Canadian University - Based Research in Condensed Matter Physics - a Review and Recommendations for the Future

Canadian University - Based Research in Condensed Matter Physics - a Review and Recommendations for the Future June 2, 1997 Review Subcommittee: John Berlinsky Martin Grant Thom Mason Sjoerd Roorda Mike Thewalt (chair) Jeff Young EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Review of Canadian university-based research in condensed matter physics (CMP), and its coupled Recommendations, is part of a wider review of all of university-based physics research in Canada, which was initiated as part of the liaison process between the Canadian Association of Physicists (CAP) and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), the primary funding source for such research. The review, which involved wide consultations with the research community at both the initial and draft stages, was allowed complete autonomy once begun. The analysis and recommendations presented here are therefore those of the review committee alone. In describing condensed matter physics research activities in Canada, two ‘success stories’ were used as examples of the impact and recognition which can be achieved when researchers working in areas of existing strength are brought together in a well-organized network aimed at enhancing national and international communication and collaboration. The breadth of activity in Canada was outlined with shorter descriptions of the high-quality work being carried out in departments across the country. In summarizing the results of the review, the committee adopted a format which focused on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, the main points of which are reproduced below. Strengths 1. The principal strength which is noted in each successful area is a core group of excellent scientists. In areas which have been nurtured in Canada for many years, there are outstanding senior scientists. In these areas we note that the quality of hiring in recent years has also been excellent, so that there is every reason to believe that established strength will be maintained. In new areas, such as (experimental) soft matter physics, the practitioners are predominantly young, and the quality is high. 2. The existence of facilities for materials synthesis and modification at McMaster, UBC, the NRC, U. de Montréal and École Polytechnique, SFU and elsewhere has contributed significantly to the health of Canadian CMP. However, there is much to be gained by further strengthening Canadian capabilities in materials synthesis, modification, fabrication and analysis, and from broadening the range of materials and structures which can be produced. 3. Condensed Matter Physics in Canada has benefited greatly from programs which have fostered interactions between active groups across Canada. In this regard, the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIAR) has played a key role by supporting excellent scientists in both superconductivity and soft matter research, and by promoting networking in these two areas. Similarly NSERC’s short-lived Collaborative Grant Program has enhanced interaction in the areas of frustrated antiferromagnets, quantum well disordering, and interdisciplinary studies of biomembranes. We note that the greatest impact has resulted from programs which have promoted interaction in areas of established strength. i 4. Two major user facilities, neutron scattering at Chalk River and MuSR at TRIUMF, have acted as magnets for forefront research, and strong user groups have grown up around each facility. 5. Canadian CMP has been dynamic in mirroring the international evolution of the field, both in terms of the hiring of new researchers, for which individual departments have responsibility, as well as in the ability of established researchers to reorient their programs to follow (and lead) new developments. There was little evidence of undue activity in ‘older’ fields which would need to be de-emphasized. Weaknesses 1. Subcritical groups and geographical isolation, without compensating collaborations and networking. 2. Shortage of start-up funding; uncertain and often inadequate level of support until long after new faculty arrive. 3. Inability to support even the best programs at internationally competitive levels. 4. Problems in supporting inherently expensive research under the present funding system, particularly if such research does not offer the prospect of short-term economic benefits which would allow supplementary funding to be obtained from the strategic or university/industry programs. Opportunities 1. Development of new areas of CMP research and enhancement of strong continuing programs. 2. Development of new major facilities for Materials Research. 3. Development of wider collaborations and networks where these can be shown to be of benefit to Canada. Threats 1. Inadequate infrastructure support for university-based materials research facilities. 2. Inadequacy of major user facilities for research in Materials Science and Engineering. Indeed, the summary of the Review ends with the following observation: Overall, the erosion of infrastructure funding of materials research facilities is the greatest single threat to the field of CMP, and to all of Canadian Materials Science and Engineering, and it is the single area of greatest need for corrective action. ii Consideration of these issues, in light of the realities of the present overall funding situation, and the feedback received from circulation of the draft Review, led the committee to make a series of suggestions and recommendations, the most significant of which are reproduced below. It should be noted that the feedback from the draft Review demonstrated a strong consensus that excellence and impact should be necessary requirements for the award of a grant. In this context, we emphasize that ‘impact’ is neither a code word for applied research or partnerships with industry, nor for the number of Physical Review Letters published - in CMP, excellence and impact are found everywhere along the fundamental to applied continuum. Rather, impact implies that the research is of use to and appreciated by some significant external grouping, as appropriate to the goals of the research itself. Major recommendations 1. The first and second recommendations of the Bacon Committee, which have already been accepted by NSERC Council, should be implemented without further delay. (The recommendations of the Bacon Committee are given on page 13; the first two relate to the establishment of national or regional ‘clusters’ of materials research facilities, and the securing of adequate infrastructure support for these clusters) 2. The remaining recommendations of the Bacon Committee, dealing with the issue of large-scale facilities for Materials Research, should form the basis of an inter-agency initiative to ensure that they come to fruition. 3. NSERC should appoint a Group Chair for Materials Science and Engineering, in order to better coordinate activities in materials-related areas, and to better evaluate needs and opportunities. 4. NSERC should initiate a thorough review of its current discipline-based Grant Selection Committee (GSC) structure, in order to determine whether a new or modified structure might not be more conducive to cooperation, and to fostering interdisciplinary initiatives. The Materials Group Chair would play an important coordinating role in this review. 5. The increase in selectivity and funding dynamics demonstrated by the GSC for CMP (GSC28), particularly since Reallocation, should be continued, and augmented by the adoption of a set of principles which will guide funding decisions over the next four year grant cycle. 6. Any increase in funding secured by GSC28 as a result of Reallocation should be applied to an initiative dealing with infrastructure and cost-of-research issues associated with high quality programs in materials growth, modification, characterization and fabrication. iii VISION STATEMENT Condensed matter physicists study the electronic, optical, magnetic, thermal and structural properties of materials such as liquids and solids. Their research results in new techniques for observing the properties of matter (such as superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometry and scanning tunneling microscopy), as well as the creation of revolutionary devices (transistors, magnetic recording media, laser diodes) and standards (the Josephson volt and the quantum Hall effect ohm) which have impact far beyond their original field of research. Canadian research bridges topics from ceramic superconductors to cell membranes. Condensed matter physics has impact on, and provides a fundamental approach to, topics which are studied in other disciplines, such as biology, chemistry, and materials science and engineering. It provides the basis for understanding, predicting, and improving properties important in the performance of technologically vital materials. The condensed matter physicist has an increasingly interdisciplinary outlook, and can contribute unique skills and approaches to the understanding and solution of the expanding range of phenomena and problems which require such an interdisciplinary approach. Researchers in condensed matter physics have a natural appreciation of the value of possible applications of their research, and recognize excellence anywhere along the continuum joining the most basic to the most applied research. They also recognize the need to redouble their efforts to bridge the gaps which remain between university researchers and Canadian industry, and to explain better the benefits of their contributions

Load more