaluateitsparticipationinArecibolaterinthedecadeinlightofthescienceopportunitiesandbudgetforecastsatthattime.
Finding.About11%ofthetotalproposalsreceivedfrom2012to2014foruseoftheArecibofacil‐itywereforGS‐relatedresearch.
Finding.SRIReportsshowthattheGS‐relatedprogramusageoftotal(includingmaintenance)telescopetimerangedfromabout8%toabout13%over2012‐2015.IntheSRIReportdatedJanuary2016,about40%ofthisGS‐relatedtelescopetimewasdevotedtoWorldDaycampaignsofdataacqui‐sition,nottoindividualPIpeer‐reviewedresearchprograms.
Final 79 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation7.5.TheGSshouldreduceitsM&OsupportfortheAreciboISRto$1.1M/year;i.e.,toaproportionalproratalevelapproximatelycommensuratewiththefractionalNSFGSpro‐posalpressureandusageforfrontierresearch.
ThisreductioninArecibofundingbyGSisimperativeformeetingthePRCchargetorecom‐mendthebalanceofinvestmentsinnewandinexistingfacilities,grantsprograms,andotheractivi‐tiesthatwouldoptimallyimplementDecadalSurveyrecommendationsinthepresumedflatbudgetenvironmentofthenextdecade.Independentofmetricsonproposalpressureandobservingtime,rebalancingtheGSinvestmentinArecibocorrectsanincreasingdistortioninitsrelativevaluetofuturegeospacescience.Takingthishardstepnowwillenablenewandinnovativedistributedmeasurements,datasystemsandresearchrequiredtoaccomplishtheintegrativegeospacesciencedescribedinChapters5and6ofthisreviewandemphasizedintheDecadalSurvey.
Recommendation7.6.Ancillaryinstrumentation(includingtheextensiveopticsinstrumentation)forgeosciencestudiesandtheiroperationalcostsatAreciboshouldallbebudgetedanddecidedinthepeerreviewprocess.
Recommendation7.7.CostsofrunningtheHFheateratAreciboshouldbebudgetedasapay‐as‐you‐gosystem,anddecidedinthepeerreviewprocess.
Finding.ThePFISRislocatedatthesitefromwhichthecurrentSondrestromradarwasremovedin1982.ProximitytothePokerFlatrocketrangeisreportedtoprovideconvenienceandefficienciesintheoperationofPFISR,aswellasresearchsynergiesresultingfromancillaryinstrumentationforsupportofrocketlaunches.PossiblerelocationofPFISRtooneofseveralalternativesiteshasbeenconsidered.
Finding.TheM&OcostsforPFISRarecurrentlycombinedwiththosefortheAMISRatResoluteBay(RISR‐N)andarethusnotreadilydetermined.
Recommendation7.8.FundingforRISR‐Nshouldbedecoupledfromthefundingforanyotherfacilityinordertohaveaccuratecostanalysisavailable.
Recommendation7.9.ThefuturelocationanduseofthePFISRradarforresearchshouldbede‐terminedbypeerreviewbythetimetheEISCAT‐3Dbeginsoperations.Peerreviewshoulddeter‐minethevaluepropositionforcontinuingtousetheradar’scapabilitiesatitscurrentsiteoriftheymightbebetterusedfornew,frontierresearchiftheradarweretobeinstalledatanotherlocation.
Finding.MillstoneHillISRhasaverylargefieldofviewthathasbeenutilizedforinnovativenewscience.Thisextensivecoveragecouldcontributesignificantlytosystemscience.
Finding.TheMillstoneHillgrouphasdevelopedandextendedtheoriginalCEDARdatabase(nowcalledMadrigal)toprovideanexcellentmulti‐instrumentdatabasethatisusedextensivelybythecommunity.
Finding.TheMillstoneHillgrouphassecuredsignificantexternalfundingforscienceandengi‐neeringtechnicaldevelopments.TheGroup’sresearchtodevelopalowcostISRmaybeofconsidera‐blevaluetoNSF,leadingtoreplacementofolderISRtechnology,includingtheMillstoneHillinstalla‐tion.
Finding.TheMillstoneHilldishhassignificantstructuralproblems.
Recommendation7.10.InvestmentisrequiredtoextendthelifetimeofMillstoneHilluntilsuch
Final 80 GS Portfolio Review
timeasitmaybereplacedbyalowercostoption,and/oratanotherlocation.
Finding.TheJicamarcaISR(JRO)istheonlyISRlocatedatthemagneticequatorandundertheequatorialelectrojet.JROisownedbyPeru.
Finding.JicamarcaisthemostpowerfulISRintermsof(power)(aperture).Spatialcoverageislimitedto±3°tothevertical.Expansionofthenear‐bycityisathreattooperationowingtoin‐creasedradiointerference.
Finding.Lackoffundingfordecadeshaspreventedthemodernizationoftheantennabeamswitching.
Finding.JROhostsalargeclusterofancillaryinstrumentationforupperatmosphereandiono‐spherestudies,manysupportedbyseparatefunding.Itisthecurrentlocationofanorphaned14‐panelAMISRsystembuiltwithMRIfunds.
Recommendation7.11.TheJROPIshouldapplytotherecommended,competitiveInnovationandVitalityProgram(Section7.4.1)forsupporttoinstallneededupgradestobringtheISRsystemuptomodernradiosciencestandards.
Finding.Ancillaryinstrumentationforstudiesofvariousupperatmosphereandspacephenom‐enaareoftenco‐locatedateachISRsite.Theinstrumentationvariesconsiderablywithsitebutusu‐allyincreasessignificantlythepotentialfornovelresearch.
Finding.SomeancillaryinstrumentsaresupportedbytheISRM&OcontractwhereasothersarefundedthroughtheinstrumentPIgrant.
Recommendation7.12.NSFshoulddevelopaconsistentpolicyandprocedureforsupportingtheM&OoftheancillaryexperimentsatISRfacilitysites.NormallytheM&Ocostsshouldbethere‐sponsibilityofeachancillaryinstrumentPI.
7.3.4 Class 2 Facilities: Findings and recommendations
Finding.AMPEREI/IIprovidesmagneticperturbationdataanddataproductsderivedfromtheIridiumsatelliteconstellation.Theunprecedentedspatialandtemporalcoverageofthemeasurementsisfacilitatingbasicresearchinmagnetosphere‐ionospherephysicsandspaceweather.Theseproductsareofincreasingimportance,particularlywiththegrowingemphasisonsystemscience.
Finding.Itcouldbepossibletoproducenear‐realtimeAMPEREdataproductsofvalueforspaceweatheroperations.Todate,acompellingcasefortheuseofrealtimedataforbasicscienceresearchhasnotbeenmade,andhencethiscapabilityisoutsidetheNSFremitatthistime.
Recommendation7.13.AMPEREI/IIshouldcontinuetobefundedatthecurrentlevels.
Finding:CCMCprovideseasyaccesstomanymodelsusedforgeospaceresearch.CurrentlyNSFfundingsupportsionosphere‐thermosphere‐magnetosphere(ITM)expertise,andoutreachandeduca‐tionalactivities.
Recommendation7.14.NSFinvolvementinCCMCshouldcontinueatthepresentlevelanditsfundingfocusshouldbeontheprovisionofscientificexpertiseandmodelcapabilitiesnotsup‐portedbyNASA,e.g.ITMandatmosphere‐ionosphere‐thermospherecoupling.
Finding.SuperMAGisadataservice,initiallydevelopedtosatisfytheinterestsoftheoriginalPI,
Final 81 GS Portfolio Review
butithasnowevolvedastrongcommunityservicecomponent.
Recommendation7.15.SuperMAGshouldcontinuetobefundedatthecurrentlevel.
Finding.Severalmagnetometersandmagnetometerarraysarefundedthroughresearchprojects.
Recommendation7.16.TheGSshouldassessiftheeramaynowexistwhereingreaterscientificsynergiesandoptimizationofoperationscouldbeobtainedifallGS‐sponsoredmagnetometersweremanagedasasinglearray.SuchanarraycouldthusevolveintoaClass2facility(seeSection7.4.3formoredetailsonDASI).
Finding.ThecurrentSuperDARNU.S.network,inconjunctionwiththeInternationalSuperDARNprogram,providesgoodspatialandtemporalcoverageatpolarlatitudesinbothhemispheres.Suchcapabilitieshavebeenexpandedmorerecentlytomid‐latitudes.
Finding.TherecentextensionofuniversityinvolvementinSuperDARNrespondsdirectlytotherecommendationsofthe2004Averyreviewofthe(then)UpperAtmosphericResearchFacilities.Thischangehasmadecommunityservice(dataproducts,dataaccessandcommunitysupport)morediffi‐culttodeliver.
Finding.TheU.S.SuperDARNnetworkhasexpandedmarkedlyinrecentyearsusingavarietyoffundingsources,butthedeploymentandadditionalM&Ocostshavenotbeenfullyassessed.
Recommendation7.17.TheU.S.SuperDARNgroupsshoulddetermineanoptimalequilibriumbe‐tweenlocalresearchandcommunityservice,andoptimizetheefficiencyoftheirM&O.
Finding.The Consortium of Resonance and Rayleigh Lidars (CRRL) comprisesfourdifferentLIDARsitesandaCRRLTechnologyCenter(CTC).TheCenterisdevelopingthenextgenerationofLIDARsforgeospaceresearch.
Finding.WhileeachofCRRLsitesprovidemeasurementsofkeystratospheric,mesospheric,andlowerthermosphereneutralparameters,theflowdownfromcoherentCRRLscienceobjectivestore‐quirementsfortheparticularchoiceoflocationsofthesitesisunclear.
Finding.CRRLascurrentlyorganizedanddirectedisnotacommunityfacilityasdefinedinSec‐tion7.2.Itsscientificobjectivesanditsdecisionsonhowdifferenttechnologicalcapabilitiesandsci‐entificprioritiesarepursuedareconsistentwithresearchactivitiesfundedbytheGSCoreandTar‐getedGrantsProgramsratherthantheGSFacilitiesProgram.
Recommendation7.18.TheparticipatingmembersoftheCRRLgroupshouldseekpeer‐reviewedfundingindividuallyorcollectivelyfromtheCoreorTargetedGSprograms.
Recommendation7.19.IftheCTCaspirestodevelopinnovativeinstrumentcapabilitiesandcon‐ceptsforanewGSfacility,e.g.,anObservatoryforAtmosphereSpaceInteractionStudies(OASIS),itshouldapplyforseparatefundingfromtheproposedInnovationandVitalityProgram(seeSection7.4.1).
Finding.ALow‐latitudeIonosphereSensor(LISN)networkhasrecentlybeenestablishedacrossSouthAmericaunderanMRIgrant.LISNcurrentlyconsistsofabout50GPSreceivers,5magnetome‐tersand5ionosondes.SpecificresourcesforscienceandforM&Oofthisdistributedarrayarecur‐rentlycoveredbynon‐facilitysources.LISNhasmanyoftherequiredcharacteristicsofaclass2facil‐ity.
Final 82 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation7.20.TheM&OandscienceresourcesforLISNshouldbefundedviapeerreviewundertherecommended“DASI”lineasoutlinedinsection7.4.3.
7.4 New Investments and Capabilities
7.4.1 Innovation and Vitality Program
OngoinginvestmentinexistingfacilitiesbeyondannualM&Obudgetsisessentialinmaintain‐ingcutting‐edgeGSfacilities.Developmentofinnovativecapabilitiesthatmayonedayprovidetheimpetusforfutureinvestmentinanewfacilityisalsoessentialforthevitalityofthefield.Commu‐nityinputstotheDecadalSurveyindicatedthatthereweremanyexcellentideasforsubstantialnewinitiativeshenceapressingneedsforsupport.
Finding.Atpresent,facilityupgradesaredoneonafacility‐by‐facilitybasisinaratherpiecemealfashion.NomechanismexiststodevelopnewfacilitieswithintheGSportfolio,exceptinaratheradhocmanner.
Finding.Thereislimitedfundingavailableforthedevelopmentofcomputationalmodelsandnu‐mericalalgorithmstoimprovetheefficiencyandfidelityofphysics‐basedmodelsofthespaceenviron‐ment.SuchmodelsarecriticaltothevalueoftheCCMCandtoconsideringgeospaceasasystemsci‐ence.
ThesefindingsimplythatGSfundingislikelynotoptimallydeployedtopromoteGSscienceandthusmeetthestrategicneedsforinnovativeresearch.
Recommendation7.21.AcentralfundtosupportinnovationandvitalityforGSfacilitiesshouldbeestablished.Itisenvisagedthatthisfundwouldsupportseveraldifferentactivities.Theseshouldinclude,butnotbelimitedto:
Majorrepairsandrenovationofanexistingfacility
Fundingfordevelopingsoftwareand/orhardwarethatwillsignificantlyimprovetheperfor‐manceofcurrently‐fundedclass1and2facilities
Thedevelopmentofnewinstrumentation,probablyalreadydesignedanddevelopedfromresearchfunds,intoacapabilitywhereitcouldoperateasafacility;thiscouldincludeopera‐tionofaprototype.
Thedevelopmentofnumericalalgorithmsandmethodologies(independentofscienceobjec‐tives)toimprovetheefficacyandaccuracyofcomputationalmodelsforcommunityuse.
Thedevelopmentoffacilities‐includingmodels,dataprovisionandmeasurementcapabili‐ties–tomakethemoperationalinrealtime,ifacompellingscientificneedforrealtimeca‐pabilitiesbecomesevident.
Recommendation7.22.FundsfromtheproposedInnovationandVitalityProgramshouldbecompetedevery1‐2yearsdependingontheleveloffundingavailable.Itisexpectedthatsomeawardsmightextendover1‐3years.Giventhediversityofthepossibleapplications,apanelreviewisrecommendedsothatthebroaderrequirementsoftheGScommunitycanberepresented.
Final 83 GS Portfolio Review
7.4.2 EISCAT and EISCAT‐3D
Section7.3.3includesarecommendationthatNSFshouldinvestigatethepossibilitiesforU.S.investigatorstogainaccesstoEuropean‐basedISRsystems(EISCATandtheEISCATSvalbardRadar)thatextendfromthepolarcapduringdisturbedtimesintotheauroralovaltomid‐latitudesduringgeomagneticallyquiettimes(seeFigure7.1).Indevelopingthisrecommendation,thePRCreviewedbasicinformationaboutEISCAT,19theEISCATBlueBook(regulations),20EISCATAnnualAccounts,21abriefoverviewoftheEISCATstandardexperimentsandothersupportedexperi‐ments22,anoverviewofEISCAT‐3D23anddiscussionswiththeDirectorofEISCAT.
ThecurrentEISCATISRsystembasedontheScandinavianmainlandistheonlyradarthatcanmaketrue3Delectricfieldmeasurements,butonlyasinglepoint.EISCAT‐3Dwillenable3Dmeasurementsatmultiplepointssimultaneously.Inaddition,averyextensivenetworkofancillaryinstruments,includinganHFheater,isdeployedwithinandsurroundingtheEISCATfield‐of‐view.TheEISCATISRsystemandancillaryinstrumentationprovideaholisticviewofthecoupledmeso‐sphere‐thermosphere‐ionospheresystemthatisintimatelylinkedtothemagnetosphere‐solarwindsystemthroughthemagneticfield.
EISCAT‐3Disthenewworld‐leadingISRunderdevelopment.Itwillgivemanysignificantadvantagesoverthecurrentradars,including:
Phased‐arraytechnologiesforrapidbeamsteering(volumetricimaging)
Multiplesitesfor3Dvectormeasurementsoftheionosphereplasma
Sufficientsensitivityforsub‐secondmeasurementsofauroralphenomena
Interferometriccapabilitiesfor100mspatial‐scalemeasurements
ThusEISCAT‐3DwouldprovideanunparalleledrangeofnewscienceopportunitiesfortheUSgeospacesciencecommunity,particularlyformeasurementsrequiringsmallspatialandfasttemporalscales.Observationsofcross‐scalecouplingprocessesfromthemicro‐tothemacro‐scalesandviceversaareessentialforobtainingdeeperunderstandingofhowthegeospacesystemoperates.
Recommendation7.23.TheGSshouldsolicitproposalsfromtheUSGScommunitytoformaUSEISCATconsortiumthatwouldbefundedbyablockgrantfromNSF,initiallytojoinEISCATasAffil‐iateandeventuallyasanAssociate.24TheinitialAffiliatestatuswouldallowtheconsortiumtogainexperiencewithEISCATbeforemakingafive‐yearcommitmentasanAssociateandtodevelopadeeperunderstandingofEISCATsystemcapabilitieswhenEISCAT‐3Dbecomesoperational.UponattainingAssociatestatus,theconsortiumshouldbetaskedwith(1)transferoftheEISCATannualmembershipfeetoEISCAT‐3Dand(2)developmentandadministrationofaproposalandpanelre‐viewprocessfortheselectionofUSEISCATusers.Theconsortiumshoulddevelopproceduresfor
19 https://www.eiscat.se/groups/Documentation/BasicInfo 20 https://www.eiscat.se/eiscat2014/eiscat‐bluebook‐draft‐2015‐version‐2014‐04‐02/view 21 https://www.eiscat.se/groups/Documentation/Council/annual‐report‐of‐the‐accounts‐2014/view 22 https://www.eiscat.se/groups/Documentation/UserGuides/eiscat‐experiments/view 23 https://eiscat3d.se/ 24 See Appendix F for an overview of the EISCAT membership type and conditions.
Final 84 GS Portfolio Review
cost‐effectivegrantadministrationthatminimizestheencumberedoverheadexpensesofmultiplememberinstitutions.
7.4.3 Distributed Arrays of Small Instruments (DASI)
TheDASIconceptwasrecommendedinthefirstdecadalsurveyofsolarandspacephysicsre‐searchTheSuntotheEarthandBeyond: ADecadalResearchStrategyinSolarandSpacePhysics(2003).DASIwouldprovidethetemporalandspatialcoverageofmanyatmosphericandiono‐sphericparametersthatcomplementmeasurementsfromotherground‐andspace‐basedfacilities.TheDASIconceptwassubsequentlyexaminedbyaNationalAcademiesworkshop.25
Inthelastdecade,theDASIconcepthasnotevolvedasrapidlyasoriginallyenvisaged.Thisshortcominghasbeenduetoavarietyoffactors,includingalackoffundingopportunities,inade‐quatecommunityexperienceincultivatingtherequiredinternationalcollaborations,andinade‐quateexperienceindevelopingrobustcapabilitiesforunmannedandenergy‐efficientoperationofdistributedinstrumentsandforautomateddataprocessing,analysisandtransfer.Nevertheless,somemembersoftheUSscientificcommunityhaveforgedaheadwiththedevelopmentandim‐provementofnewground‐basedinstrumentationandthedeploymentofsmallnetworks.Theseac‐tivitieshavebeensponsoredbydiversefundingstreamsincludingNSFMRI,GSCore,theOfficeofNavalResearch,andtheDepartmentofDefenseUniversityResearchInstrumentationProgram(DU‐RIP).
DASI‐typenetworksthathaveeitheremergedoraugmentedoperationsoverthelastdecadeincludeSuperDARN,CRRLandLISN.SomehavebeendevelopedspecificallytoachievethescienceobjectivesdefinedbythePIsandnotnecessarilytothesignificantbenefitofthewidergeospacecommunity.
ThetypesofinstrumentsdeployedinDASI‐typenetworksincludebutarenotlimitedtoGlobalPositioningSystemreceiversgivingtotalelectroncontentandscintillationactivity,Fabry‐Perotin‐terferometersmeasuringwindsandtemperaturesatmesosphericand/orthermosphericaltitudes,magnetometers,meteorwindradars,digitalionosondes,LIDARs,opticalimagers,photometers,ri‐ometersandVLFradioreceivers.
Finding.Withgrowingrecognitionfortheimportanceofgeospacesystemscience,thegeospacecommunitycanexpect,inthenextdecade,anincreasingdemandforhigherspatialandtemporalreso‐lutioninmeasurements,notonlytodeterminethelocal,regionalandglobalscaleofprocessesbutalsofordataassimilationintogeospacemodels.
Recommendation7.24.TheGSshouldcreatea“DASI”fundwithtwopurposes:(i)todevelopandbuildnew“small”instrumentationsuitablefordeploymentinaDASInetworkand(ii)toprovideM&Ofundstomaintainthenetworkoncecreated.
Recommendation7.25.Theinitialopportunityforawards,tobeevaluatedbyanadhocreviewpanel,shouldprovidefundingofsufficientdurationthattheDASIprojectscanbeevaluatedincon‐junctionwiththeotherClass1andClass2facilitiesbytheproposedSeniorReviewPanel(Section7.5)atitsfirstmeeting.
25 http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11594/distributed‐arrays‐of‐small‐instruments‐for‐solar‐terrestrial‐research‐re‐port
Final 85 GS Portfolio Review
Matureandscientifically‐compellingDASInetworksthatareoperatingasaClass2facility(asdefinedinSection7.2)areenvisagedtobecandidatesforincorporationintotheGSfacilitiesbudget,ifthecapabilitiesandscientificobjectivesofthefacilitywouldenablesubstantialprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedinthe2013DecadalSurveyforSolarandSpacePhysics.
AdvancementofaGSDASIProgramfacestwofundamentalchallenges:WhattypesofDASIwillbedeployedwhereandforwhatpurposes?HowwilltheUSdevelopmentsbeintegratedmosteffectivelywiththosefromtheinternationalcommunity,whichisprogressingalongasimilartra‐jectory?
Inordertoensurecutting‐edgescience,fundsallocatedtotheproposedGSDASIProgramwouldbecompetedwithregularannouncementsofopportunityandwithselectionsrecommendedbyapeer‐reviewpanel.Primarycriteriaforselectionwouldincludeassessmentsof:
CapabilitiesthatwouldenableprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedinChapter1ofthe2013DecadalSurveyforSolarandSpacePhysics;
Qualityofthenewsciencetobederivedfromthedevelopmentand/ordeploymentofthenetworkofinstruments;
Sizeofthepotentialusercommunity;
QualityandrangeofservicestobeprovidedtotheUnitedStatesGScommunity;and
Leverageoftheproposedinvestmentfrominternationalpartners.
7.4.4 Data Systems, Products and Management
ObservationsarecriticaltothesuccessofGSresearch.Theyareessentialfordescribingpro‐cessesingeospace,forrobustlytestingmodelsandforassimilationintomodels.Withtheever‐in‐creasingcapabilitiesandnumberofdistributedinstruments,thegrowthindataquantityisverysig‐nificant.
TheISRdataandmanyofthosefromtheco‐locatedinstrumentsaremanagedandarchivedthroughtheMadrigaldatabasecurrentlysupportedthroughtheMillstoneHillISRM&Obudget.
Finding.DatafromUSfacilitiesarevalidated,processedtoatleastlevel1,andarchivedbythePIsusingM&Ofunding.Limitedstatisticsareavailableondatadownloadsandonthenumberofdatausers.
Assystemsciencedevelopsfurther,anever‐pressingneedisexpectedfornon‐dataexpertstobeabletoaccess,visualiseandutilisedataeasilyfromaproliferationofsources.Asaresult,coher‐ent,integrateddatasystemsneedtobedevelopedthatalloweasyaccesstoalldatacollectedbyUS‐fundedscience,andsometimesincludingdatafrominternationalpartners.
Thereisarealopportunitytoproducemore“value‐added”geospaceproductsbycombiningdatafromseveralsources.Forexample,ionosphericconductanceisessentialformanyscienceob‐jectives;regionalandglobalconductancemapscouldnowbeproducedusingAMPERE,SuperDARN,SuperMAGandotheravailabledatasets(e.g.,GPS,optical,ISRandspace‐baseddata).Itisnotes‐sentialtohaveallGSdataonasingleserverbutinter‐operabilityisessential.
Recommendations.NSFshouldcreateaseparatecompetitivefundforthefurtherdevelopmentof
Final 86 GS Portfolio Review
datamanagementanddatavisualisationfrommanysources,includingnewvalue‐addeddataprod‐ucts.ThisfundingshouldincludethefurtherdevelopmentandoperationoftheMadrigaldatabase,thusseparatingitfromtheMillstoneHillISRM&Ofundingforgreatertransparency.
7.5 Facility Extensions
7.5.1 Advisory/User Groups
Thedeliveryoffacilitiestousersalwayspresentsmajorchallengesinbalancinginevitablecom‐petitionforlimitedfacilityresources.Thesechallengesincludemaintenance,operations,additionalsupportfortheusercommunity,developmentofnewhardwareandsoftwareandoperatingcosts(e.g.,thecostoffuelandrepairstotheinfrastructure).Prioritisingsuchactivitiesisparticularlydif‐ficultattimesoflimitedresources.PrioritydecisionsonthechallengeshavebeennormallymadebythePI,sometimesinconsultationwithNSFstaff.
Finding.FacilitiesPIsoftenconveneonlyinformalusersmeetings,e.g.embeddedwithintheCE‐DARmeeting.Ausers’consensus(ifoneemergesinsuchmeetings)typicallyhaslimitedinfluenceindecidingpriorities.
Recommendation7.26.Allfacilitiesshouldhaveaformalandactiveusers/advisorygroup,ap‐pointedbyNSFandchairedbyanindependentpersontosupportNSFandthePIindecidingpriori‐ties.
Recommendation7.27.EachfacilityPIshouldprovideanannualreporttoNSFthatshouldin‐cludea3‐yeardevelopmentplan,prioritisedandbudgetedforthefacility.
Recommendation7.28.AllannualreportsshouldbeopentotheGScommunity,exceptforsec‐tionsthatarecommerciallysensitiveorinvolveindividualpersonnelissues.
7.5.2 Scientific Research Within Facilities Awards
Somefacilityawardsbudgetaportionofthefacilitiesgrantorcooperativeserviceagreementforscientificexploitationoffacilitydata.Therationaleforthispracticeisnotalwaysclear.
Amodestbudgetforstaffresearch(notmorethan10%ofstaffcosts)intheM&ObudgetofClass1andClass2facilitiescanprovidethefollowingadvantages:
Recruitmentandretentionofhighly‐ratedstafftooperatethefacilityandinteractwithitscommunityofusers;
SupportforM.S.andPh.D.studentsengagedinthedeliveryofthefacilityservicesaspartoftheirtrainingandprofessionaldevelopment;and
Developmentofathoroughunderstandingoffacilitydatasetswithprovisionofexpertsup‐porttothefacility’susercommunity(e.g.advisingonthemodesofoperationofthefacilityanddataprocessingmethodologies).
Thequalityofthescienceundertakenmustbeinternationallycompetitive.ThereforeaSeniorReview(Section7.8)shouldevaluatethequalityofsciencesupportedbythefacilitygrantorcon‐tractwhenreviewingthefacility.
Scientistsandengineersassociatedwithfacilitiesarestronglyencouragedtoapplyfor
Final 87 GS Portfolio Review
additionalfundsthroughthemanyscience,engineeringandtechnicalopportunitiesavailabletothemtoenhancetheresearchofthefacility.
Recommendation7.29.NSFshoulddevelopclearproceduresfordecidingwhethertoawardsci‐enceresearchfundingwithinafacilitycontract,andthelevelofthatfunding,whichnormallyshouldnotexceed10%ofthepersonnelcosts.
Recommendation7.30.Thesemi‐decadalSeniorReviewoffacilitiesshouldevaluatethequalityofthescienceundertakenwiththeM&Ofunding.
7.6 Non‐GS Funded Instrumentation
Finding:OngoingM&Ocostsforgeospaceinstrumentsandarraysofinstrumentsinitiallydevel‐opedwithfundsobtainedfromNSF(e.g.,theMRIprogram)andotheragencyannouncementsofop‐portunityarenottypicallyincludedintheinitialaward.Aftertheinstrumentshavebeendeployedorusedforaninitially‐proposedperiod,theGSwilloftenreceiveaproposaltocoverongoingM&Ocostsoftheinstruments.ExamplesincludeLISN,GIMNAST,theheaterfacilityatArecibo,amini‐AMISRatJicamarcaandmultipleFabry‐Perotinstruments.
Recommendation7.31.NSFshouldidentifyboththeongoingM&Ocostsandtheirfundingsource(s)beforeawardingthegrant.
Recommendation7.32.Forinstrumentsfundedfromexternalsources,theSeniorReviewpanel(Section7.8)shouldbetaskedtodeterminewhetherfacilityfundingisappropriate.
7.7 Midscale Projects Program
TheDecadalSurveyrecommendedthatNSFshouldcreateanew,competitivelyselectedmid‐scaleprojectfundinglineinordertoenablemidscaleprojectsandinstrumentationforlargepro‐jects.TheenvisionedapproacheswereconsiderednecessarybytheDSsteeringcommitteetofillgapsinobservationalcapabilitiesandtomovethesurvey’sintegratedscienceplanforward.ThePRCconcurswiththeSurveycommittee’srecommendationandrationaleforit.
ToquotetheDS:
“Importantresearchisoftenaccomplishedthroughmidscaleresearchprojectsthatarelargerinscopethantypicalsingleprincipalinvestigator(PI)‐ledprojects(MRIs)andsmallerthanfacilities(MREFCs).TheAdvancedModularIncoherentScatterRadar(AMISR)isanexampleofamidscaleprojectwidelyseenashavingtransformedresearchintheground‐basedAIMcommunity.AlthoughdifferentNSFdirectorateshaveprogramstosupportunsolicitedmid‐scaleprojectsatdifferentlevels,theseprogramsmaybeoverlyprescriptiveandunevenintheiravailability,andpracticalgapsinproposalopportunitiesandfundinglevelsmaybelim‐itingtheeffectivenessofmidscaleresearchacrossNSF.Itisunclear,forinstance,howpro‐jects like the highly successfulAMISRwould be initiated and accomplished in the future.Mechanismsforthecontinuedfundingofmanagementandoperationsatexistingmidscalefacilitiesarealsonotentirelyclear.
TheNSFCommitteeonProgramsandPlansformedataskforcetostudyhoweffectivelyitsupportsmidscale projects, how flexible the funding is, howuniformly it is administeredacrossNSF,andhowwellsuchprojectsservetheinterestsofeducationandpublicoutreach.The resulting report affirmed the importance of strongly supporting midscaleinstrumentation but did not recommend any new or expanded NSF‐wide programs.
Final 88 GS Portfolio Review
Nevertheless,asdescribed inChapter4 inthe“Diversify”recommendationsofDRIVE, thecommitteestronglyendorsesthecreationofsuchacompetitivelyselectedmidscaleprojectlineforsolarandspacephysics.Thisapproachisalsoconsistentwiththe2010astronomyandastrophysicsdecadalsurvey,whichrecommendedamidscalelineasitssecondpriorityinlargeground‐basedprojects.”
Thissurveycommittee’swhite‐paperprocessandthesubsequentdisciplinarypanelstudiesbrought forwardanumberof important ‘Heliophysics’projects thatwould require anewmidscalefundingline.Theunrankedexampleslistedbelowillustratethekindofsciencethatthelinecouldenable.Theseprojectsareseenasbeingcentraltotheintegratedsciencepro‐gramoutlinedinthesurvey:(1)TheFrequency‐AgileSolarRadiotelescope;(2)TheCoronalSolarMagnetismObservatory;(3)AnAll‐AtmosphereLidarObservatory;(4)AHeterogeneousIonosphericFacilityNetwork; (5)ASouthern‐Hemisphere IncoherentScatterRadar;and(6)Next‐GenerationGround‐BasedInstrumentation.
TothemidscalecandidatesidentifiedbytheDS,thePRCcanaddTheCoronalMassEjectionRa‐dar,whichwasproposedinoneofthewhite‐papercommentssubmittedtothePRC.
TheMidscaleInnovationsProgramrecommendedintheASTPortfolioReview,andnowimple‐mented,isanASTdivision‐wideprogramforprojectsrangingfrom$4Mto$30M.Ifamidscalepro‐jectsprogramweretobeimplementedattheGSlevel,fundingforitatanannuallevel$1Mto$6Mwouldsustainanewprojectwithatotalcostof$5Mto$30Mevery5years.
ThePRCagreeswiththeDSthatnumerouscompellingMidscaleprojectscouldaddressgapsincriticalcapabilitiesforgeospaceandsolarscience(e.g.,Tables5.2‐5.5).Investinginamidscalelinewouldenableinnovativemeasurementcapabilities,butaccommodatingallnewGSprogramele‐mentsrecommendedbytheSurveyisnotpossiblefortheflatbudgetassumedforGSoutto2025.AMidscaleProjectsline,inparticular,hasalowerpriorityatthistimethanotheritemsinthebudgetscenariopresentedinChapter9.However,thePRCwouldrecommendaMidscaleProjectsProgramifoneorbothofthefollowingconditionsaremet.
Recommendation7.33.IfuseoftheAreciboObservatoryisnolongeravailabletoGSresearchers,e.g.,duetodivestmentorinsufficientfundingforitscontinuingoperation,andtheGSbudgetre‐mainsatorabovetheflatfundinglevelassumedforthePortfolioReview,thentherecommendedannualfundingof$1.1MforAreciboshouldberedirectedtotheInnovationsandVitalityProgramdescribedinSection7.4.DependingoncommunityconsensusandtherecommendationsfromthefacilitiesSeniorReviewrecommendedinSection7.8,asignificantportionofthisaugmentedI&VannualbudgetmightbedirectedtofundingforanewMidscaleproject.
Recommendation7.34.IffutureGSbudgetsexceedtheflat‐budgetassumptionofthisreviewby$1Mperyearorgreater,thentheadditionalannualfundingshouldbedirectedtoaMidscalePro‐jectsProgram.
7.8 Facilities Senior Review
Maintainingstateoftheartfacilitiesforgeospaceresearchiscrucialinenablingdiscoveriesthattransformunderstandingofgeospace.AsdiscussedinChapters3,4and6andSection7.3,theadditionofnewprograms,newGSfacilitiesandadoublingintheGSfinancialsupportofAreciboduringthepastdecadecameatatimewhentheinflation‐adjustedGSbudgetremainedflat.Whilesomeofthenewprogramsandfacilitieshaveenablednewcapabilities,theircostsproducedafundingsqueezeonallGSprogramsincludingsupportforscience,forexistingGSfacilitiesandfacilitiesupgrades.Consequently,fundsfortimelyfacilityupgradesandimprovedcapabilitieshave
Final 89 GS Portfolio Review
beendeferred.Therecommendationsofthisportfolioreviewareintendedtocorrectthissituationinthecomingyears.
IftheGSbudgetremainsflatforthenextdecade,aspresumedinthePRCcharge,pastpracticesuggeststhatGSfundsforfacilityupgradeswillagainbecomestressedasnewfacilitiescomeonlinefromsuccessfulMRIorMREFCinitiativesandotherpeer‐reviewedproposals.SuccessfulMRI(andpotentiallyMREFC)initiativesareawardedwithGSconsent,butwithoutadequateplanningforsubsequentM&Osupport,letalonesciencesupport.TheresultisthatongoingM&OcostsforthesenewfacilitiesmustbecoveredbytheGSbudget.Ifspaceisnotmadeinthepresumedflatbudget,thesecostswillfurthersubstantiallyreducefundsforexistingfacilitiesM&Oandtheirup‐gradestobesupportedbythenewInnovationandVitalityProgramdescribedinSection7.4.
Recommendation7.35.TopreventscopecreepinfuturefacilitieswithoutadequatebudgettosupporttheadditionalM&Ocosts,aperiodic“SeniorReview”ofallGSfacilitiesshouldbecon‐ducted,atleastevery5years.Thisreviewshouldincludeestablishedfacilitiesi.e.allClass1andClass2facilities.Nascent“facilities”thatmaybeonatrajectoryforfacilitystatusbuteitherarenotyetoperatingasafacility,asdefinedinSection7.2,orhavenotyetbeenfullydeveloped,e.g.,aspartofanMRI,MREFC,apossiblenewMid‐ScaleProjectsline,orotherinitiative,shouldalsobein‐cludedintheSeniorReviewiftheirtransitiontofacilityclassisexpectedtooccurbeforethenextSeniorReview.Ideally,allfacilityproposals(includingthosefornewfacilities)shouldeventuallybesynchronizedona5‐yearrenewalfortheenvisionedSeniorReviewprocess.
ThepurposeoftheFacilitiesSeniorReviewistwo‐fold:
1. ToreconciletheGSfacilitiesbudgetwiththecostsrequiredtoprovideadequateM&OforallGSfacilitiesandtomaintainthestate‐of‐the‐artinfacilitiesinstrumentationandcapabili‐ties.Asdescribedinthisportfolioreview,reconciliationmayrequireclosureordivestmentofsomefacilitiestoaccommodatetheinnovativecapabilitiesprovidedbynewfacilitiesoraugmentedfacilities.
2. Toreviewandrankeachfacility’scapabilities(i)toenable,asastandaloneinstrumentorsystem,transformativescientificdiscoveries,and(ii)tocontributetointegrativescientificunderstandingasacomplementaryelementinNSF’sdistributedcapabilitiesforobservinggeospaceasasystem.Capability(ii)cutsacrossallGSprograms,sothepanelchargedwithconductingtheSeniorReviewwoulddrawonexpertiseineachoftheGScoreresearchpro‐grams.
AlthoughtheadministrationanddecisionsonthestructureoftheSeniorReviewprocessresidewiththeGSHeadandFacilitiesProjectManagers,thePRCofferssomesuggestionsforhowtoen‐surethatthereviewismosteffectivegivenitsexperienceinreviewingGSfacilitiesfortheportfolioreview.ThePRCenvisionstheSeniorReviewtobeanopenprocessinwhichwrittenproposalsforfacilitycontinuationarefirstreviewedbytheSeniorReviewpanel.ThePIsandkeystaffofeachofthefacilitiesarethensubsequentlyinvitedtopresentinaface‐to‐facemeetingwiththeSeniorRe‐viewpanelandGSstaff,thefacility’spastsuccessesandfutureplansformeetingcriteria(i)and(ii)above.TherecommendationsoftheSeniorReviewandtheirjustificationswouldbemadepubli‐callyavailableinaSeniorReviewreportfollowingthereview.
TheSeniorReviewpanelwouldbechargedwellbeforethepresentationsandinterviewsarescheduled.Tobetterinformthereview,priortotheface‐to‐facemeetingthepanelwouldreacha
Final 90 GS Portfolio Review
consensus(e.g.,viawebconference)onthemajorissuesofconcernandclarificationforeachfacil‐itysothatfacilityPIsmayprepareappropriateresponses.
ItwouldbeadvantageousandadministrativelyefficientifthewrittenproposalssubmittedtotheSeniorReviewservedastheNSFproposalforthefive‐yeargrantorcooperativeagreementforthefacility.SomefacilitiesmayrequireupgradesoraugmentedcapabilitiestofulfilthePI’sorthecommunity’svisionforitsfuturesuccess.ProposalstocompleteupgradesoraugmentationsmightbeincludedintheproposalssubmittedtotheSeniorReview.
NSFhasdevelopedasetofcriteriaforreviewingmajorscientificinitiatives.ThesecriteriacouldbeadaptedfortheseniorReviewassessment.Theyare:
–Primaryfilter:
Compellingscience:researchthathasthepotentialforimportant,transformativestepsfor‐wardinunderstandinganddiscovery.
Secondaryfilters(importantcriteria,buteachonemaynotbemetineverycase):
Potentialforsocietalimpact:researchthatyieldsinformationofnear‐termand/orlongtermbenefitsforsociety.
Time‐sensitiveinnature:researchthatinvolvessystems/processesundergoingrapidchangethatneedtobeobservedsoonerratherthanlater;researchthatcouldhelpinformcurrentpublicpolicyconcerns.
Readiness/feasibility:researchthatispoisedtomoveforwardquicklywithinthecomingdec‐ade,intermsofneededtechnologiesandcommunityreadiness.
KeyareaforU.S.andNSFleadership:researchforwhichtheUnitedStates,andNSFinpartic‐ular,isadvantageouslypositionedtolead.
Tertiaryfilters(additionalfactorstoconsider):
Partnershippotential:researchforwhichNSFinvestmentscouldleverageinvestmentbyotherfederalagencies,otherpartsofNSF,orinternationalpartners.
Impactsonprogrambalance:researchthatwouldnotcausesignificantadverseimpactsonotherprojectsbyrequiringdisproportionatefundingsupport,orlogisticalsupport.
Potentialtohelpbridgeexistingdisciplinarydivides:researchthatcouldprovideopportu‐nitiestobringtogetherdisciplinarycommunitiesthatseldomworktogether.
Recommendation7.36.NSFGSshoulddevelopacommonsetofannualmetricsfromeachfacilitywhichcanbecollectedyear‐on‐yeartoprovideanunderpinningofthenextSeniorReview.Thesemetricscouldincludescienceoutputsbothfromfacilitystaffandexternalusers,annualexpendi‐ture(capitalandresource),datadownloadsandusage,andkeytechnicaldevelopments(hardwareandsoftware).
Final 91 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 8. Partnerships and Opportunities
Thisportfolioreviewformalizesthegeospacesciencecommunity’srecommendationstotheAGSDivisionforhowbesttooptimizeinvestmentsincriticalcapabilitiesneededovertheperiodfrom2016to2025thatwouldenableprogressonthescienceprogramarticulatedinthe2013De‐cadalSurveyforSolarandSpacePhysics.TherecommendedGSportfoliopresentedinthenextchapterdoessowithintheflat‐budgetconstraintassumedforthereview.However,somecriticalcapabilitiesareprovidedbyNSFprogramsexternaltotheGeospaceSectionanddonotexplicitlyenterthebudgetscenariooftherecommendedportfolio.OthercapabilitiesmaybeaugmentedorleveragedthroughpartnershipsbothinternalandexternaltoNSF.Theseextra‐GSprogramsandresourcesaresummarizedhere.LeveraginginvestmentsincriticalcapabilitiesforgeospacesciencenecessarilyrequirescollaborationbetweenGSprogramstaffandthegeospaceresearchcommu‐nity.ItalsorequiresinitiativeonthepartofgeospacePIsinapplyingforresourcesexternaltotheGS.ThischapterofthereviewisdirectedtobothGSprogrammanagersandthegeospaceresearchcommunity.
8.1 NSF Intra‐Agency Partnerships and Opportunities
8.1.1 Programs Within AGS
NCAR and HAO
TheNationalCenterforAtmosphericResearch(NCAR)isanationalinstitutionandresourcededicatedtothestudyoftheatmosphere,theEarthsystem,andtheSun.
TheHighAltitudeObservatory(HAO)isthegeospacelaboratoryofNCAR.HAOprovidescapa‐bilitiesthatdirectlysupportNSF‐GSscienceobjectivesandcommunityresearchefforts.Inparticu‐lar,HAOmanagestheMaunaLoaSolarObservatory(MLSO)whichmakesdailyobservationsthataredistributedviatheinternetinnear‐realtime.Theseformauniquesolarcoronalsynopticda‐tasetwhichisrequiredforseveraloftheSolar‐Terrestrialsciencechallenges(seeSection5.3).HAOalsoworkswiththecommunitytodeveloplarge‐scale,computationalmodelsthatsupportcommu‐nityresearchinupperatmospheric,ionospheric,andmagnetosphericphysics.TheseincludetheThermosphereIonosphereElectrodynamicsGeneralCirculationModel(TlEGCM),andtheWholeAtmosphereCommunityClimateModel(WACCM),withextensionupwardintotheionosphere,thermosphere,andmesosphere(WACCM‐X;currentlyunderdevelopment).HAOhasasubstantialvisitor’sprogramthatsupportsinteractionswiththebroadercommunity,andthatannuallyfundsbothpostdoctoralassociatesandgraduatestudents.HAOrepresentsasignificantinvestmentbytheAGSDivisioninsupportofgeospacescience.TheFY2015HAObudgetwasprojectedtobe$6.1MincludingNSFbasefundingandDirectoratetransfers.
NCAR’sComputationalandInformationSystemsLaboratory(CISL)deploysandoperatesthephysicalandvirtualcomputationalfacilitiesneededtosupportitssciencecommunity.CISL’ssupercomputingresourcesserveapproximately1,800usersinawidevarietyofdisciplinesincludinggeospacescience.CISLdevelopsandcuratesresearchdatasetsandmaintainsonlineuseraccesstothearchive.CISLalsoprovidesvirtualizationandgridtechnologies,promotingcollaborationandsharingofvaluablescientificresources.UniversityuseofCISLresourcesisintendedtosupportresearchintheatmosphericandrelatedsciencesbyscientistsholdingNSF
Final 92 GS Portfolio Review
grantsandgraduatestudentsatU.S.universities.AllocationsforCISLresourcesaremadeatnocosttoeligibleusersandemphasizeextensiveprojectsthatarebeyondthescopeofuniversitycomputingcenters.Thisresourceenablescriticalcapabilitiesforlarge‐scalesimulationmodelingstudiesandbigdataanalysisprojectsofNSFgeospacescientists.
NCAR’sAdvancedStudyProgram(ASP)helpsNCARandthescientificcommunitiesitservesprepareforthefutureby:encouragingthedevelopmentofearlycareerscientistsinfieldsrelatedtoatmosphericscience;directingattentiontotimelyscientificareasneedingspecialemphasis;organ‐izingnewscienceinitiatives;supportinginteractionswithuniversities;andpromotingcontinuingeducationatNCAR.ASPsupportsthreeprogramsforscientistsandgraduateresearcherstoworkinresidenceatNCAR:PostdoctoralFellowshipProgram,FacultyFellowshipProgram,andGraduateStudentVisitorProgram.Theseprogramscontributetothevitalityofthegeospacescienceprofes‐sion.
Recommendation8.1.TheAGSDirectorandGSHeadshouldcontinuetocoordinatewiththeDi‐rectorofHAOtofacilitatealignmentofHAOsciencegoalswithGSsciencegoals.
TheAGSPostdoctoralResearchFellowshipsProgram,asdiscussedinChapter4,alsocontrib‐utestothevitalityoftheprofessionbysponsoringpostdoctoralfellowspursuingresearchingeo‐spacescience.
8.1.2 Programs Within the Geoscience Directorate
Office of Polar Programs
TheAntarcticAstrophysicsandGeosciences(AAGS)ProgramoftheDivisionofPolarPrograms(DPP)supportssubstantialsolar‐terrestrialresearchatabudgetaryleveloftheorderofslightlymorethan$2M/year.Asthenameimplies,theProgramalsosupports,atabudgetarylevelofabout$9M/year,asignificantresearchprograminastronomyandastrophysics,largelyattheAmundsen‐ScottSouthPoleStation.Becauseitslandmassspansaverylargegeomagneticareaun‐derthepolarcapandauroralregions,theAntarcticcontinentisanideallocationfordeploying,atthemannedstationsandinthedeepfield,state‐of‐the‐artinstrumentationforsolar‐terrestrialre‐search.Theprogramsinsolar‐terrestrialresearchcurrentlyincludeawiderangeofinstrumenta‐tionforpolarcap,polarcusp,andauroralstudies.
Instrumentsinthedeepfieldconsistofseverallatitudinalmagnetometerchains,oneofwhich,theAutomaticGeophysicalObservatories,alsoincludesinstrumentationsuchasimagingriometers,photometers,VLFreceivers,andotherstudies.Thesechainsofremotesitesuseinnovativesolar,wind,andbatterypowerforyearlongoperations.ThemannedU.S.stationsatMcMurdo/ArrivalHeights(inthepolarcuspregion)andatSouthPole(theauroralzone)arehometoinstrumentationincludingmagnetometers,imagingriometers,Fabry‐PerotInterferometers(FPI),all‐skyimagersandphotometers,Lidars,VLFandELFreceivers.TheU.S.PalmerStation,ontheAntarcticPenin‐sula,hasanFPIandalsostudiesatVLFfrequenciesnatural(fromlightning)andman‐madesig‐nals.TwoSuperDARNradarsbasedintheAntarctic(SouthPoleandMcMurdo)aresupportedbytheAAGS.
DPPalsosupportstheoperationoftwoneutronmonitors(atMcMurdoandSouthPole)whichprovideuniquemeasurementsforseveralareasofsolar‐terrestrialresearch.Ofthe13neutronmonitorspreviouslysupportedbyNSF,onlythesetwoarecurrentlyNSF‐fundedandarecriticalto
Final 93 GS Portfolio Review
continuingthe>50year‐longrecordofhighenergyparticlesimpactingtheEarth’satmos‐phere.Particlemeasurementsfromneutronmonitorsprovideinformationregardinglong‐termso‐larcyclevariationsaswellasshort‐termspaceweatherconditionsandareanessentiallinkbe‐tweenthelowerenergyparticlemeasurementsmadebysensorsonspacecraftandthehigheren‐ergyregimemonitoredbyground‐baseddetectorssuchasmuondetectorsandairshowerarrays.
ThechallengingenvironmentoftheAntarcticdemandsvastlydifferentlogisticsrequirementsforinstrumentationandM&Othaninotherinternationallocations.Thus,logisticsarehandledbytheGEO‐PLRandnotbyindividualPIs.
Internationalinstrumentationishostedatbothofthemannedstations,andinternationalinves‐tigatorscollaboratewithdataanalysisandmodelingofphenomenafromtheremotefieldsites.In‐ternationalcollaborationalsooccursinotherways,includingtheconjugacyofportionsoftheAnt‐arcticmagnetometerarrayswithnorthernhemispherelocations,andwithinstrumentationarraysinotherAntarcticlocationsofothernations,notablytheUK.
Onoccasionandasscienceprioritiesarise,theDivisionalsosupportsthescienceandlogisticsoflong‐durationballoonflightsforsolar‐terrestrialresearch.Inthepast,rocketsforauroralstud‐ieshavealsobeenlaunchedfromtheAntarctic.BothrocketsandballoonshavebeensupportedbytheDivisionandbyNASA.Also,asscienceprioritiesandobjectivesrequire,thereisclosecollabora‐tionbetweentheAntarcticAstrophysicsandGeosciencesProgramandtheGeoscienceSectionofAST.
Recommendation8.2.TheGSHeadshouldcontinuetocoordinatewiththeGEO=PLRAAGSPro‐gramDirectortofacilitatealignmentofAAGSsciencegoalswithGSsciencegoals.
Research in Hazards and Disasters (Hazards SEES) and Prediction of Resilience against Ex‐
treme EVENTS (PREEVENTS) Programs
NSFsupportsbasicresearchinscientificandengineeringdisciplinesnecessarytounderstandextremenaturaleventsandhazards.ProgramswiththisgoalincludetheInterdisciplinaryResearchinHazardsandDisasters(HazardsSEES)program,whichcompleteditssecondandfinalcompeti‐tionin2015,anditsrecentlyannouncedsuccessorprogram,PredictionofandResilienceagainstExtremeEVENTS(PREEVENTS).HazardsSEESiscurrentlyfundingorco‐fundingtwosignificantprojectsrelevanttogeospacescience:AMPEREIIasreviewedinChapter7andaprojecttoimprovepredictionofgeomagneticdisturbances,geomagnetically‐inducedcurrents,andtheirimpactsonpowerdistributionsystems.
Finding.Participationintheseprogramsmayrequireco‐fundingfromGSwhenaselectedprojectisrelevanttogeospacescienceorspaceweather.
Recommendation8.3.GSPMsshouldcontinuetoencourageGSinvestigatorstopursueco‐fundingfromthePREEVENTSandsimilarfutureprogramsoftheGeoscienceDirectorate.Wheneverpossi‐bleco‐fundingthesetypesoftargetedprogramsfromtheGSbudgetshouldbederivedfromGSStrategicGrantsorFacilitiesprogramsratherthantheGSCoreGrantsprogram.
Final 94 GS Portfolio Review
8.1.3 Cross‐Directorate Programs
AST‐GS Partnership in Solar Physics: NSO, NRAO, NOAO
SolarphysicsisalsoapartofthemissionoftheNSF‐MPS‐ASTdivision.SynopticobservationsofsolarsurfacemagnetismandflowsthatcanbeusedinGSanalysesaretakenbytheNationalSolarObservatory(NSO)IntegratedSynopticProgram(NIST).Hightemporalandspatialresolutionob‐servationsofsolarplasmaandmagneticfieldswillbetakenbytheDanielK.InouyeSolarTelescope(DKIST)currentlyunderconstruction.TheNSOalso(withNASA)coordinatestheVirtualSolarOb‐servatory(VSO).RelevantstellarobservationsareobtainedbytheNationalOpticalAstronomicalObservatory(NOAO),andflare/CME‐relatedradioobservationsaretakenbytheNationalRadioAs‐tronomicalObservatory(NRAO).AllofthesearerequiredcapabilitiesforSolar‐Terrestrialsciencechallenges,asdescribedinSection6.4.
Asdiscussedinthatsection,coordinationacrossdirectoratesisimportant.TheASTinvestmentinNSOwas$8MinFY2015forbaseNSFfundingplus$5Mforramping‐upDKISToperations.
Recommendation8.4.ThisrecommendationreaffirmsthefindingandrecommendationinSection6.4thatGSshouldcontinuetocoordinatewithPMsandDirectorsoftheseexternalentitiestoen‐surecontinuingacquisitionofthesecriticaldatastreamsandaccesstothemforgeospaceandsolarscienceinvestigations.
EarthCube
EarthCubeisacommunity‐drivenactivitysponsoredthroughapartnershipbetweentheNSFDirectorateforGeosciences(GEO)andtheDirectorateforComputer&InformationScience&Engi‐neering(CISE)DivisionofAdvancedCyberinfrastructure(ACI)totransformresearchintheaca‐demicgeosciencescommunity.EarthCubeaimstocreateawell‐connectedandfacileenvironmenttosharedataandknowledgeinanopen,transparent,andinclusivemanner,thusacceleratingourabilitytounderstandandpredicttheEarthsystem.
AchievingEarthCubewillrequirealong‐termdialogbetweenNSFandtheinterestedscientificcommunitiestodevelopcyberinfrastructurethatisthoughtfullyandsystematicallybuilttomeetthecurrentandfuturerequirementsofgeoscientists.NewavenueswillbesupportedtogathercommunityrequirementsandprioritiesfortheelementsofEarthCube,andtocapturethebesttech‐nologiestomeetthesecurrentandfutureneeds.TheEarthCubeportfoliowillconsistofintercon‐nectedprojectsandactivitiesthatengagethegeosciences,cyberinfrastructure,computerscience,andassociatedcommunities.TheportfolioofactivitiesandfundingopportunitieswillevolveovertimedependingonthestatusoftheEarthCubeeffortandthescientificandculturalneedsofthege‐osciencescommunity.
ThisEarthCubeprogramcurrentlysponsorsageospacescienceproject“EarthCubeIA:Magne‐tosphere‐Ionosphere‐AtmosphereCoupling”withtheintenttodevelopaseriesofinterlockingwebservicesthatprovideaccesstotheunderlyingMIACdatasets(AMPERE,SuperDARNandSuper‐MAG),thatapplythesciencealgorithmstoderivethedesiredelectrodynamicproducts,andprovidedatatranslationandvisualizationservices.
Finding.TheEarthCubeprogramisaneffectivevehicleforaugmentingGSinvestmentsintherec‐ommendedGSFacilitiesprogramforDataSystems,ProductsandManagement(Sect.7.4.4).
Final 95 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation8.3.GSPMsshouldcontinuetoencourageGSinvestigatorstopursueco‐fundingfromtheEarthCubeprogramforDataSystems,ProductsandManagement.Ifco‐fundingfromtheGSisdesirableorrequiredtosecureexternalEarthCubefunding,wheneverpossibletheco‐fundingshouldbederivedfromthenewlyrecommendedGSFacilitiesProgramforDataSystems,ProductsandManagement(Sec.7.4.4).
8.1.4 Foundation‐Wide
Major Research Instrumentation Program (MRI)
AsdescribedontheNSFprogramwebpage,theMajorResearchInstrumentationProgram(MRI)servestoincreaseaccesstosharedscientificandengineeringinstrumentsforresearchandresearchtraininginourNation'sinstitutionsofhighereducation,not‐for‐profitmuseums,sciencecentersandscientific/engineeringresearchorganizations.Theprogramprovidesorganizationswithopportunitiestoacquiremajorinstrumentationthatsupportstheresearchandresearchtrain‐inggoalsoftheorganizationandthatmaybeusedbyotherresearchersregionallyornationally.
EachMRIproposalmayrequestsupportfortheacquisition(Track1)ordevelopment(Track2)ofasingleresearchinstrumentforsharedinter‐and/orintra‐organizationaluse.Developmentef‐fortsthatleveragethestrengthsofprivatesectorpartnerstobuildinstrumentdevelopmentcapac‐ityatMRIsubmission‐eligibleorganizationsareencouraged.
TheMRIprogramassistswiththeacquisitionordevelopmentofasharedresearchinstrumentthatis,ingeneral,toocostlyand/ornotappropriateforsupportthroughotherNSFprograms.Theprogramdoesnotfundresearchprojectsorprovideongoingsupportforoperatingormaintainingfacilitiesorcenters.
Theinstrumentacquiredordevelopedisexpectedtobeoperationalforregularresearchusebytheendoftheawardperiod.ForthepurposesoftheMRIprogram,aproposalmustbeforeitherac‐quisition(Track1)ordevelopment(Track2)ofasingle,well‐integratedinstrument.TheMRIpro‐gramdoesnotsupporttheacquisitionordevelopmentofasuiteofinstrumentstooutfitresearchlaboratoriesorfacilities,orthatcanbeusedtoconductindependentresearchactivitiessimultane‐ously.
InstrumentacquisitionordevelopmentproposalsthatrequestfundsfromNSFintherange$100,000‐$4millionmaybeacceptedfromanyMRI‐eligibleorganization.
Cost‐sharingofprecisely30%ofthetotalprojectcostisrequiredforPh.D.‐grantinginstitutionsofhighereducationandfornon‐degree‐grantingorganizations.Non‐Ph.D.‐grantinginstitutionsofhighereducationareexemptfromcost‐sharingandcannotincludeit.
Finding.TheMRIprogramhasbeenusedeffectivelybyGSinvestigatorstoacquireanddevelopinstrumentationtoaugmentresearchconductedatClass1facilitiesandtodevelopDASIprojectsthathavethecapacitytobecomeClass2facilities.
Recommendation8.5.TheGSshouldcontinuetoencourageandworkwithPIsapplyingforandreceivingMRIfundstodevelopinnovativenewinstrumentationforuseingeospacescienceresearch.ConsistentwiththefindingandrecommendationofSection7.6,whenadditionalfundswillberequestedfromtheGSforfutureM&OcostsfortheMRI,thefundingsource(s)andspaceintheGSFacilitiesbudgetshouldbeplannedwellinadvanceoftaking‐onthenewfacilities’costs.
Final 96 GS Portfolio Review
Alternatively,PIsshouldbeencouragedtoexplorenon‐NSFsourcesoffundingforfutureM&Ocosts.
Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC)
TheNationalScienceFoundation(NSF)definesafacilityunderMREFCasanessentialpartofthescienceandengineeringenterprisethatwilladvancescienceinwaysthatwouldnotbepossibleotherwise.Thefacilitycaneitherbecentralizedorconsistofdistributedinstallations.Theproject“shouldofferthepossibilityoftransformativeknowledgeandthepotentialtoshiftexistingpara‐digmsinscientificunderstandingandengineeringprocessesand/orinfrastructuretechnologyandshouldserveanurgentcontemporaryresearchandeducationneedthatwillpersistforyears”(NSF,2007).
MREFCprojectsaresolargethatthetotalconstructioncostswouldbe>10percentofthebudgetforthesponsoringdirectorateoroffice.Thus,fundingofthefacilitywoulddistortthebaseprogramoffundinginthatdiscipline(s)withoutMREFCfunding.Investmentsincomputingre‐sourcesandforsupportingcyberinfrastructurecanbeincludedinthedesignplanandtheconstruc‐tioncosts.DevelopmentoftheDKISTbytheNSF‐MPS‐ASTdivisionhasbeenenabledbyanMREFCgrant.
Finding.Todate,noGSfacilitieshavebeendevelopedwithMREFCfunds.TheMREFCprogramcouldprovidethemeansfordevelopmentofnext‐generationGSfacilitiesthathavethecapacitytotransformourunderstandingofgeospace.
Recommendation8.6.ConceptsappropriateforMREFCinvestmentingeospacesciencehavere‐centlyemergedinGScommunityforums(e.g.,attheconferenceonMeasurementTechniquesinSo‐larandSpacePhysicsheldinBoulderinApril,2015andatrecentCEDARandGEMwork‐shops).TheGSshouldencouragedevelopmentoftransformativefacilityconceptsappropriateforMREFCinvestmentbyco‐sponsoringcommunityworkshopstoadvanceinnovativenewconcepts.
Recommendation8.7.PlanningforapossiblefutureMREFCinvestmentshouldincludebudgetscenariosforhowM&Owouldbeaccommodatedforanewfacilityofthisscale,includingpossiblesunsettingofoneormoreexistingGSfacilities.
Software Infrastructure for Sustained Innovation (SI2)
NSF’sprogramforSoftwareInfrastructureforSustainedInnovation(SI2)isalong‐terminvest‐mentfocusedonrealizingaportionoftheCyberinfrastructureFrameworkfor21stCenturyScienceandEngineeringvisionandforcatalyzingnewthinking,paradigmsandpracticesinscienceanden‐gineering.Itenvisionsalinkedcyberinfrastructurearchitecturethatintegrateslarge‐scalecompu‐ting,high‐speednetworks,massivedataarchives,instrumentsandmajorfacilities,observatories,experiments,andembeddedsensorsandactuators,acrossthenationandtheworld,andthatena‐blesresearchatunprecedentedscales,complexity,resolution,andaccuracybyintegratingcompu‐tation,data,andexperimentsinnovelways.
TheobjectivesofthenewGSDataSystemsprogramrecommendedinSection7.4arewell‐alignedwiththegoalstheSI2program.SI2couldenableinvestmentsinnewGSdatasystemsatthreedifferentlevels:1)ScientificSoftwareElementsawardstargetingsmallgroupstocreateanddeployrobustsoftwareelementsforwhichthereisademonstratedneedthatwilladvanceoneormoresignificantareasofscienceandengineering;2)ScientificSoftwareIntegrationawardsthat
Final 97 GS Portfolio Review
targetlarger,interdisciplinaryteamsorganizedaroundthedevelopmentandapplicationofcommonsoftwareinfrastructureaimedatsolvingcommonresearchproblemsfacedbyNSFresearchersinoneormoreareasofscienceandengineering;and3)ScientificSoftwareInnovationInstitutesthatfocusontheestablishmentoflong‐termhubsofexcellenceinsoftwareinfrastructureandtechnologies,whichwillservearesearchcommunityofsubstantialsizeanddisciplinarybreadth.
SI2isanexcellentvehicleforaugmentingGSinvestmentsingeospacedatasystems.ThePRCoffersnoparticularrecommendationregardingSI2otherthantosuggestthattheGStocontinuetoencouragethegeospaceresearchcommunitytodevelopcompetitiveconceptsforfutureSI2invest‐ment.
Integrated NSF Support Promoting Interdisciplinary Research and Education (INSPIRE)
TheINSPIREprogramseekstosupportboldinterdisciplinaryprojectsinallNSF‐supportedar‐easofscience,engineering,andeducationresearch.INSPIREhasnotargetedthemesandservesasafundingmechanismforproposalsthatarerequiredbothtobeinterdisciplinaryandtoexhibitpo‐tentiallytransformativeresearch.ComplementingexistingNSFefforts,INSPIREwascreatedtohan‐dleproposalswhose:
Scientificadvanceslieoutsidethescopeofasingleprogramordiscipline,suchthatsubstan‐tialfundingsupportfrommorethanoneprogramordisciplineisnecessary.
Linesofresearchpromisetransformationaladvances.
Prospectivediscoveriesresideattheinterfacesofdisciplinaryboundariesthatmaynotberecognizedthroughtraditionalrevieworco‐review.
Finding.SuccessfulINSPIREproposalshaveaugmentedgeospacescienceaccomplishedinGSgrantsprograms.GSCubeSatprojects(Section6.6)alsoappeartobeagoodfitforINSPIREfunding,whichcouldleverageGSinvestmentCubeSats.
Finding.The INSPIRE program is designed to utilize mixed funding, with up to half of each award being provided by central funds and the rest shared between several divisions (programs). The INSPIRE funding model is set to change so that over the next 2 years, the central funding contribution will be phased out.
Recommendation.IfandwhenNSFcentralfundingforINSPIREprojectsphases‐out,theGSshouldcontinuetouseitsowninternalandwell‐establishedprocessestofundhigh‐qualityprojectsthatcrossthedisciplinaryboundariesofitscoregrantsprogramsandseekappropriatepartnersexternaltoGSforprojectsthatcrosssection,divisionordirectorateboundaries.
EPSCoR Research Infrastructure Improvement Program
ThemissionofEPSCoRistoadvanceexcellenceinscienceandengineeringresearchandeduca‐tioninordertoachievesustainableincreasesinresearch,education,andtrainingcapacityandcom‐petitivenessthatwillenableEPSCoRjurisdictionstohaveincreasedengagementinareassupportedbytheNSF.EPSCoRgoalsare:
toprovidestrategicprogramsandopportunitiesforEPSCoRparticipantsthatstimulatesustain‐ableimprovementsintheirR&Dcapacityandcompetitiveness;
toadvancescienceandengineeringcapabilitiesinEPSCoRjurisdictionsfordiscovery,innovationandoverallknowledge‐basedprosperity.
Final 98 GS Portfolio Review
EPSCoRobjectivesunderlyingtheprogramgoalsare:
tocatalyzethedevelopmentofresearchcapabilitiesandthecreationofnewknowledgethatex‐pandsjurisdictions'contributionstoscientificdiscovery,innovation,learning,andknowledge‐basedprosperity;
toestablishsustainableSTEMeducation,training,andprofessionaldevelopmentpathwaysthatadvancejurisdiction‐identifiedresearchareasandworkforcedevelopment;
tobroadendirectparticipationofdiverseindividuals,institutions,andorganizationsinthepro‐ject’sscienceandengineeringresearchandeducationinitiatives;
toeffectsustainableengagementofprojectparticipantsandpartners,thejurisdiction,thena‐tionalresearchcommunity,andthegeneralpublicthroughdata‐sharing,communication,out‐reach,anddissemination;
toimpactresearch,education,andeconomicdevelopmentbeyondtheprojectatacademic,gov‐ernment,andprivatesectorlevels.
Finding.CubeSatprojectssatisfymanycriteriaforEPSCoRfunding,whichhasbeenusedtoco‐fundsomeCubeSatprojects.EligibilitytocompeteinNSFEPSCoRprogramopportunitiesiscurrentlylimitedtotwenty‐fivestates,theCommonwealthofPuertoRico,Guam,andtheU.S.VirginIslands.
Recommendation8.8.GSPMsshouldencourageeligiblePIstopursueEPSCoRopportunitiestoleveragefundingforappropriategeospaceresearchandeducationalprojects.
CubeSats
TheGSCubeSatprogramtodatehasbeenastandaloneprogramfundedprimarilybytheGSwithmodestaugmentationsfromotherNSFprograms(e.g.,EPSCoR).
Recommendation8.9.InlinewiththefindingsandrecommendationsofSection6.6regardingthefutureoftheGSCubeSatprogram,theGSshouldexplorepossiblepartnershipsacrossNSF(andwithDoD,NASA,industry,internationalpartners)foraugmentingthescientificimpactofinvest‐mentsintheGSCubeSatprogram.
8.2 Interagency Partnerships
8.2.1 Department of Defense (DoD)
AnumberofexistingandfutureDoDprogramsarefocusedonuniversityresearchofdirectrel‐evancetotheresearchareasoftheGeospaceSection.AFOSRhasannouncedaMultidisciplinaryUniversityResearchInitiative(MURI)for2016on'ActiveIonosphere‐ThermosphereCoupling:MechanismsandEffects.'Theobjectiveofthisprogram'istocharacterizethethermosphericre‐sponsetospacestormsfromthepolarcaptoequatoriallatitudes,touncoverthebasicphysicalpro‐cessesthatdeterminewhereandhowtheI‐Tsystemrespondstoenergyinput,andtodeterminethemechanismsofenergydissipationintheionosphere.'ThisobjectivecapsulizesmuchoftheCE‐DARprogramaswellasmagnetosphere‐ionospherecouplingwithinthescopeoftheGEMprogram.Additionally,DoDsponsorsaDefenseUniversityResearchInstrumentationProgram(DURIP)withthegoaltoprovidemajorequipmentto'augmentcurrentordevelopnewresearchcapabilitiesinsupportofDoD‐relevantresearch.'AlthoughnofinancialrelationshipbetweenNSFandDoDexistsforthesetypesofprograms,instrumentationandmodelsdevelopedandimplementedundersuch
Final 99 GS Portfolio Review
DoDprogramsmaycontributetocriticalcapabilitiesforGSinvestigationsduringandafterthepe‐riodofperformanceoftheDoDcontract.
Finding.Innovativeinstrumentationandmodelshavebeendevelopedandimplementedforgeo‐spaceresearchbytheuniversityresearchcommunityusingfundsfromDoDprograms.Theusefullife‐timeoftheseDoDinvestmentsoftenexceedstheperiodofperformanceoftheoriginalDoDfunding.Insomecases,continuinguseoflegacyDoDinstrumentationandmodelsforgeospaceresearchhasbeensupportedbyGSgrants.
Recommendation8.10.TheGSshouldcarefullyreviewtheimpactonitsfacilitiesandgrantspro‐gramsofassumingM&OcostsforlegacyDoDinstrumentation.Whendoingsoiswell‐alignedwithDSandSectionsciencegoals,continuinguseofsuchequipmentmaybringsignificantaddedvaluetoGSprogramswithnoup‐frontcostsforinvestmentintheinstrumentdevelopment.TheGSshouldusetherecommendedSeniorReviewprocesses(Section6.7and7.7)todeterminetheover‐allvalueofassumingM&OcostsforlegacyDoDequipment.
8.2.2 Department of Energy (DoE)
NSF/DOE Partnership in Basic Plasma Science and Engineering
TheNationalScienceFoundation(NSF),withparticipationoftheDirectoratesforEngineering,Geosciences,andMathematicalandPhysicalSciences,andtheDepartmentofEnergy,OfficeofSci‐ence,FusionEnergyScienceshasco‐fundedthejointPartnershipinBasicPlasmaScienceandEngi‐neeringsince1997.Thegoalofthisprogramistoenhancebasicplasmaresearchandeducationinthebroadlyapplicable,multidisciplinaryfieldofplasmasciencebycoordinatingeffortsandcom‐biningresourcesofthetwoagencies.ThepartnershipencouragesbasicresearchintofundamentalplasmascienceandbasicplasmaexperimentsatNSFandDOEsupporteduserfacilities,suchastheBasicPlasmaScienceFacilityattheUniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,designedtoservetheneedsofthebroaderplasmacommunity.
Finding.Co‐sponsorshipofbasicplasmasciencethroughtheNSF/DOEPartnershipsignificantlyleveragesGSinvestmentsincriticalcapabilitiestomakeprogressonDSKeyScienceGoal4:Discoverandcharacterizefundamentalprocessesthatoccurbothwithintheheliosphereandthroughouttheuniverse.
Recommendation8.11.TheGSshouldcontinuetoparticipateintheNSF/DOEPartnershipandco‐fundresearchprojectsthataddressDSKeyScienceGoal4.
8.2.3 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Community Coordinated Modeling Center (CCMC)
TheCCMCisamulti‐agencypartnershiptoenable,supportandperformtheresearchanddevel‐opmentfornext‐generationspacescienceandspaceweathermodels.AsdescribedinChapter7,theGSco‐sponsorsCCMCalthoughthebulkofitsfundingcomesfromNASA.
Finding.CCMCmodelsandsimulationdatafromCCMCruns‐on‐requestareusedextensivelybythegeospacescienceandspaceweatherresearchcommunities.
Final 100 GS Portfolio Review
Recommendation8.12.TheGSshouldcontinuetoco‐fundCCMCatthecurrentlevelasrecom‐mendedinSection6.5.1).
NASA/NSF Partnership for Collaborative Space Weather Modeling
TheGSincollaborationwiththeNSF‐GEOPolarProgramsDivision,theAirForceOfficeofSci‐entificResearchandtheOfficeofNavalResearchfundsbasicresearchinsupportofnationalspaceweatherobjectives.Thissupportincludesthedevelopmentofspaceweathermodelsforspecifica‐tionandforecastofconditionsthroughoutthespaceenvironment.
Similarly,aprimarygoalofNASA'sLivingWithaStar(LWS)Programisthedevelopmentoffirst‐principles‐basedmodelsforthecoupledSun‐EarthandSun‐SolarSystem,similarinspirittothefirst‐principlesmodelsforthelowerterrestrialatmosphere.Suchmodelscanactastoolsforscienceinvestigations,asprototypesandtestbedsforpredictionandspecificationcapabilities,asframeworksforlinkingdisparatedatasetsatvantagepointsthroughouttheSun‐SolarSystem,andasstrategicplanningaidsforenablingexplorationofouterspaceandtestingnewmissionconcepts.
Becauseofthecommongoalsamongtheagencyprogramsdescribedabove,NASAandNSFhaveperiodicallyagreedtorenewtheirpartnershiptosupportnewroundsofStrategicCapabilities,large‐scaleresearchprojectsthataremoreambitiousthanthosetypicallysupportedbyasinglegrantbyeitherorganization.Thepartnershipfundsprojectstotalingapproximately$4M/yearwiththeGScontributionrunning$1.5M/year.
Finding.TheNASA/NSFPartnershipforCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelinghasbeeneffectiveinadvancingGSandDSsciencegoalsforspaceweatherresearch.ToassessitscontinuingalignmentwithbothGSandLWSsciencegoals,continuationofthepartnershipisreviewedbybothNASAandNSFat3‐5yearsintervalswhenanewAnnouncementofOpportunityisduetobereleased,
Recommendation8.13.TheGSshouldcontinuetheNASA/NSFPartnershipforCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelinginthecurrentmodusoperandiandaslongasitcontinuestoadvancespaceweatherresearchgoalsfortheGS(asrecommendedinSection6.5.2).
Grand Challenge Projects (GCP) Program
AGSGCPprogramisrecommendedinthisportfolioreview(Section6.5),andNASAiscurrentlyevaluatinganewHeliophysicsDivisionfundinglinetocreateHeliophysicsScienceCenterstopur‐sueGCR.SinceneithertheNSFnortheNASAprogramexiststoday,theextenttowhichthesciencegoalsofthetwoprogramswilloverlapisnotknown.TheDriveInitiativeoftheDecadalSurveyrec‐ommended“NASAandNSFtogethershouldcreateHeliophysicssciencecenterstotacklethekeyscienceproblemsofsolarandspacephysicsthatrequiremultidisciplinaryteamsoftheorists,ob‐servers,modelers,andcomputerscientists,withannualfundingintherangeof$1millionto$3mil‐lionforeachcenterfor6years,requiringNASAfundsrampingto$8millionperyear(plusin‐creasesforinflation).
ThisnascentprogramelementisacandidateforaNASA/NSFpartnership.Iftheirrespectivesciencegoalsandeligibilitycriteriaandmetricsforproposalselectionsarewell‐aligned,thensuchapartnershipcouldbeforgedandmanagedsimilarlytotheNASA/NSFPartnershipforCollabora‐tiveSpaceWeatherModeling.
Recommendation8.14.TheGSshouldexploreanewpartnershipwithNASAtocreateaco‐fundedGrandChallengeResearchprogram(asrecommendedinSection6.5.2).
Final 101 GS Portfolio Review
8.2.4 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
TheNSFGeospaceSectionsupportslong‐established,andmutuallybeneficial,partnershipswithNOAA.CollaborationsareprimarilywiththeSpaceWeatherPredictionCenter(SWPC),oneofNOAA’sNationalWeatherService(NWS),NationalCentersforEnvironmentalPrediction(NCEP),butalsowithNOAA’sNationalCenterforEnvironmentalInformation(NCEI,formerlyNGDC)wheredataaremadeavailabletoNSFsupportedscientists.
AnexampleofarecentpartnershipistheNSFScienceTechnologyCenter(STC),CenterforInte‐gratedSpaceWeatherModeling(CISM).STCgoalsincludeestablishingmeaningfullinksandbene‐fitstosocietyandpromotinglinkstofederalagencies.InthecaseofCISM,thiswasaccomplishedthrougha“KnowledgeTransfer”componentwithSWPCscientistsplayingkeyrolesthroughoutthe10‐yearprogram.Inaddition,oneofthemodelssupportedbyNSF’sCISM,theWang‐Sheeley‐ArgeEnlilmodelthatpredictssolarwindconditionsatEarth,waslatertransitionedtooperationsatSWPC.
TheGeospaceSectionhasalsobeenapartnerwithSWPC’sannualSpaceWeatherWorkshopthatbringstogetherspaceweatherresearch,applications,operations,andusers.Inanotherpart‐nership,NOAAiscontributingsubstantialresourcesforthelong‐termoperationsandmaintenanceoftheGlobalOscillationNetworkGroup(GONG)thatispartoftheNationalSolarObservatorysup‐portedbyNSF’sDivisionofAstronomicalSciences(AST).Inthispartnership,NOAAwillbecollect‐ingandprocessingdatafrom6sitesforuseinspaceweatheroperationsandmakingthesedata,re‐latedtoHimagesandCarringtonmagnetogrammaps,availabletotheentiresciencecommunity.
Inadditiontothesepartnerships,therearemanycollaborationsbetweenNSFsupportedorgan‐izationssuchastheNationalCenterforAtmosphereResearch(NCAR)HighAltitudeObservatory(HAO)andNOAASWPC,andbetweenNSFsupportedresearcherswhoutilizeNOAAdataintheirresearch.Withregardtoprograms,NSF’sGEM,CEDAR,andSHINEhavealwaysinvolvedparticipa‐tionfromSWPC,includingNOAAmembersonthesteeringcommitteesoftheseNSFledcommunityprogramsthat,inmanycases,improveourunderstandingandmodelingofprocessesrelatedtospaceweather,aswellasspacescience.
Finally,newandongoingopportunitiesforcollaborativeworkbetweenNSFandNOAAareidentifiedintheWhiteHouseOfficeofScienceandTechnologyPolicy(OSTP)NationalSpaceWeatherActionPlan.26
Finding.TheGSSWRprogram,currentlyincollaborationwithNASA,undertakesbasicandap‐pliedresearchforimprovedunderstandingofspaceweatherphenomenaandfordevelopmentof“stra‐tegiccapabilities”toimprovespaceweatherforecasting‐‐theprovinceofNOAA’sSWPC.Thissymbi‐oticrelationshipbetweenSWPCandtheGSSWRismutuallybeneficial.ItprovidesimportantsocietalcontextandrelevanceforGSresearch,anditenablesimprovedcapabilitiesforSWPC’sdirectivetoprovidespaceweatherforecasts.
Finding.CooperationbetweenNOAA’sSWPCandtheGSSWRprogramhasbeenmultifaceted,rangingfromcapability‐enablingthroughNOAA‐NSF(AST)co‐sponsorship,e.g.,theGlobalOscillationNetworkGroup,tosubstantialresearchcollaboration,e.g.,viaNSF’sformerCISMSTC,todataprovi‐sionforGSresearchderivedfromNOAAsatelliteandground‐basedmeasurements,toinformation
26 https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/nstc/docsreports
Final 102 GS Portfolio Review
sharingatCEDAR,GEM,SHINEandtheco‐sponsoredannualSpaceWeatherWeekworkshops.ThiscooperationhasrequiredverymodestresourcesfromtheGS.
Recommendation8.15.TheGSshouldcontinueitscollaborationwithNOAA’sSWPCthroughre‐sourceandinformationsharinginwaysthatareconsistentwitheachagency’srespectivegoalsinadvancingbasicandappliedknowledgeofspaceweatherandcapabilitiesforpredictingitseffects.
8.3 International Partnerships
ToaddresstheoutstandingresearchproblemsidentifiedintheDecadalSurvey,ground‐andspace‐basedmeasurementsofthegeospaceenvironmentfrommanydifferentpartsofthecoupledsystemarerequiredatincreasingtemporalandspatialresolution.Providingthiscapabilityisfarbeyondthecapacityofanyonenationandhenceinternationalcollaborationandcooperationareessential.ThisneedfordistributedgeophysicalmeasurementshasbeenrecognizedforwelloveracenturythroughinitiativessuchastheInternationalPolarYear(IPY)(1882‐83),thesecondIPY(1932‐33)andtheInternationalGeophysicalYear1957‐58.ExcellentinternationalcoordinationisalsoarrangedthroughthefamilyofscientificunionsandscienceorganizationsthataremembersoftheInternationalCouncilforScience(ICSU),togetherwithcooperationbetweenthenationalspaceagencies.
TheUShasbeenandcontinuestobeamajorcontributortointernationalprojectsandpro‐grams.NSF‐GSsupportsawiderangeofinternationalactivitiesonmanycontinents.Inthefuture,internationalcooperationislikelytoincreasegiventheemphasisonsystemscience,theever‐grow‐ingimportanceofspaceweather,andtheneedtomaximizethecost‐benefitofinvestments.Someofthemostimportantinternationalpartnershipsforground‐basedobservationofgeospacearesum‐marizedbelow.Thelistisbynomeansexhaustive.
ExamplesofinternationalcooperationforClass1facilitiesincludetheAreciboandJicamarcaISRsinPuertoRicoandPeru,respectively.TheUShasbeenthemajorityfinancialsponsorbutthehostnationsmakecriticallyimportantcontributionstothesuccessfuloperationofthefacility.TheseISRsalsohavestronglocalpublicoutreachandtechnicaltrainingprograms.
AnotherexcellentexampleofjointinternationaldevelopmentisRISR‐NandRISR‐C.Thefor‐merhasbeendevelopedwithfundsfromNSFandthelatterisfundedbyCanada.Theseradarsuti‐lizesimilartechnology,andwiththeradarsco‐locatedbutlookingindifferentdirections,significantscientificandtechnicalbenefitsaccrue,aswellasfinancialsavingsonM&Ocosts.
GS‐sponsoredinvestigatorshavealsoforgedanumberofimportantinternationalpartnershipstobroadenthescopeandgeographicreachofvariousClass2facilities,especiallyDASI‐likenet‐works.
SuperDARN(SuperDualAuroralRadarNetwork.)isaninternationalpartnershiptojointlyde‐sign,developandoperatecoherent‐scatterHFradarsforthepurposeofconductingresearchonEarth’sgeospaceenvironment.Theverylargefieldsofviewoftheradars(each~1Mkm2)allowawiderangeofscientifictopicstobestudiedincludingthestructureofglobalconvectionanditsre‐sponsetochangesininterplanetaryconditions,substorms,ULFwaves,gravitywaves,mesospherewindsandplasmairregularities.Alldataarefreelysharedamongstthepartners,andthevastma‐jorityofdataareopentoallscientistssoonaftercollection.
SuperDARNbeganintheearly1990sandprogressivelyexpanded.Itinvolves35radarstoday,
Final 103 GS Portfolio Review
supportedbythefundingagenciesofninecountries.TheUScontinuestobeamajorplayerinSu‐perDARN,supportingnearlyhalftheradars,andoperatinginbothhemispheres.
TheleverageofSuperDARNhasbeensignificant.Keystothissuccessincludetheexcellentspiritofinternationalcollaboration,andtheorganizationhasbeenbureaucraticallylight.SuperDARNisacriticalsystemforcurrentandfuturegeospacesystemscienceasitprovidesaglobalperspectiveonmanykeyprocessesofthecoupledsolarwind‐magnetosphere‐ionosphere‐thermospheresystem.
OtherexampleswhereNSFgrantfundinghasmadeasignificantcontributiontointernationalnetworksincludeLISN,anetworkofinstrumentsinvolvingeightcountriesinSouthAmer‐ica;GIMNAST–aUSextensionoftheCanadianground‐basednetworkofAllSkyImagers(ASIs)ini‐tiallydevelopedtosupporttheNASAThemismission;MagnetometerArrayforCuspandCleftStud‐ies(MACCS)‐ahighlatitudearrayofeighthigh‐timeresolutionmagnetometersandfourstandardobservatoriesinnortheasternCanada;andtherecentlyinitiatedTransitionRegionExplorer(TREx)–aCanadiannetworkunderdevelopmenttoreplaceandenhancetheTHEMIS‐ASIswith21allskyimagersin3differentwavelengthbandsand10imagingriometers(thesetobedevelopedwithfundsfromtheNSFMRIprogram).
Ampere,SuperDARN,SuperMAGandtheMadrigaldatabaseallharvestdatafromdifferentsourcesbothintheUSandoverseas.TheseClass2facilityactivitiesprovideaccesstothecalibrateddata.Theyalsoproducevalue‐addeddataproducts.Theseservicesrequiresignificantcooperationandgoodwilloftheinternationalpartnersbutthebenefitstoallgeospacescientistsareverysignifi‐cant.Someofthesedatacouldbemadeavailableinnearreal‐timeforapplicationinspaceweatherforecastingornowcasting,butatpresenttheneedforreal‐timedataforscientificpurposesisnoturgent.
MostofthesedevelopmentshavebeeninitiatedbyUSinvestigators,butopportunitiesalsoexistfortheUStoengageinnewinternationalfacilitiesdevelopedbyothernationalentities.Aprimeex‐ampleistherecommendationinSection7.4fortheUStobecomeapartnerinEISCATandparticu‐larlyEISCAT‐3Dtoprovideaccesstonewcapabilities.
Finding.USfundingforengagementininternationalpartnershipsprovidesexcellentleverageforadditionaldata,accesstoanexpandedbaseofscientificandtechnicalskillsandknowledge,andtonewandinnovativesoftwareandhardware.Significantbenefitsaccruetoallpartners.
Recommendation8.16.TheGSshouldcontinuetosponsorhighly‐ratedproposalstodevelop,de‐ployandoperatenewinstruments,instrumentnetworksanddataacquisition,especiallywhenGSresourcesfortheprojectareleveragedthroughinternationalpartnerships.
TheGSprovidesmodestsupportforworkshopsforthedevelopmentofnewideas,technologyand/orfacilities.Oftentheseinvolveinternationalexperts.AlsoGSsupportsUSrepresentatives,oftenNSFofficers,toattendoverseasmeetingswithsimilarobjectives.
Finding.GS‐fundedinternationalworkshopsandattendanceatinternationalplanningwork‐shopscancatalyzeexcitingandimportantnewopportunities.
Recommendation8.17.TheGSshouldcontinuetoprovidefundingforinternationalworkshops.
Final 104 GS Portfolio Review
Chapter 9. Recommended GS Portfolio
9.1. Balance of Investments
ThecurrentbalanceofinvestmentsintheGSportfolioamongcoregrantsprograms,strategicgrantsprogramsandfacilities(Figure3.1)ispartitionedintheFY2015budgetat33%,28%and38%,respectively,withtheremaining1%intheGSreserveaccount.Thebalanceofinvestmentsintherecommendedportfoliooutto2025maintainsthisapproximatebalancebutshifts2%offacili‐tiesfundingintostrategicgrantsprogramstoaddressDRIVEinitiativesrecommendedbytheDeca‐dalSurvey.Bytiltingthebalancetowardstrategicgrantsprograms,theGScanencourageandena‐bletheintegrativescienceelementsadvocatedbytheDS,inparticular,regardingpredictivescienceunderlyingspaceweatherapplicationsandlarge‐scopecross‐disciplinaryscience.
Provisionalbudgetsfortherecommendedportfolioin2020and2025aregiveninTable9.1,withrelativedistributionsshowngraphicallyinFigure9.1.Forcomparison,theFY2015budgetforeachcontinuinganddiscontinuedlineitemisalsoincluded.Inkeepingwithitscharge,thePRChasassumedthattheprojectedfuturebudgetsareflatininflation‐adjustedFY2015dollars.
Recommendationsforthevariouslineitemsintheportfolioareincludedinthenextsections.Additionaldetails,findingsandrecommendationsrelatedtotherecommendationsofChapter9arediscussedinChapters4‐8.
9.2. Core Grants Program
Thevitalityofthegeospacescienceenterprisedependscriticallyonavibrantcoregrantspro‐gram.ThePRCandmanymembersofthegeospacesciencecommunity(asexpressedinresponsestothesolicitationforcommunityinput)recommendmaintainingthecurrentleveloffundingforthecore(unsolicited)grantsprogram.Althoughahigherleveloffundingforcoregrantswasrecom‐mendedinsomecommunitycommentsandwouldmoderatetheproposalpressurereviewedinChanter4,thebalanceintheGSportfoliowouldhavetochangetoaccommodatesuchanincrease.IffutureGSbudgetsweretobemoreoptimisticthanassumed,augmentingthebudgetforthecoregrantsprogramwouldbebeneficial.
ThePRCisconcernedthatthecoregrantsprogram,attimes,maybeprovidingasignificantpor‐tionofitsbudgetfor“targeted”objectivessuchastheCAREERandthePost‐DoctoralFellowshipprograms.Whiletheseprogramsareofmeritintheirownright,andaresecuredbypeerreview,theyarenotcoreinthesensethatcoreisenvisioned:supportofinnovativefrontierresearchwith‐outregardtoanyspecificsconcerningtheproposer.
Recommendation9.1.TheGSshouldmaintaintheexistingbudgetsharefortheCoreGrantsPro‐graminAeronomy,MagnetosphericPhysicsandSolar‐TerrestrialResearchwithintheassumedin‐flation‐adjusted2015level(orgreater)forthenextdecade.Itshoulduseproposalpressureincon‐certwithportfoliobalancetodetermineanoptimumdistributionofinvestmentsacrossthethreeprograms.ThePRCrecognizesthatthebudgetallocationbetweencoreandtargetedgrantspro‐grams(CEDAR,GEM,SHINE)mayvaryfromyeartoyeardependingonthenumberandqualityofproposalssubmittedtothevariousgrantsprograms.GSprogrammanagersshouldcontinuetohavetheflexibilitytoadjustthesebudgetlinesinresponsetoproposalpressure,buttheyshouldstrivetomaintainaminimumbudgetforthecoreprogram.Agoodbalancefortheportfoliowouldbeatleast⅓oftheGSbudgetforthecoregrantsprogramsandnotlessthan$14‐15Mperyearshouldtheoverallbudgetdecline.
Final 105 GS Portfolio Review
Table 9.1 Recommended Portfolio in 2015 Dollars (x $1M)
Core Grants Program (Priority 1) 2015 2020 2025 %
AER (1)
Core†
6.14
14.4 14.4
Core
MAG (1) 3.88
STR (1) 4.36
Core Grant Total 14.38 14.4 14.4 33%
Strategic Grants Program (Priorities 1, 2, 3) Change from 2015 to 2020
CEDAR (1)
Targeted†
3.09
8.7 6.7
Stra
tegi
c
GEM (1) 2.63
SHINE (1) 2.98
Space Weather (1) IGS
1.50 1.55.0
Grand Challenge (2) 1.5
CubeSat (3) 1.50 1.0 1.0
FDSS (3) 0.60 0.6 0.6
Strategic Grants Total 12.30 13.3 13.3 30%
Class 1/2 Facilities (All priority 1) 2015a 2020 2025b,c
Faci
litie
s Arecibo d
Class 1‡
4.10 1.1
8.4
PFISR e 1.50 1.5
RISR-N e 1.50 1.5
Sondrestrom 2.50 0.0
Millstone Hill f 2.10 1.9
Jicamarca 1.35 1.4
SuperDARN
Class 2‡
0.96 1.0
4.8AMPERE 1.02 1.0
SuperMag 0.15 0.2
CCMC 0.50 0.5
CRRLg not a facility 1.20 0.0
Class 1/2 Facilities Subtotal 16.88 10.1 13.2
New Facilities Programs (Priorities 1, 2)
EISCAT (1) Class 1‡ 1.0 b
Data Systems (1) Class 2‡
0.5c
DASI (1) 1.6
Innovation & Vitality (2)
Upg
rade
s Instruments, Facilities 2.42.7
Community Models 0.3
New Facilities Programs Subtotal 5.8 2.7
Facilities Total 16.88 15.9 15.9 36%
Midscale Projects Line h out of budget $1-6M/year
GS Reserve 0.43 0.4 0.4 1%
Grand Total * 43.99 44.0 44.0 100%
NOTES
Priorities:(1)ScienceGrantsPrograms;SpaceWeather;Facili‐ties;EISCAT;DataSystems;DASI.(2)I&V;GCProjects.(3)Cu‐beSats;FDSS†2020/25budgetsplitbetweencore&targetedandbetweenin‐dividualprogramsincore&tar‐getedTBDbyproposalpressure
‡NewClass1/2facilitiesmaybedevelopedviaMRI,Midscale(ifcreated)orMREFCawards;ad‐ditionmayrequirediscontinua‐tionofotherfacilities
aBudgetvalueis3‐or5‐yearav‐eragebasedonmostrecentaward,exceptAOwhichisinthelastyearofa5‐yearcooperativeagreement
bEISCAT/EISCAT‐3DmembershipbecomesClass1facilityby2025
cNewDASI/DataSystemsprojectsbecomeClass2facilitiesby2025
dIfAOuseforGSresearchcannotbesecuredfor$1.1M,redirectits$1.1MbudgettotheI&VPro‐gram
ePFISR+RISR‐Nbudgetis$3M;delineated50/50here
fNewdatasystemslinetoabsorbMHMadrigalbudgetby2020
gCRRLisnotcurrentlyoperatingasafacility(Sec.7.2);itshouldseekfuturefundingfromcoreortargetedgrantsprograms.
hTobefundedonlywithaddi‐tionalfutureGSfunding;ifNSFdivestsfromAO,its$1.1MbudgetshouldbeaddedtotheI&VLine,aportionofwhichcouldgotoMidscaleProjects*GrandTotalexceedstheactualFY2015budgetof$43.56Mbe‐causeClass1/2facilitiesbudg‐etsare3‐and5‐yearaverages(seenotea)
Final 106 GS Portfolio Review
Fixedfractionalbudgetallocations(orapproximatelyfixed)foreachofthethreeGSdisciplinarygrantsprograms(AER,MAG,STR)andtheirassociatedtargetedprograms(CEDAR,GEM,SHINE)isnot,inthePRC’sview,themostprudentwaytoallocateresources.Relaxingthisrestrictionandal‐lowingproposalpressuretoplayaroleindeterminingrelativebudgetallocationsamongdisci‐plines,canachievegeospacescienceofhighervalue.Withtheexpectationthatgeospacesciencewillincreasinglyencompassmoreintegrativescience,disciplinaryboundariescanbeexpectedtoblurinthefuture.
Recommendation9.2.GSprogrammanagersshouldallowproposalpressuretoplayaroleindeterminingtherelativebudgetallocationsamongthecoregrantsprogramsinAER,MAGandSTRandamongthetargetedgrantsprogramsCEDAR,GEMandSHINE.
Thisrecommendationisreflectedinthe2020and2025budgetscenariosofthePortfolioRe‐viewwhereinseparatelineitemsforAER,MAGandSTRandforCEDAR,GEMandSHINEareelimi‐nated.
Figure 9.1. Relative budgets for GS program elements and Class 1/2 facilities itemized in Table 9.1 for FY
2015 and recommended distributions for 2020 and 2025. IGS in 2020 and 2025 includes the Space
Weather Modeling (SWM) and Grand Challenge Projects (GCP) programs. “Facilities Development” in
2020 includes support for initiation of a US EISCAT consortium, DASI facilities, Data Systems and an Inno‐
vation and Vitality (I&V) program. EISCAT becomes a Class 1 facility by 2025 and the DASI and Data Sys‐
tems lines become Class 2 facilities.
Final 107 GS Portfolio Review
9.3. Strategic Grants Programs
AsdiscussedinChapter6,CEDAR,GEMandSHINEarebothtargetedgrantsprogramsandstra‐tegicgrantsprogramsbecausetheytargetandcoordinatecampaigns,researchchallenges,eventstudies,focusgroupstudiesandworkshopsessionswhileservingtoinformanddevelopcommu‐nityvisionforstrategicresearchdirections.Animportantelementofeachofthethreetargetedgrantsprogramisthefundingallocatedfortheirverypopularandhighlyregardedcommunityworkshops.Strategicresearchdirectioncrystallizesintheseworkshopsandinthereviewpanelse‐lectionsofproposalssubmittedtothetargetedgrantsprograms.
TheDRIVEinitiativeoftheDSrecommendsthatNSFpartnerwithNASAto“createHeliophysicssciencecenterstotacklethekeyscienceproblemsofsolarandspacephysicsthatrequiremultidis‐ciplinaryteamsoftheorists,observers,modelers,andcomputerscientists”.ThisproposedstrategicgrantprogrameffectivelyanticipatestherecenttrendintheGSgrantsprogramstofundlargecol‐laborativeprojects.However,theenvisionedinitiativetocreatesciencecenterscallsforanevenhigherdegreeofmultidisciplinaritythanispresentlyoccurringintheGSgrantsprograms.TheGStargetedgrantsprogramshavebeenundertakingcommunity‐drivenresearchchallengesandor‐ganizinggrandchallengeworkshopssincetheirinception.ThePRCseesaspectsoftheproposedsciencecentersasanaturalprogressionintheevolvingdirectionofcommunity‐drivengrandchal‐lengeprojectswithonesignificantexception.Thecenterconceptconveysenduringinstitutionalfir‐mamentwithvisionandmission.Incontrast,agrandchallengeprojectbringsresourcestobearonastrategicresearchproblemandhasresearchgoalsandobjectives.Itsolvesormakessignificantprogressinsolvingtheproblemandthendiminishesinintensityofefforttomakewayforotherpressingstrategicresearchproblems.
Recommendation9.3.TheGSshouldinitiateanewstrategicgrantsprogram,GrandChallengeProjects,initiallywithabudgetof$1.5Mperyearby2020.
TheGrandChallengeProjectsmodelismoreconsistentwithcommunity‐driven,collaborativeresearchinitiativesemergingfromGStargetedgrantsprogramsthanwouldbeaHeliophysicsSci‐enceCentermodel.Itwillalsoencouragegreatercross‐disciplinarityandgreateremphasisoninte‐grativeandsystemsciencethanpresentlyoccursinthemoredisciplinary‐oriented,targetedgrantsprograms.
TheDecadalSurveyrecommendsmaintainingandgrowingbasicresearchprogramsatNSF(andatNASA,AFOSRandONR)formoreeffectivetransitionfrombasicresearchtospaceweatherforecastingapplications.ThesuccessfulNASA‐NSFPartnershipforCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelinghasmaintainedabasicresearchprogramwiththisobjectiveforthepast10+years.AsdiscussedinSections6.5and8.2,thePRCgenerallyendorsescontinuationofthecollaborationaslongasthesciencegoalsfortheNASAandNSFprogramsarealigned.Themodestincreaseinspaceweatherfundingintherecommendedportfoliobeyond2020couldbeusedtoaugmentacontinu‐ingNASA‐NSFPartnership,oritmightfundamodestGS‐onlyspaceweatherprogramsimilartotheonethatexistedpriorto2011.
Recommendation9.4.ThebudgetforIntegrativeGeospaceScience,includingSpaceWeatherModelingandGrandChallengeProjects,shouldgrowfrom$3Mperyearin2020to$5Mperyearby2025byacquiringIGSprojectsfundedbytheTargetedGrantsPrograms.
Thedesignationof$2MfromtheTargetedGrantsProgramstoIGSby2025isnotconsideredsomucharedirectionofresourcestoadifferenttypeofresearchbutarecognitionandmoreaccurate
Final 108 GS Portfolio Review
accountingoftheactualnatureofresearchthathasbeencontinuingunabatedintheseprogramsandisexpectedtocontinuewellintothefuture.
Recommendation9.5.Withtheassumptionthatfutureresearchincoreandtargetedgrantspro‐gramswillentailanincreasingnumberofcollaborativeprojectsdevotedtointegrativeandcross‐disciplinarygeospacescience,theGSshouldmigratefuturefundingforsuchprojectsintostrategicgrantsprogramsforSpaceWeatherresearchandGrandChallengeProjects.Astheseprojectsmi‐gratefromeithercoreortargetedgrantsprogramsintoSpaceWeatherResearchorGrandChal‐lengeProjectsgrants,thecoregrantsprogrambudgetshouldremainapproximatelyconstant(orgrowiffuturebudgetsaremoreoptimisticthanflat)whilethebudgetfortargetedgrantsprogramdecreases.
AsdiscussedinSection6.6,theGSCubeSatProgramhasbeenapioneeringeffortandhasdemonstratedthat(1)inexpensivesmallsatellitemissionsareviable,(2)theyareaneffectivevehi‐cleforstimulatinginterestinSTEMeducationamonguniversitystudents,especiallyundergradu‐ates,and(3)usefulsciencecanbeaccomplishedbysuchmissions.InterestinCubeSatshasbroad‐enedwellbeyondtheGS,andithasbecomeatrulyemergentcapability.WhiletheGSshouldcon‐tinuetoplayakeyroleinthescientificutilizationofCubeSats,itisimportantthatthefocusandlevelofsupportforthisprogrambecommensuratewithitsvaluepropositionforadvancinggeo‐spacescience.ThePRCrecommendsthattheGScontinueitsCubeSatProgram,atasomewhatre‐ducedlevel,buttheSectionshouldconsiderpossiblepartnershipswithotheragenciesorindustrytoaccomplishmoresciencefortheinvestmentintheprogram.ACubeSatprogrammightalsobeofinterestandutilityinotherdivisionsoftheNSF.Indeed,theDSrecommendationtoincreasethenumberofnewCubeSatsstartsperyearwithasuitablyaugmentedbudgetwasdirectedtoNSFasawholeandnottotheGSalone.MoregeneralrecommendationstoNSFarebeyondthePRC’schar‐ter.
Recommendation9.6.GSshouldcontinueitsCubeSatProgramwithafocusonmissionconcept,instrumentdevelopmentandscienceexploitationofthedatawhilepartneringwithotherentitieswithengineeringexperienceinthedevelopmentofCubeSatbuses.ThePRCrecommendsanannualbudgetof$1MforthereducedscopeofGSCubeSatmissiondevelopment.
TheGSProgramforFacultyDevelopmentinSpaceSciences(FDSS),inadditiontofundingca‐reerdevelopmentandresearchofearly‐careerfacultyinthespacesciences,hasthebroaderimpactofestablishingbulwarksforspacescienceinuniversitydepartments.Thisimpactincludesthetransmissionoftaxpayer‐fundedknowledgeofthespaceenvironmentoftheEarthandsolarsystemtostudentsinastronomyandgeneralsciencecoursesthatoftendonotincorporatesuchknowledge.TheprimarymetricforsuccessoftheFDSSprogramisthenumberforFDSSfacultywhohaveachievedtenure.Withan88%successrate(7/8)todate,theprogrammaybedoingbet‐terthantheaveragetenurerateforjuniorfacultyatlarge.
Recommendation9.7.GSshouldcontinuetosupporttheFDSSprogramwithanannualbudgetof$0.6M(cf.Section4.2).
PrioritiesinGSgrantsprogramsenablingcorefrontierscience,strategicscienceinitiativesandspecialprogramsforworkforcedevelopmentwillnaturallyevolveinresponsetonewscienceimperatives,newfundingopportunitiesarisingwithinNSFandbeyond,andprospectivenewpartnershipsthathavethecapacitytoleverageGSresources.ChangesinfundingprioritiesinGSgrantsprogramshavetypicallybeenmadebytheGSHeadandProgramManagersinconsultationwithvariousstandingsteeringcommitteesandadhocreviewcommitteeschargedwithoversight
Final 109 GS Portfolio Review
orreviewofsomespecificprogramelement.Aformal,semi‐decadalreviewofallgrantsprogramswouldprovideamoreholisticreviewoftheeffectivenessofthegrantsprogramsinmeetingDecadalSurveyandGeospaceSectionsciencegoals.
Recommendation9.8.TheGSshouldimplementasemi‐decadalSeniorReviewofitsCoreandStrategicGrantsPrograms,asdescribedinSection6.7.
9.4. GS Facilities Program
Althoughthefacilitiesbudgetisreducedbyonly2%intherecommendedportfolio,theactualchangesintherecommendedGSFacilitiesProgramaresubstantial.RecommendedchangesincludeterminationoftheSondrestromISRanda73%reductionintheGScontributiontoAreciboObser‐vatory(AO)funding,from$4.1MinFY2016to$1.1Mby2020.Thesetwochangesmake$5.5Mavailableforalternativeinvestmentsintheportfolio.
TherelativelyhighlatitudeoftheSondrestromISRhasmadeitastalwartforcuspresearchformorethantwodecades.Sondrestrom’srelativelyhighbudgetisdriveninpartbythelogisticsofop‐eratinginGreenlandandbyhigherM&Ocostsforitsolderdishandklystron‐tubetechnology.InplaceoftheSondrestromISR,thePRCrecommendsforginganewpartnershipwiththeEISCATcon‐sortium.The$1MannualcostofassociatemembershipinEISCATissubstantiallylessthan$2.5MbudgetforSondrestrom.TheEISCATSvalbardfacilityalsosamplescusplatitudes,andthegeomag‐neticlatitude‐localtimepositioningofthePFISR(auroral),RISR‐N/RISR‐C(bothpolarcap)andtheEISCATSvalbard(cusp)ISRmayofferadvantagesoverSondrestromforsomecoordinatedpolarregionstudies.EISCAT‐3D,anewmultistaticradarcomposedoffivephased‐arrayantennafields,isexpectedtoreplacetheEISCATsystematKirunaby2020.
MembershipinESICATcurrentlytakesoneofseveralforms.(1)Arollinglong‐termcommit‐mentof5yearsasanassociatememberwithafundingcommitmentofabout$1Mperyear.Termi‐nationofthemembershipwouldrequireaphase‐outperiodof5years.SuchamembershipwouldallowtheUStohaveaseatontheEISCATCouncilwhichwouldconsistoftwopersons,onetorepre‐sentthefundingagencyandonetorepresentthechiefscientist.ThismembershipwouldprovideaccesstoallarchivalEISCATdataimmediatelyaswellastheopportunitytoparticipateinspecificobservingprogramsgearedtoachievescienceobjectives.ThememberwouldhaveaccesstoCom‐monProgramsthatwouldincludeimmediatedataanalysisoftheobservationstoyielddataprod‐uctsthatcouldbeappliedimmediatelyforscienceanalysis.Normally,aone‐yearembargoisim‐poseduponanyobservationsobtainedbyaMembernation.(2)Affiliatemembershipincursauserfeeofabout$25,000forabout8hoursEISCATobservingtime.Multipleaffiliatesfromasinglecountryarepossible.(3)Peer‐reviewedscienceprojectsareawarded200‐300hoursayear.TheawardsaremadebasedontheproposedresearchanditsevaluationbyEISCATscientists.
Recommendation9.9.TheGSshouldterminatefundingfortheSondrestromISRfacilityafterthecurrentcontinuinggrantforitsmanagementandoperationends(December2017).Ancillaryin‐strumentationforgeospacestudiesandtheiroperationalcostsatSondrestromshouldbebudgetedanddecidedbyapeerreviewprocessfromtheCoreorTargetedGSprograms.
Recommendation9.10.TheGSshouldinvestigatecostsandcontractualarrangementsforU.S.in‐vestigators’accesstotheexistingEISCATfacilitiesandtotheplannedEISCAT‐3Dfacility.Ifnobar‐rierstosystemuseanddataaccessarise,NSFinvestigatorscouldbeginusingtheEISCATsystemsoonafterthecurrentcontinuinggrantforSondrestromM&Oexpires.
Final 110 GS Portfolio Review
TheGScontributiontotheArecibocooperativeserviceagreementis$4.1MinFY2016.ThiscostisincommensuratewithArecibo’svalueforgeospacescience,andithasasignificantadverseimpactonthebalanceofinvestmentsintheGSportfolio.NSFdivestmentfromAOiscurrentlyun‐derstudybytheNationalScienceBoard,withunknownimplicationsforfutureoperationofthefa‐cilitybyNSF.
Recommendation9.11.TheGSshouldreduceitsM&OsupportfortheAreciboObservatory(AO)to$1.1Mby2020,i.e.,toaproportionalproratalevelapproximatelycommensuratewithitsfrac‐tionalNSFGSproposalpressureandusageforfrontierresearch.
TerminationofSondrestromISRfunding(Recommendation9.9)andthereductioninAOfund‐ing(Recommendation9.11)couldoccurinonestepwhentheircurrentagreementswithNSFex‐pire(September2016forAO,December2017forSondrestrom)orviaaprogressiveramp‐downtoward2020(to$1.1MforAOand$0forSondrestrom)uponexpirationoftheircurrentagree‐ments.Withoutastepchangeorramp‐downinfundingforthesefacilities,thenewinitiativesrec‐ommendedbythePRCwouldnothavesufficientfundstobeinplaceby2020.
IfNSFdivestsfromAOinthenearfutureoriftherecommendedlevelofsupportforAOpre‐ventsGSresearchers’futureaccesstothefacility,Recommendation9.16belowrecommendsanal‐ternativedispositionofthe$1.1MGScontributiontoAO.
TherecommendedchangesinGSinvestmentsinAOandSondrestrom,discountedbytheex‐pectedcostofjoiningEISCAT,open10%intheGSbudgetforimplementationofDSrecommenda‐tionsforNSF.Thiswedgefallsshortoftheestimated25%increaseintheGSbudgetrequiredforfullimplementationofDSrecommendations(Section3.2),butitdoesallowinitiationofimportantnewprogramelementsthatwillprovidecriticalcapabilities:ADistributedArrayofScientificIn‐struments(DASI)ProgramleadingtonewClass2facilities(seeSection7.2);aDataSystemsPro‐gramtoenabledeploymentofnewsystemsfordatamanagement,productsanddistribution,alsoexpectedtoevolveintonewClass2facilities;andanenduringInnovationandVitalityProgramforupgradestofacilitiesandmodels.Allareexpectedtobeinplaceby2020.
TheDRIVEinitiativeoftheDSdirectsNSFtoprovidefundingsufficientforessentialsynopticandmultiscaleobservations.Distributedmeasurementsarerequiredtoprovidesynopticground‐basedobservationsofgeospacephenomena.DASInetworkscanfulfillthisrequirement.Therecom‐mendedportfolioincludesanexplicitlineitemforDASIdevelopment,deploymentandoperation.
Recommendation9.12.TheGSshouldcreateanewDASIFacilitiesProgramwitha$1.6Mannualbudget.ThisfundshouldbeusedinitiallytodevelopandimplementoneormoreDASIClass2facili‐tieswithconceptselectiondeterminedbypeerreview.ForafullyoperationalDASItotransitiontoaClass2facility,itmustsatisfythecriteriaforacommunityfacilityasdefinedinSection7.2.
Inmostcases,operationalcostsforaDASIareexpectedtobelessthandevelopmentandimple‐mentationcosts.AsmoreDASIfacilitiesbecomeoperational,atsomepointtheannualbudgetforDASIwillbefullysubscribedbyDASIoperations.WhenthisoccursanewDASIcannotbedevelopedwithoutanincreaseintheGSbudgetforDASIorwithoutdefundingoneormoreexistingDASIfacil‐itiestomakefundsavailablefornewdevelopments.ArigorousseniorreviewforDASIprogramswillberequiredtodeterminethefutureoftheDASIprogram,andfuturenewinitiativesintheDASIprogram.
TheDecadalSurveycallsforNASAtoaugmentitsdatasystemssupportfortheHeliophysicsSystemObservatory(DecadalSurveyTable4.1).DatafromNSF‐sponsoredGBOsareincreasingly
Final 111 GS Portfolio Review
beingcombinedwithHSOdataforsynopticstudiesofgeospacephenomena.GSground‐basedas‐setsineffectconstituteelementsofanemergingNSF‐sponsoredGeospaceSystemObservatory(GSO).NSFshouldaugmentitssupportforGSOdatasystems.TheMadrigalsystemdevelopedbytheMillstoneHillObservatorymanagesdatamainlyfortheAeronomycommunity.TheSuperMAGprojectmanagesdatafromUSandinternationalground‐basedmagnetometers.SuperDARNdataaremanagedbytheSuperDARNconsortium,anddatamanagementforAMPEREishandledbytheAMPEREPIinstitution.Otherdatasetsofutilityforgeospacesciencearebeingmanagedinamoreadhocmanner.ThePRCdoesnotnecessarilyadvocateasingledatasystemfordataderivedfromallGSassets,butmoreeffectivecoordinationofthesedatasetsanddevelopmentofvalue‐addeddataproductswouldimprovetheiraccessibilityandutilityforgeospacescience.KeyelementsoftherecommendeddataenvironmentarelistedinTable4.1oftheDecadalSurvey.
Recommendation9.13.TheGSshouldfundanewDataSystemsProgramfordataexploitationwithanannualbudgetof$0.5M,ofwhich$0.15MshouldberedirectedfromthecurrentMillstoneHillObservatorybudgetfortheMadrigalsystem.Selectionofaproposal(s)fordevelopmentandmanagementofthenewsystemshouldbedeterminedbypeerreview.Oncethesystembecomesfullyoperational,itshouldbecomeaClass2facility,withcompetitiverenewalsdeterminedbypeerreview.
AllGSfacilities,computermodelsanddatasystemsrequireperiodicupgradestomaintainstate‐of‐artcapabilities.AdedicatedGSfundforsuchupgradesdoesnotcurrentlyexist.Pastup‐gradeshavebeenadhoc,sometimesdealingwithurgentunscheduledmaintenanceorfailedcom‐ponents,andtheyareoftenfundedthroughnegotiationwithGSProgramManagers.Somefacilitieshaverequiredupgradesformanyyears,yetfundshavenotbeenavailableforthem.ThePRCrec‐ommendsanewenduringprogramdedicatedtomaintainingstate‐of‐artcapabilitiesofGSfacilities.
Recommendation9.14.TheGSshouldfundaFacilitiesInnovationandVitality(I&V)Programwithanannualbudgetreachingasteady‐statevalueof$2.7Mby2020.AllocationofI&VProgramfundsshouldbedecidedusingapeer‐reviewproposalprocesstodetermineimprovementsofgreatestvalueinanygivenyearforinstrument,facilityand/orcommunitymodelupgrades.ThebudgetscenarioinTable9.1providesnotionalbudgetaryguidanceonanapproximate,averagepar‐titionofthefundbetweeninstrumentandfacilityupgradesandmodelupgrades.
InreviewingtheConsortiumofResonanceandRayleighLidars(CRRL),whichisfundedasaGSfacility,thePRCreachedtheopinionthatCRRLascurrentlyorganizedanddirectedisnotoper‐atingasacommunityfacility(seeSections7.2and7.3).WhilethemeasurementtechniquesbeingadvancedbyCRRLandthemeasurementsthemselvesareinnovative,thePRCdoesnotrecommendfundingaPI‐ledresearchactivityfromthefacilitiesbudget.Suchresearchisappropriateforfund‐ingfromthecoreortargetedgrantsprograms.TheCRRLmightachievefacilitiesclassbyadoptingthecharacteristicsofcommunityengagementdescribedinSection7.2.Forthisreason,thebudgetforCRRLbecomeszeroby2020intherecommendedGSfacilitiesbudget.
ThebudgetscenariothatenablesthenewgrantsandfacilitiesprogramsdescribedaboveandlistedinTable9.1isillustratedinFigure9.2.ThescenariousesreprogrammedfundsfromtheSondrestrom($2.5M)andCRRL($1.2M)facilitylineitems,$3MoftheArecibobudget,aportionoftheCubeSatprogrambudget($0.5M)andtheMillstoneHillbudgetforcommunitydatasystems($0.2)toimplementthefirstphaseby2020.WithsubsequentdevelopmentofnewDASIfacilities,communityDataSystemsandaUSconsortiumforEISCATparticipation,thesefacilityelementsbecomeClass1/2facilitiesby2025.ThecurrentSpaceWeatherModelingprogramcombinedwith
Final 112 GS Portfolio Review
therecommendedGrandChallengesProjectsprograminitiateanIntegrativeGeospaceScience(IGS)programby2020.Thisprogramisenvisionedtoacquire$2MofadditionalinvestmentfromprojectsalignedwithIGSgoalsandoriginallyfundedbytheTargetedGrantsprograms.
Theindividualfacilitiesbudgetsfor2015inTable9.1areaveragevaluesdeterminedfromthecurrent3‐or5‐yearawardtothefacility.TheexceptionisArecibo,whichisinitsfinalyearofaco‐operativeserviceagreement.ThelineitemforAreciboisitsFY2016budgetrequestedfromtheGS.
Arecibo
4.1
2.5
1.2
1.5
9.5
0.2
1.1Arecibo or MSP
2.7
1.6
0.5
1.0
Innovation& Vitality
DASI
Data Systems
EISCATSondrestrom
MH/Data Systems
CRRL
CubeSat
CubeSat
2015
2020
Reprogram
1.5
1.0
5.0
1.5
8.7
Grand ChallengeProjects
Space WeatherModeling
Targeted GrantsPrograms
1.1Arecibo or MSP
CubeSat
2025
1.0
5.0
6.7
Intgrative Geospace
Science(SWM and GCP)
TGP
2.7
Innovation& Vitality
Incorporationas facilities
3.1
3.1
2015 program elementsand facilities with budgets
reprogrammed by 2020
Figure 9.2. Program elements in Table 9.1 with budget changes going from 2015 to 2020 and 2025. Son‐
drestrom, CRRL and the community data systems line item in Millstone Hill are eliminated as facilities by
2020. The Arecibo budget is reduced from $4.1M to $1.1M. If NSF divests from Arecibo in the future, the
$1.1M for AO science is redirected to a GS Mid‐Scale Projects (MSP) line. The CubeSat program is reduced
from $1.5M to $1.0M. New facilities development programs initiated by 2020 (EISCAT, Data Systems and
DASI) become incorporated as Class 1/2 facilities by 2025. Space Weather Modeling (SWM) is carried from
2015 to 2020 with a flat $1.5 M budget and is combined with the Grand Challenge Projects (GCP) program
(launched by 2020) to form an Integrative Geospace Science program by 2025. Their combined budgets
of $3M in 2020 grow to $5M by 2025 by acquiring $2M in projects from the Targeted Grants Programs.
Final 113 GS Portfolio Review
TherecommendedbudgetsforClass1andClass2facilitiesinTable9.1purposelydonotspec‐ifylineitemsforindividualfacilitiesin2025toemphasizethat(1)nofacilitynoritscurrentbudgetshouldbeconsideredenduringand(2)someturnoverinfacilitiesisconsideredhealthyasnewtechnologiesandnewscientificknowledgeandmeasurementtechniquesemerge.Thusinresponsetoevolvingscience,modeling,instrumentationandfacilitiesimperativesofthefuturesomeoftheGSfacilitiesin2025arelikelytobequitedifferentthanthosesupportedtoday.
Recommendation9.15.GoingforwardtheGSshouldstrivetomaintainabalancedportfolioofcut‐ting‐edgefacilitiesandshouldperiodicallyevaluatetheperformanceandbudgetofeachfacilityagainstDecadalSurveyandGeospaceSectionsciencegoalsusingtheFacilitiesSeniorReviewpro‐cessdescribedinSection7.8.
AMidscaleProjectsProgramrepresentsasignificantopportunityforaugmentationofGSsci‐ence,which,consideringthecompellingandmaturenatureofpotentialnext‐generationground‐basedobservatoriesdiscussedintheDS,islikelytoofferhighreturnoninvestmenttotheNSF.TheMidscaleProjectsProgramrecommendedbytheDSisintendedtofundprojectswithdevelopmentcostsintherangeof$4‐30M.Unfortunately,thiscostdoesnotfitintocurrentGSbudgetenvelopeandisnotexplicitlyincludedintherecommendationportfolioinTable9.1.However,asdiscussedinSection7.7,thePRCwouldrecommendaMidscaleProjectsProgramifoneorbothofthefollow‐ingconditionsaremet.
Recommendation9.16.IfuseoftheAreciboObservatoryisnolongeravailabletoGSresearchers,e.g.,duetodivestmentorinsufficientfundingforitscontinuingoperation,andtheGSbudgetre‐mainsatorabovetheflatfundinglevelassumedforthePortfolioReview,thentherecommendedannualfundingof$1.1MforAreciboshouldberedirectedtotheInnovationsandVitalityProgramdescribedinSection7.4.DependingoncommunityconsensusandtherecommendationsfromtheFacilitiesSeniorReviewrecommendedabove,asignificantportionofthisaugmentedI&VannualbudgetmightbeappliedtoinvestmentinanewMidscaleProjectProgram.
Recommendation9.17.IffutureGSbudgetsexceedtheflat‐budgetassumptionofthisreviewby$1Mperyearorgreater,thentheadditionalannualfundingshouldbedirectedtoaMidscalePro‐jectsProgram.
9.5. Prioritizations
ThePRCwaschargedwithprioritizingelementsoftherecommendedportfolioinsufficientde‐tailtoenableGStomakesubsequentappropriateadjustmentsinresponsetovariationsinFederalandnon‐Federalfunding.ShouldfutureGSfundingbelessoptimisticthanflat,therecommendedportfolioinTable9.1giveshighestpriorityinrankordertothecoreandtargetedgrantsprograms,facilities,thespaceweathergrantsprogram,EISCATmembershipandthenewDataSystemsandDASIprograms.ThefacilitiesInnovationandVitalityprogramandtheGrandChallengeProjectsprogramarerankedequallyassecondpriorityprograms.TheFDSSandCubeSatprogramsarethelowestpriorityprogramsintheportfolio.
IffutureGSbudgetsaremoreoptimisticthanassumedforthisreview,anewMidscaleProjectsProgramshouldbeinitiatedwithhighestpriorityiftheadditionalfundsincludingsomeportionoftheI&Vlinearesufficienttofunda$4‐30Mmidscaleprojectoverafive‐yearperiod.Ifalesserbudgetincreaseoccurs,Priority1programsshouldbeaugmentedwithrelativeprogramincreaseslefttotheSection’sdiscretion,followedbyaugmentationintheGrandChallengeProjectsprogramthentheCubeSatprogram.
Final 114 GS Portfolio Review
9.6. GS Management Processes
ThePRCwouldliketoacknowledgecordialinteractionswithAGSDirectorPaulShepson,re‐centlyappointedSectionHeadThereseMorettoandallGSPMsandactingHeadsoverthecourseofthisreview.Theircandidopinionsandresponsestorequestsforinformationthroughouttheport‐folioreviewhelpedthePRCunderstandmanyaspectsofGSprograms.TheserequestsattimesmusthavebroughttomindtheSpanishInquisition.
ThepastyearhasbeenadifficulttimeoftransitionfortheGS,andthistransitionaddedcompli‐cationstothereviewprocessthatwerenotanticipatedwhenthecommitteeaccepteditscharge.Duringtheroughlyninemonthsofthereview,thePRCinteractedwiththreedifferentSectionHeads,twodifferentfacilityPMs,twodifferentAERPMs,andthethreestandingPMsfortheMAG,STRandSWRprograms.SomeoftheGSstaffwereontemporaryassignmenttotheSectionand,whileknowledgeableandcapable,werenotnecessarilypreparedtodealwiththedemandsofafirst‐everGSportfolioreview.Theyrespondedadmirably.
Changesinstaffandmanagementoccurinallorganizations,andthebeststrategyformanagingasmoothtransitionrequiresmaintainingahighdegreeoftransparencyinprogramoperationsandaccounting.ThePRCcanrecommendseveralimprovementsinGSorganizationalprocesses,whichwouldmakefuturereviewsofthistypemorestraightforwardandefficient,facilitatesmoothertran‐sitionsfortheinevitablechangesthatwilloccurinGSprogrammanagementandbuildstrongerre‐lationshipswiththeGScommunity.
Developaccurate,completeandtransparentlyunderstandabledatametrics,includingsuc‐cessrates(NSF‐standard)forallgrantsinthevariousprogramsoftheSection.Bothhistori‐caldataanddataforthecurrentfiscalyearareusefulforunderstandingtrendsandinas‐sessingthevitalityofthegrantsprograms;27
ConsiderasetoftheabovedefinedmetricstomakepublicallyavailableontheSection’swebportal;
SeparatefullyfundedGSresearchproposalsfromspecialcategoriesofawards,suchascon‐ferenceawards,MRIawardsandco‐fundedprojectssuchasCAREER,AGSPostdoc,NSF/DOEpartnership
Track,maintainandpublishdataonworkforceissues,e.g.,diversityandgender,forawardsandforpostdocsineachprogram.Forgrants,itwouldalsobedesirabletotrackyearssincethePIreceivedthePhD;
27 *Historical budget data (2014 and earlier) provided to the PRC for the GS programs changed with section heads during the portfolio review, indicating that the Section may not have a common and readily accessible extraction procedure or format for such data. The PRC received data on proposal success rates that were determined in at least three different ways, e.g., collaborative proposals were counted as one proposal by the NSF budget office and as multiple proposals by the GS based on the number of collaborating institutions. For the targeted programs (CE‐DAR, GEM, SHINE), the denominator in success rates appear to have been determined by the number of proposals received in the fiscal year rather than on proposal actions. Use consistent criteria for identifying facilities. The com‐mittee learned late in the review about one Class 2 facility not previously identified to the committee by either Fa‐cilities PM serving during the review, perhaps because different GS staff have different ideas about what consti‐tutes a facility. The committee recommends using the criteria given in Section 7.2 to differentiate facilities from PI‐led research.
Final 115 GS Portfolio Review
Asdifficultasitmaybetodoso,thePRCrecommendstrackingM&Ocostsingrantsandfa‐cilitiesawards.MaintainadatabasefortheportionoftheGSbudgetdevotedtoM&O.Ongo‐ingM&OintheGSGrantsprograms(versusGSFacilities)diminishesthefundsavailablefornewresearchprojects.ThenumberofDASIandDASI‐likeprojectsisexpectedtoincreaseinthefutureandtrackingtheirM&Ocostsmayappearinbothgrantsandfacilitiesprograms.AsdiscussedintheGSfacilitieschapter,suchissuesmayinsomecasesbearonthequalityofthefacility‐embeddedresearch;
EstablishguidelinesfordeterminingtheimpactsofencumberingprogramresourcesforM&Oofnewfacilitiesinitiativesbeforecommittingfuturebudgettothem.Forexample,thepeerreviewprocessforaninnovativenewDASItendstogenerateapositiverecommenda‐tiontofundit,butthereviewersarenotnecessarilyconsideringthebiggerpicture:WhatotherprograminvestmentswillbeimpactedbytakingonnewcontinuingM&Ocostsforthisproject?
GSoftenhastomakedifficultdecisions;thisportfolioreviewmakesseveralrecommenda‐tionstoprovideadditionalsupportindecision‐makingsuchastheSeniorReviewsandtheadvisorygroupsforClass1facilities.Communicatingtheoutcomes,rationaleandimpactsofdecisionsisanareawherefurtherdevelopmentsandtransparencyareencouraged.
Final A1 GS Portfolio Review
Appendix A. Committee Charge
National Science Foundation Directorate for Geosciences Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences
Review of the Geospace Section Portfolio
Charge to the Review Committee
February 18, 2015
Context
This review is motivated in part by priorities highlighted for the Geospace scientific community in the National Research Council's (NRC) Decadal Survey: Solar and Space Physics – A Science for a Tech-nological Society (hereafter called the Survey) and by the current challenging outlook for the U.S. Federal budget.
The review is designed to examine the balance across the entire portfolio of activities supported by NSF’s Geospace Section (GS) within the Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences (AGS). The primary goal of this review, and of any resulting adjustments of the GS portfolio, is to ensure that investments in the GS science disciplines and respective facilities are properly aligned, both now and in the future, with the needs and priorities of the Geospace scientific community, in part as articulated in the Survey.
The following boundary conditions will be adopted for the review:
All of the GS-funded activities should be considered together with the Survey recommendations: Core Programs of Aeronomy, Magnetospheric Physics, and Solar Terrestrial Research, focused programs CEDAR, GEM, and SHINE, elements of the new Space Weather Research & In-strumentation Program (CubeSats, space weather modeling, and other multi-user, space weather-related activities), components of the Geospace Facilities Program, such as the Incoherent Scatter Radar, Lidar Consortium, SuperDARN HF radars, and those activities spe-cifically designed to enhance educational opportunities, diversity, and international participa-tion.
The review should be forward-looking focusing on the potential of all funded facilities, programs, and activities for delivering the desired science outcomes and capabilities (while taking into account respective past performances) and considering the value of funded activities in terms of both intellectual merit and broader impacts.
The review should assume budget scenarios (to be provided by GS) to encompass the period from 2016 through 2025, and consider the costs of (i) continuing the existing observing capabilities and science-funded programs, as well as of (ii) new facilities and programs, including those recommended in the Survey and others the Review Committee may wish to introduce.
The Committee’s deliberations should take into consideration the national and international Ge-ospace Sciences landscape and the consequences of its recommendations for domestic and international partnerships.
The Charge
The Committee is asked to construct its recommendations around two themes:
1. Recommend the critical capabilities needed over the period from 2016 to 2025 that would enable progress on the science program articulated in Chapter 1 of the Sur-vey. These recommendations should encompass not only observational capabilities, but also theoretical, computational, and laboratory capabilities, as well as capabilities in research
Final A2 GS Portfolio Review
support, workforce, and education.
2. Recommend the balance of investments in the new and in existing facilities, grants pro-grams, and other activities that would optimally implement the Survey recommendations and achieve the goals of the Geospace Section as articulated in the AGS Draft Goals and Ob-jectives Document (including NRC/BASC Review, 2014) and the GEO/Advisory Committee Document "Dynamic Earth: GEO Imperatives & Frontiers 2015-2020" (NSF, 2014). These recommendations may include closure or divestment of some facilities, as well as ter-mination of programs and other activities, and/or new investments enabled as a result. The overall portfolio must fit within the budgetary constraints provided to the Committee.
It is important that the Portfolio Review Committee considers not only what new activities need to be introduced or accomplished, but also what activities and capabilities will be potentially lost in enabling these new activities and discontinuing current activities.
The elements of the recommended portfolio should be prioritized in sufficient detail to enable GS to make subsequent appropriate adjustments in response to variations in Federal and non-Federal funding.
The Committee should consider the effects of its recommendations on the future landscape of the U.S. Geospace community. The recommended portfolio and any changes should be viable and lead to a vigorous and sustainable future. In particular, the Committee is asked to examine how the recommended portfolio supports and develops a workforce with the requisite abilities and diversity to exploit the recommended research and education investments.
The Committee will be a sub-committee of the Directorate for Geosciences Advisory Committee (AC/GEO). The Committee is asked to provide its recommendations by September 2015 for presentation to the AC/GEO, so NSF can consider them in formulating the FY 2017 Budget Request.
Portfolio Review Timeline
The timeline for this review is based on the desire for its results to inform on the input into the Fiscal Year 2017 budget process, and it is constrained by the needs to be initiated and reported to the GEO/Advisory Committee that meets in April/May and October/November each year.
The timeline for the Portfolio Review is as follows:
Finalize PR Committee membership (12-14 members; January 2015)
Develop criteria and strategy (January-February 2015)
GEO/Front Office approves the PR Charge and formation of PR Committee (Feb 2015)
Kick-off teleconference with GS/PR Committee (February 2015)
Collect data and begin assessment (February – March, 2015)
First PR Committee face-to-face meeting at NSF (March 2015)
Visiting selected facility sites (tentative; February – May, 2015)
Seeking community input via emails and workshops (March – June 2015)
PR Committee drafts their report (June - August 2015)
Second PR Committee face-to-face meeting at NSF (August 2015)
Submit GS Portfolio Review Report to GEO/Advisory Committee (September 2015)
GEO/Advisory Committee reviews the GS/PR Report (October 2015)
GS programs response to the PR Committee Report (November 2015)
Final (revised if necessary) GS/PR Report released (December 2015)
The detailed schedule for the Portfolio Review will be updated as events occur, milestones reached, and the process evolves.
Final A3 GS Portfolio Review
Appendix B. Committee Membership
WilliamLotko(Chair),DartmouthCollege
JoshuaSemeter(AC/GEOliaison),BostonUniversity
DanielN.Baker,UniversityofColorado‐Boulder
WilliamBristow(resignedMay2015),UniversityofAlaska‐Fairbanks
JorgeChau,Leibniz‐InstituteofAtmosphericPhysics(Germany)
ChristinaCohen,CaliforniaInstituteofTechnology
SarahGibson,HighAltitudeObservatory,NationalCenterforAtmosphericResearch
JosephHuba(appointedMay2015),NavalResearchLaboratory
MonaKessel,NASA/HQandGSFC
DeloresKnipp,UniversityofColorado‐Boulder
LouisLanzerotti,NewJerseyInstituteofTechnology
PatriciaReiff,RiceUniversity
AlanRodger,FormerlyBritishAntarcticSurvey
HowardSinger,NOAA/SpaceWeatherPredictionCenter
Final A4 GS Portfolio Review
Appendix C. RFIs to Facility PIs
C1. Request for Information sent to all ISR PIs (AMISRs, AO, JRO, MH, Sondrestrom)
Examination: ISR Facilities:
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current capabilities of your ISR facility for addressing key science goals and key sci‐ence challenges described in the recent Decadal Report for solar and space physics, indicating recent improvements/modernizations.
2. Describe the essential technical/engineering features and capabilities of your ISR facility, and why these are essential for your facility.
3. How do these features and capabilities compare to state‐of‐the‐art astronomical and other radio capabilities, nationally and internationally?
4. Has your facility conducted an independent review of its technical capabilities? If so when, and the outcome? If not, why?
5. What international ISR facilities might be considered comparable to the capabilities of your facil‐ity?
Maintenance and operations
6. What is the current Maintenance and Operations (M&O) budget of your ISR facility and how has it changed in the last five years? What is your total ISR budget if different than your M&O budget?
7. Does your facility receive funding from sources other than NSF Geoscience facilities (GF)? If so, how is the funding distributed among funding sources and main activities at your facility (M&O, Research, Solar/Mag/Aeronomy areas, ...)
8. What fraction of your yearly ISR budget is devoted solely to M&O and what fraction is devoted to science, technology upgrades, and related, respectively?
Strategic planning
9. How often does your facility update its strategic plan?
10. If more funding were available to your facility, how much would you require, where would it be invested and what would be the benefit for the US Geospace community?
11. Has your facility interacted with other similar facilities in the last 5 years?
12. Have you considered applying to medium sized grants in the last five years to develop your facili‐ties? If not, why not?
13. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of the facility and how are they being miti‐gated?
Final A5 GS Portfolio Review
C2. Request for Information sent to AMPERE PI
Examination: Ampere Facility:
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current capabilities of the AMPERE Facility products for addressing key science goals and key science challenges described in the recent Decadal Report for solar and space physics, indicating recent developments.
Maintenance and operations
2. What fraction of the NSF AMPERE Facility yearly budget is devoted solely to producing and main‐taining the current data products, and what fraction is devoted to developing new products, sci‐ence, and other activities, respectively? How have these budgets changed over the last five years?
3. What is the total yearly funding for AMPERE, and what are other sources and amounts of funding for routine operations, developing new products, science, and other activities, respectively?
4. Approximately how is AMPERE effort and budget split between providing products for space weather and for novel science research?
Strategic planning
5. What is the plan for AMPERE developments? How often is this plan updated?
6. If more funding were available to AMPERE, how much would be required, where would it be in‐vested and what would be the benefit for the US Geospace community?
7. Are there plans to integrate AMPERE data with other data sets to produce further value‐added products?
8. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of the AMPERE facility? How are they being mitigated?
Final A6 GS Portfolio Review
C3. Request for Information sent to SuperMAG PI
Examination: SuperMAG Facility
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current capabilities of the SuperMAG facility products for addressing key science goals and key science challenges described in the recent Decadal Report for solar and space physics, indicating recent developments?
Maintenance and operations
2. What fraction of the NSF SuperMAG facility yearly budget is devoted solely to producing and maintaining the current data products, and what fraction is devoted to developing new products, science, data archiving, and other activities, respectively? How have these budgets changed over the last five years?
3. What is the total yearly funding for SuperMAG, and what are other sources and amounts of fund‐ing for routine operations, developing new products, science, data archiving, and other activities, respectively?
4. Approximately how is SuperMAG facility effort and budget split between providing products for space weather and for novel science research?
Strategic planning
5. What is the plan for SuperMAG developments? How often is this plan updated?
6. If more funding were available to SuperMAG, how much would be required, where would it be invested and what would be the benefit for the US Geospace community?
7. Are there plans to integrated SuperMAG data with other data sets to produce further value‐added products?
8. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of SuperMAG? How are they being miti‐gated?
Final A7 GS Portfolio Review
C3. Request for Information sent to SuperDARN PI
Examination: SuperDARN Facilities:
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current capabilities of SuperDARN (the U.S. components and the international com‐ponent) for addressing key science goals and key science challenges described in the recent De‐cadal Report for solar and space physics, indicating recent improvements/modernizations.
2. Can the US SuperDARN facilities be rank‐ordered by their contribution to the science defined in the Decadal Review?
3. How do the technical/engineering features and capabilities of U.S. SuperDARN radars compare to state‐of‐the‐art astronomical and other radio capabilities, nationally and internationally?
4. How much progress has been made since 2004 (Avery Report) in gaining a more firm scientific understanding of the source and behavior of the irregularities upon which the SuperDARN backscatter relies for its results?
Maintenance and operations
5. How are the individual U.S. radars coordinated and managed for the US Geoscience community?
6. What fraction of the NSF U.S. SuperDARN yearly budget is devoted solely to M&O, and what frac‐tion is devoted to science, technology upgrades, and related, respectively? How have these budg‐ets changed over the last five years?
7. What is the total yearly funding of the U.S. SuperDARN? What are other sources and amounts of funding for M&O, science, technology upgrades, data archiving and other activities, respectively?
8. How much of the SuperDARN data is used for near‐real time space weather activities?
Strategic planning
9. Does the U.S. component of the SuperDARN consortium have a strategic plan? If so, how often is it updated?
10. If more funding were available to SuperDARN, how much would be required, where would it be invested, and what would be the benefit for the US Geospace community?
11. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of the facility? How are they being miti‐gated?
Final A8 GS Portfolio Review
C4. Request for Information sent to CCMC PI
Examination: CCMC Facility
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current capabilities of the CCMC for addressing key science goals and key science challenges described in the recent Decadal Report for solar and space physics, indicating recent developments?
2. Describe the decision process used to incorporate models into CCMC. Describe the decision pro‐cess for the termination of support for models.
3. Describe the relationship for coordination with model development at HAO.
4. Describe how the current suite of models at CCMC compares with other models, both in the USA and internationally.
Maintenance and operations
5. Describe how and by whom the priorities and the success criteria of CCMC are set each year.
6. Provide information as to how often the various models are used each year. Provide a breakdown between inside NASA and other users.
7. What fraction of the NSF‐contributed CCMC yearly budget is devoted to maintaining the current suite of models, ingesting new models, setting up and running models for external scientists, sci‐ence research by CCMC‐funded staff, model archiving and other activities, respectively? How have these budgets changed over the last five years?
8. What is the total yearly funding for CCMC, and what are the other sources and amounts of funding for maintaining the current suite of models, ingesting new models, setting up and running models for external scientists, science research by CCMC‐funded staff, model archiving and other activi‐ties, respectively.
9. Are there any CCMC facility activities that could be considered for space weather in contrast to novel science research?
Strategic planning
10. What is the plan for CCMC developments? How often is this plan updated?
11. If more funding were available to CCMC, how much would be required, where would it be invested and what would be the benefit for the US Geospace community?
12. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of CCMC? How are these being mitigated?
Final A9 GS Portfolio Review
C5. Request for Information sent to CRRL PI
Examination: Lidar Facilities:
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current capabilities of the set of LIDAR installations for addressing key science goals and key science challenges described in the recent Decadal Report for solar and space physics, indicating recent improvements/modernizations.
2. Can the LIDAR installations be rank‐ordered by their contribution to the science defined in the Decadal Review?
3. Describe the coordination process for current individual PI‐led LIDAR instruments to obtain optimum research return.
4. What are international LIDAR capabilities, and how do they compare to the U.S. capabilities?
Maintenance and operations
5. What fraction of the NSF U.S. LIDAR yearly budget is devoted solely to M&O, and what fraction is devoted to science, technology upgrades, and related, respectively? How have these budg‐ets changed over the last five years?
6. What is the total yearly funding of the LIDAR groups and what are other sources and amounts of funding for M&O, science, technology upgrades, data archiving and other activities, respec‐tively?
Strategic planning
7. Does the LIDAR PI‐group have a strategic plan? If so, how often is it updated?
8. If more funding were available to the LIDAR PI‐group, how much would be required, where would it be invested, and what would be the benefit for the US Geospace community?
9. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of the PI‐led LIDAR facility group? How are they being mitigated?
Final A10 GS Portfolio Review
C5. Request for Information sent to LISN PI
Request for Information for LISN Facilities
Technical capabilities
1. Describe the current and any proposed capabilities of LISN (the U.S. components and the inter‐national components) for addressing key science goals (Chapter 1) and key science challenges (Chapter 2) described in the 2013 Decadal Survey Report for solar and space physics, indicating any recent or proposed improvements and modernizations in capabilities.
2. How do the technical/engineering features and capabilities of the U.S. component of LISN com‐pare to similar or related state‐of‐the‐art capabilities, nationally and internationally?
3. Describe the coordination process for current and any proposed LISN instruments to obtain optimum research return for the US geospace science community.
4. Please quantify the contribution to the design, build and deployment of the non‐US partners in the LISN project.
Maintenance and operations
5. We understand that NSF may not yet have decided or allocated yearly budgets for LISN. What are the proposed future yearly budgets from NSF starting with FY16? Please indicate the total proposed yearly budget and separate line items for LISN M&O, LISN science and LISN technol‐ogy upgrades? Describe very briefly the nature of the proposed science and technology up‐grades. What is the yearly budget for data storage and distribution to users (if these are not a part of M&O)? How have the estimates for these budgets changed over the last five years? What was the projected M&O budget included in the MRI proposal for LISN?
6. What other sources and amounts of funding for M&O, science, technology upgrades, data ar‐chiving and other activities is LISN receiving from international partners and any non‐NSF US partners?
7. How much of the LISN data are used for near‐real time space weather activities?
Strategic planning
8. Does the U.S. component of LISN have a strategic plan? If so, how often is it updated? What is the projected lifetime of LISN?
9. If more funding were available to LISN, how much would be required, where would it be in‐vested, and what would be the benefit for the US geospace science community?
10. What are the biggest risks to the continued operation of the facility? How are they being miti‐gated?
Final A11 GS Portfolio Review
Appendix D. PI Diversity Data by GS Grants Program
Table D1. AER Awardees by gender and ethnicity, 2010‐2014
PIs 2010‐14
Asian Black/AA1 Hispanic Multi‐ Racial
Unknown White Total Fraction of awards
Female
Actions 23 0 0 0 10 30 63
Awards 10 0 0 0 3 17 30 0.16
Funding Rate 0.43 0.30 0.48
Male
Actions 47 1 13 0 13 243 317
Awards 20 1 6 0 4 116 147 0.80
Funding Rate 0.43 1.00 0.46 0.31 0.46
Unknown
Actions 1 0 0 0 18 5 24
Awards 0 0 0 0 5 2 7 0.04
Funding Rate 0 0.28 0.40 0.29
Total
Actions 71 1 13 0 41 278 404
Awards 30 1 6 0 12 135 184
Funding Rate 0.42 1.00 0.46 N/A 0.29 0.49 0.46
Fraction of total awards
0.16 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.07 0.73
1 AA (African American)
Final A12 GS Portfolio Review
Table D2. AER Awardees by gender and ethnicity, 2005‐2009
PIs 2005‐09
Asian Black/AA1 Hispanic Multi‐ Racial
Unknown White Total Fraction of awards
Female
Actions 16 2 0 0 6 30 54
Awards 7 2 0 0 3 15 27 0.14
Funding Rate 0.44 0 0.00 0.50 0.50
Male
Actions 52 12 20 2 16 336 438
Awards 14 6 5 1 3 141 170 0.85
Funding Rate 0.27 0.50 0.25 0.50 0.19 0.42 0.39
Unknown
Actions 1 0 0 0 5 6 12
Awards 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0.01
Funding Rate 0.20 0.17
Total
Actions 69 14 20 2 27 372 504
Awards 21 8 5 1 7 157 199
Funding Rate 0.30 0.57 0.25 0.50 0.33 0.42 0.39
Fraction of total awards
0.11 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.79
1 AA (African American)
Final A13 GS Portfolio Review
Table D3. MAG Awardees by Gender and Ethnicity, 2010‐2014
PIs 2010‐14
Asian Black/AA1 Hispanic Multi‐ Racial
Unknown White Total Fraction of awards
Female
Actions 40 3 0 0 2 32 77
Awards 14 3 0 0 1 9 27 0.18
Funding Rate 0.35 1.00 0.50 0.35
Male
Actions 88 6 7 1 26 192 306
Awards 28 2 3 1 11 77 114 0.77
Funding Rate 0.32 0.33 0.43 1.00 0.42 0.37
Unknown
Actions 7 0 0 0 17 3 27
Awards 0 0 0 0 6 1 7 0.05
Funding Rate 0 0.35 0.33 0.26
Total
Actions 135 9 7 1 45 227 410
Awards 42 5 3 1 18 87 148
Funding Rate 0.31 0.56 0.43 1.00 0.40 0.38 0.36
Fraction of total awards
0.28 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.59
1 AA (African American)
Final A14 GS Portfolio Review
Table D4. MAG Awardees by Gender and Ethnicity, 2005‐2009
PIs 2005‐09
Asian Black/AA1 Hispanic Multi‐ Racial
Unknown White Total Fraction of awards
Female
Actions 12 0 0 0 1 23 36
Awards 4 0 0 0 0 13 17 0.11
Funding Rate 0.33 0 0.00 0.57 0.47
Male
Actions 95 8 8 1 21 214 347
Awards 34 3 2 0 10 88 137 0.87
Funding Rate 0.36 0.38 0.25 0.00 0.48 0.41 0.39
Unknown
Actions 4 0 0 0 8 4 16
Awards 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0.03
Funding Rate 0 0.38 0.25 0.25
Total
Actions 111 8 8 1 30 241 399
Awards 38 3 2 0 13 102 158
Funding Rate 0.34 0.38 0.25 0.00 0.33 0.42 0.40
Fraction of total awards
0.24 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.08 0.65
1 AA (African American)
Final A15 GS Portfolio Review
Table D5. STR Awardees by Gender and Ethnicity, 2010‐2014
PIs 2010‐14
Asian Black/AA1 Hispanic Multi‐ Racial
Unknown White Total Fraction of awards
Female
Actions 21 1 5 0 11 35 73
Awards 2 0 2 0 2 10 16 0.11
Funding Rate 0.10 0.00 .4 0.18 0.47
Male
Actions 64 2 2 3 15 226 312
Awards 18 0 2 3 4 82 137 0.87
Funding Rate 0.28 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.27 0.39
Unknown
Actions 5 0 0 0 35 3 16
Awards 0 0 0 0 9 0 4 0.03
Funding Rate 0 0.26 0.00 0.25
Total
Actions 90 3 7 3 61 264 399
Awards 20 0 4 3 15 92 158
Funding Rate 0.22 0.00 0.57 1.00 0.25 0.35 0.40
Fraction of total awards
0.14 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.62
1 AA (African American)
Final A16 GS Portfolio Review
Table D6. STR Awardees by Gender and Ethnicity, 2005‐2009
PIs 2005‐09
Asian Black/AA1 Hispanic Multi‐ Racial
Unknown White Total Fraction of awards
Female
Actions 25 0 3 0 4 41 73
Awards 7 0 2 0 2 17 28 0.22
Funding Rate 0.28 0 0.00 0.41 0.38
Male
Actions 79 1 0 2 12 214 308
Awards 19 0 0 1 3 74 97 0.77
Funding Rate 0.24 0.00 0.50 0.25 0.35 0.31
Unknown
Actions 0 0 0 0 8 0 8
Awards 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.01
Funding Rate 0.13 0.13
Total
Actions 104 1 3 2 24 255 389
Awards 26 0 2 1 6 91 126
Funding Rate 0.25 0.00 0.67 0.50 0.33 0.36 0.32
Fraction of total awards
0.21 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.72
1 AA (African American)
Final A17 GS Portfolio Review
IN ORBIT AWAITING LAUNCH NEW PROJECT Appendix E. Summary of GS CubeSat Missions
Mission, Launch Leading Organizations Science Spacecraft Status Comments
RAX 2010 , 2011
U Michigan SRI
Ionospheric plasma regularities 1 of 2 S/C operated 18 months; mission complete
30 Events, Data:rax.sri.com/raxdata.html
DICE 2011
Utah State U ASTRA LLC
Storm time E‐fields,plasma density
E‐field boom did not de‐ploy; mission complete
Data archive not found
CINEMA 2012 UC Berkeley Ring current dynamics Early comm failure Some magnetic field data
CSWWE 2012
CU Boulder Outer rad belt, solar energetic electron and protons
Full operations; missioncomplete; 24 months
Data at NSSDCwith Van Allen Probes
FIREBIRD I, II 2013, 2015
UNH, Montana State UAerospace
Relativistic electronmicrobursts
All SC operational Collecting Data
FIREFLY 2013 and FIRESTATION
Siena College, NASA/GSFC Terrestrial gamma ray flashes S/C operational; mission nearing completion
~60 Events Captured
EXOCUBE 2015
U Wisconsin, Cal Poly, U IllinoisScientific Solutions
Exospheric morphology, dynamics Antenna did not deploy First light massspectrometer measurement
CADRE U Michigan, NRL Thermospheric dynamics Awaiting Launch
LAICE V Tech, U Ill, Aero Corp, NWRA Atmospheric gravity waves Launch expected 2016
OPAL USU, HISS (U. Maryland East Shore) Neutral temp profiles 90‐140 km alt Launch expected 2016
QBUS U Michigan, CU Boulder, Stanford, U del Turabo, Draper Lab
In situ lower thermospheric observa‐tion, spectrometer
Project underway 2014;Launch expected 2018
4 CubeSats to European QB50 Project
ELFIN UCLA, Aerospace Corp Relativistic particle PA distributions Project underway 2014
IT SPINS JHU/APL, Montana State Um SRI UV nightglow radiance from O+ recomb Initial funding
TRYAD UA Huntsville, Auburn Terrestrial gamma‐ray Flashes Initial funding
ISX Cal Poly, SRI Ionospheric scintillation Initial funding
Final A18 GS Portfolio Review
Appendix F. Membership in EISCAT: Categories and Conditions
Theappendixprovidesabriefoverviewofthemembershiptypeandconditions.TheelementstakendirectlyfromtheEISCATregulationsareininvertedcommas.Muchfurtherdetailsarepro‐videdintheEISCATBlueBook.28
“TwolevelsofEISCATmembershipareavailable:AssociateandAffiliate.Associatemem‐bersmakealong‐termfinancialcommitmentatanationallevel.Thismembershipprovidesimme‐diateaccesstoallCommonProgram(CP)measurements,andgreaterinfluenceontheoperationandfuturedirectionofEISCAT.Affiliatemembershaveashorter‐termandsmallerfinancialcom‐mitment,gainimmediateaccesstotheCommonProgramandarenormallyindividualinstitutionsratherthannationalprograms.”
Genericrequirement
“NewAssociatesandAffiliatesneedtodemonstratescientificcompetenceonaninterna‐tionallevelandmustbepreparedtocontributetheirscientificexpertisetotheassociation.Theyareexpectedtocarryoutorfundbasicresearchthatispublishedininternationallyacceptedscientificjournalsand/ortohaveanindependentexternalscientificevaluationsysteminplace.”
Associates
“EISCATAssociatesenablethebasicconditionsforrunningtheAssociation,takefullre‐sponsibilityfortheAssociationanddeterminetheoveralldirectionofitsdevelopment.“TheyareexpectedtomakeasignificantinitialpaymentintotheAssociation,whichisusedtoachievetheAs‐sociation’sscientificandstrategicgoals,tocontributetotheEISCATsystem’soperationalcosts,maintenanceanddecommissioninginaproportionthatisrelatedtotheirinitialpaymentandthatallowsthattheminimumrequiredoperationcostsbecoveredbytheAssociates.AnAssociate’slong‐termcommitmentisfiveyearsonarollingbasis,i.e.,theymustgivefiveyears’noticebeforeleavingtheAssociation.AtpresenttheinitialpaymentofanewAssociateideallycorrespondstoatleast5%ofthetotalinvestmentcurrentlyplannedfornewEISCATinstruments.”EISCATisplan‐ningamajorinvestmentintothenewEISCAT‐3Dsystemthatisequivalenttoapproximately1100MSEK(118M€,~130M$).Therefore5%representsabout$6.5M(May2013costs).
“TheAssociatesdecideonacommonobservingprogramandondataformats.TheyhaveaccesstothearchiveddataoftheAssociation.Theirobservingtimeisguaranteedaccordingtoatime‐shareformuladevelopedbytheAssociation.AssociatesarenormallyNationalResearchCoun‐cils,theirequivalents,ormajornationalinstitutions.”
CurrentAssociateMembersincludeNorway,Sweden,Finland,Japan,CanadaandtheUK.
Affiliates
“EISCATAffiliatescanjointheAssociationwithasmallerfinancialcontributionandwithlessresponsibilityandothercommitments.TheobservingtimeofAffiliatesisguaranteedbyanAs‐sociationtime‐shareformula.AffiliateshaveaccesstothearchiveddataoftheAssociation.Theex‐pectedminimumpaymentofanAffiliatetotheAssociationcoversthecostofobservingtimeforanAffiliatetorunatleastoneindependentobservationalcampaignperyear.”Thiscorrespondstoa
28 www.eiscat.se/eiscat2014/eiscat‐bluebook‐draft‐2015‐version‐2014‐04‐02/view
Final A19 GS Portfolio Review
minimumfeeequivalentto100KSEK(€11K,~$12K)(2014costs).“Affiliateswillnormallybein‐dividualinstitutionsorfoundations”.
CurrentAffiliateMembersareRussia,FranceandUkraine.Koreamayjoininthenearfu‐ture.
“TheEISCATAssociatesestablishthegoverningEISCATCouncilanditscommittees.Affili‐ateshavevestedmembershipintheEISCATScienceAdvisoryCommitteeandobserverstatusinCouncil.”
In2014,theEISCATAssociatespaidbetween~170k$and667k$perannumtotheM&OofEISCATandthiscontributionprovidedbetween10‐30%ofEISCATSpecialTime.
ThedistributionoftimeonEISCATis
SpecialProgramTime:51%
CommonProgramTime:38%
PeerReviewTime(openlycompeted):8%
EISCATTimefordevelopment:2%
Final A20 GS Portfolio Review
Appendix G. List of ACRONYMS
AAGS:AntarcticAstrophysicsandGeospaceSciencesprogramACR:AnomalousCosmicRaysAER:AERonomyAGS:AtmosphericandGeospaceSciencesAIM:Atmosphere‐Ionosphere‐MagnetosphereAIMI:Atmosphere‐Ionosphere‐MagnetosphereInteractionsAFOSR:AirForceOfficeofScientificResearchAMISR:AdvancedModularIncoherentScatterRadarAMPERE:ActiveMagnetosphereandPlanetaryElectrodynamicsResponseExperimentASP:AdvancedStudiesProgramAST:ASTronomicalsciencesATST:AdvanceTechnologySolarTelescopeBBSO:BigBearSolarObservatoryCCMC:CommunityCoordinatedModelingCenterCEDAR:Coupling,Energetics,andDynamicsofAtmosphericRegionsCISL:ComputationalandInformationSystemsLaboratoryCISM:CenterforIntegratedSpaceweatherModelingCME:CoronalMassInjectionCOSMO:COronalSolarMagnetismObservatoryCOSTEM:CommitteeonScience,Technology,Engineering,andMathematicsCOV:CommitteeofVisitorsCRRL:ConsortiumofResonanceandRayleighLidarsDASI:DistributiveArrayofScienceInstrumentsDKIST:DanielK.InouyeSolarTelescopeDRIVE:Diversify,Realize,Integrate,Venture,EducateDoD:DepartmentofDefenseDPP:DivisionofPolarProgramsDS:DecadalSurveyDURIP:DefenseUniversityResearchInstrumentationProgramEISCAT:EuropeanIncoherentSCAtterScientificAssociationELF:ExtremelyLowFrequencyENA:EnergeticNeutralAtomsEPSCoR:ExperimentalProgramtoStimulateCompetitiveResearchFASR:FrequencyAgileSolarRadiotelescopeFDSS:FacultyDevelopmentintheSpaceSciencesFPI:Fabry‐PerotInterferometerGEM:GeospaceEnvironmentModelingGBO:GroundBasedObservatory
Final A21 GS Portfolio Review
GCM:GeneralCirculationModelGCP:GrandChallengeProjectsGCR:GalacticCosmicRayGIC:GeomagneticallyInducedCurrentsGONG:GlobalOscillationNetworkGroupGS:GeospaceSectionGSO:GeospaceSystemObservatoryHAO:HighAltitudeObservatoryHF:HighFrequencyHSO:HeliosphericSystemObservatoryIBEX:InterstellarBoundaryEXplorerICON:IonosphericCONnectionexplorerIGS:IntegratedGeospaceScienceINSPIRE:IntegratedNSFSupportPromotingInterdisciplinaryREsearchISR:IncoherentScatterRadarI‐T:Ionosphere‐ThermosphereI&V:InnovationandVitalityKP:KittPeakobservatoryLISN:Low‐latitudeIonosphericSensorNetworkLISM:LocalInterStellarMediumMAG:MAGnetosphereMHD:MagnetoHydroDynamicsMLSO:MaunaLoaSolarObservatoryMMS:MagnetosphericMultiscaleMissionM&O:ManagementandOperationsMPS:MathematicalandPhysicalSciencesMREFC:MajorResearchEquipmentandFacilitiesConstructionMRI:MajorResearchInstrumentationprogramMSIS:MassSpectrometerandIncoherentScatterradarmodelMURI:MultidisciplinaryUniversityResearchInitiativeNASA:NationalAeronauticsandSpaceAdministrationNCEI:NationalCenterofEnvironmentalInformationNCEP:NationalCenterforEnvironmentalPredictionNIST:NationalInstituteofStandardsandTechnologyNCAR:NationalCenterforAtmosphericResearchNOAA:NationalOceanicandAtmosphericAdministrationNRAO:NationalRadioAstronomyObservatoryNSF:NationalScienceFoundationNSO:NationalSolarObservatoryNWS:NationalWeatherService
Final A22 GS Portfolio Review
O2R:OperationstoResearchONR:OfficeofNavalResearchOSTP:OfficeofScienceandTechnologyPolicyPFISR:PokerFlatIncoherentScatterRadarPI:PrincipalInvestigatorPLR:PoLaRprogramsPRC:PortfolioReviewCommitteeR2O:ResearchtoOperationsRISR‐C:ResolutebayIncoherentScatterRadar‐CanadaRISR‐N:ResolutebayIncoherentScatterRadar‐NorthfaceR‐MHD:RadiativeMagnetoHydroDynamcisS2I2:SoftwareInfrastructureforSustainedInnovationSEP:SolarEnergeticParticlesSFO:SanFernandoObservatorySHINE:SolarHeliosphericandINterplanetaryEnvironmentSOLIS:SynopticOpticalLong‐termInvestigationoftheSunSP:SacramentoPeakobservatorySSP:SolarandSpacePhysicsSTEM:Science,Technology,EngineeringandMathSTEREO:SolarTErrestrialRElationsObservatorySTC:ScienceTechnologyCenterSTR:Solar‐TerrestrialRelationsSWM:NASA/NSFCollaborativeSpaceWeatherModelingSWMI:SolarWindMagnetosphereInteractionSWPC:SpaceWeatherPredictionCenterSWR:SpaceWeatherResearchSuperDARN:SuperDualAuroralRadarNetworkTEC:TotalElectronContentTHEMIS:TimeHistoryofEventsandMacroscaleInteractionsDuringSubstormsTIEGCM:ThermosphereIonosphereElectrodynamicsGeneralCirculationModelTSI:TotalSolarIrradianceUCAR:UniversityCentersforAtmosphericResearchUV:UltraVioletVLF:VeryLowFrequencyVSO:VirtualSolarObservatoryWACCM:WholeAtmosphereCommunityClimateModelWACCM‐X:WholeAtmosphereCommunityClimateModeleXtendedWSO:WilcoxSolarObservatoryWPI:Wave‐ParticleInteraction