Update from Science Board
Advisory panel interactions, reports and evaluations, project funding details, dark matter strategic review, programme evaluations, and findings in various science areas are highlighted. Recommendations and financial scenarios are also discussed, emphasizing the importance of continued funding and diverse approaches.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Update from Science Board Tara Shears, for Science Board. .
In the past year.. Advisory panel interactions: Advisory panel interactions: CAP (+IRIS) in October PPAP in December Reports and evaluations: Reports and evaluations: Dark Matter strategic review Programme evaluations, Balance of Programmes 2020 Priority projects process Project funding: Project funding: AWAKE Run 2, HL-LHC-UK2 (in accelerator science) AGATA (in nuclear physics) GridPP, DIRAC (within available funds)
Dark Matter strategic review Follows from 2012 review; proposes long term strategy for the field Follows from 2012 review; proposes long term strategy for the field Published, available on STFC website Recommendations Recommendations: Continued funding is essential Routes to maintain a diversity of approaches should be considered (seedcorn funding) STFC should build on UK expertise and experience Invest in one experiment if funding constrained Short term: invite common R&D for Ar/Xe next generation experiments; investigate Boulby potential to host next generation experiment Science Board endorsed the review https://stfc.ukri.org/files/2019-dark-matter-strategic-review/
Programme evaluations: Three year rolling programme to define a balanced programme of Three year rolling programme to define a balanced programme of excellent science within a realistic financial planning envelope in excellent science within a realistic financial planning envelope in each PPAN area, followed by a balance of each PPAN area, followed by a balance of programmes programmes exercise: exercise: Accelerator Science, Astronomy, Computing, Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics and Particle Astrophysics Financial scenarios of flat cash and +-10% All evaluation reports published, available on STFC website All evaluation reports published, available on STFC website https://stfc.ukri.org/about-us/our-purpose-and-priorities/planning-and-strategy/programme-evaluation/balance-of-programme-exercise-ppan/
Programme evaluation findings: All PPAN areas contain world All PPAN areas contain world- -leading science, with many opportunities leading science, with many opportunities open to the communities. open to the communities. All PPAN areas suffer from constrained funding. All PPAN areas suffer from constrained funding. https://stfc.ukri.org/about-us/our-purpose-and-priorities/planning-and-strategy/programme-evaluation/balance-of-programme-exercise-ppan/
Programme evaluation findings: Accelerator Science: an upturn of at least 10% is essential to reverse the damage already caused by flat cash funding. (paragraph 1.12) Nuclear Physics: a 10% increase in the nuclear physics programme would allow PDRAs awarded on the CG to be supported in full .. and help to reverse the erosion of flat cash (paragraph 5.3) Particle Astrophysics: a 10% increase, assuming a baselined continuation of the uplift, is the minimum amount required to maintain UK visibility and leadership in current projects. (paragraph 1.8) Particle Physics: a 10% increase as the minimum amount required to maintain UK visibility and leadership in the current programme. (paragraph 1.7) https://stfc.ukri.org/about-us/our-purpose-and-priorities/planning-and-strategy/programme-evaluation/balance-of-programme-exercise-ppan/
Balance of Programmes 2020 Balance of Balance of Programmes Programmes 2020 has started Panel = Science Board + programme evaluation chairs Very light touch Based on evaluations and updates/comments from AP (thanks) Examines programme breadth, balance, depth and health Financial scenarios: flat real, +10% over a 5 year period Exercise will conclude by June (latest) Final report will be made public. 2020 has started Note: Note: Timescale is set by forthcoming decision points Factors requiring greater discussion (loss of ERC funds, funding cuts, bigger funding uplifts) will trigger a separate exercise Halfway through; no confirmed emerging messages yet
Developing a World Class Research Programme / Priority projects Advisory panels have submitted ideas for the Priority Projects/ Advisory panels have submitted ideas for the Priority Projects/ WCRP scheme WCRP scheme ( (reminder: targets new, non reminder: targets new, non- -core funds core funds). ). Science Board comment on scientific case Some projects have been submitted to UKRI funding calls Initial update process: Annually; advisory panels consider any urgent developments; constant overall length of list Every three years; major review of the priority list. Next review is in 2021 https://stfc.ukri.org/about-us/our-purpose-and-priorities/planning-and-strategy/stfc-reviews/research-programme/
Developing a World Class Research Programme / Priority projects Should the process evolve further? Should the process evolve further? Some issues have been identified: Other Councils approach this differently (eg EPSRC Big Ideas scheme) Priority project/WCRP list may not be the same as community roadmaps; tension WCRP exercise has generated projects (by design) Can we generate ideas for grand challenges as well as projects? We discussed the approach in Science Board and provided input. The process is now under consideration. https://stfc.ukri.org/about-us/our-purpose-and-priorities/planning-and-strategy/stfc-reviews/research-programme/
Summary of current issues: Funding level what will it be? Considering Priority Projects approach Main short term business: Balance of programmes 2020
Science Board Membership: + 14 non-core members Jayne Lawrence (Manchester) (Chair) Tara Shears (Liverpool) (Deputy Chair) Martin Bauer (Durham) Andrew Beale (UCL) Stewart Boogert (Royal Holloway) Bill Chaplin (Birmingham) Andrew Coates (UCL/Mullard) Gavin Davies (Imperial) Karen Edler (Bath) Keith Grainge (Manchester) Stephen Hayden (Bristol) David Ireland (Glasgow) Martin King (Royal Holloway) Paul McKenna (Strathclyde) Alex Murphy (Edinburgh) Robin Perutz (York) STFC Office: Karen Clifford (new / changed) https://stfc.ukri.org/about-us/how-we-are-governed/advisory-boards/science-board/
