SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Environmental Molecular Science Laboratory (EMSL)...
-
date post
19-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of SCHOOL OF INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN Environmental Molecular Science Laboratory (EMSL)...
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Environmental Molecular Science Laboratory (EMSL) Collaboratory
at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
EMSL function types
• Primary type: shared instrument
• Secondary: product development, expert consultation
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
EMSL collaboratory basics
• Makes NMR instruments at Pacific Northwest Labs available to external users remotely
• DOE funded instruments, mandated 50% of instrument time to external users
• EMSL collaboratory has developed both synchronous and asychronous tools to support remote use
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Clarification of terms
• External users- not housed at PNNL
• Remote users- external users who decide to operate instruments remotely
• Local experts- scientists who work at PNNL full time
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Phases of EMSL
1993- StartupInternal funding +subcontract
1996 Development
DOE 2000
2001Ongoing-
Split operations and research
Explore toolset, Develop CORE2000
Pilot study usage
Continue CORE2000
Adopt VNC
Develop E-Lab notebook
Continued operations at EMSL- internally funded
NATIONAL COLLABORATORIES Continued research on E- Lab Notebooks and middleware
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Access to…
• Access to instruments
• Acess to people
• Access to information
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Access to instruments
• NMR set at PNNL, + other instruments at PNNL
• Higher powered NMRs are oversubscribed 2x to 3x
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Access to people
• Dedicated staff for external user support
• Onsite scientists have a fund to charge for assisting external users
• Work with onsite scientists often turns into full-fledged collaboration
• Remote access means less casual contact with other users- Balkanization
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Access to information
• Electronic Lab Notebook provides small group workspace
• Little demand for larger-scale knowledge management (e.g. other researchers’ experiments) due to the small project size of the scientific work
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Technology used
• CORE 2000
• VNC
• E-lab notebook
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
CORE 2000 (Collaborative research environment)
• Screen sharing
• Chat, whiteboard
• Video conferencing, remote-control camera on instrument panel
• Molecular modeling
• Voting tool
• Extensible
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
VNC
• Replaced custom tele-viewer• General purpose screen sharing, uses
whatever interface is available• Free, open source from AT&T lab London• Supplemented with phone, instrument
camera• (Is commoditification the future of
collaboratory tools?)
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Electronic Lab Notebook
• General purpose lab notebook• Form-based text and formula composition,
editing, publishing • Image capture+ molecular modeling software• Two levels of security, digital signatures• Can capture direct from instruments, including
settings and output• ‘Killer app’ for collaborations that are
distributed, image-intensive, or access controlled
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Resourcediagram
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Issues from diagram
• Flow of money is much simpler than a fee-for-service, one of the EMSL success factors
• Balkanization issue- remote users don’t talk to each other (do they need to?)
• PNNL very central for information flow, instrument time allocation, opportunity for co-publication
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Usage
• Instruments oversubscribed for external users, proposals evaluated and time awarded on a 6-month schedule
• Remote acces is optional for all remote users, currently is about 25% of use
• Not always the same 25%!• Often groups include both collocated
and remote collaborators• (E-lab has a separate base of ~1500
registered users)
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Motivation of collaborators
• Professional support• Local experts have a fund to draw from
for external user support• Collaboration (co-authorship) is
common between local and remote users
• Co-authorship usually given to instrument experts
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Diffusion of innovation
• Reasons for using:– Save $ on travel– Involve more people, e.g. students, outside
collaborators– Occasional changes of plans, e.g. pregnancy
• Other factors promoting adoption– Fits with existing practice– Trialability- use students to try out remote
access with lower risk
– Adoption by new disciplines-- Biologists
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Diffusion of innovation
• Where is EMSL on the adoption curve?
• Is 25-30% remote use the peak penetration for this facility?
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Diffusion of innovation
• Given that this project has tried a nearly comprehensive set of collaboratory technologies…
• What set of CORE 2000 and ELN are most used/ useful?
SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
Operations versus R&D
• Some EMSL work was funded to support current users, some R&D
• Pragmatic concern for users led to VNC adoption, de-emphasis of some other aspects
• Yet there was always some research $ available for advanced development
• This balance seems to have been very healthy- (was it?)