The future of Study Groups

A Loose Minute

An Informal Meeting to discuss the future of Study Groups with Industry was held on 27 March 2007 at the University of Nottingham during the 59th European Study Group with Industry. The meeting was chaired by Dr John Ockendon (JRO). There were about 20 people present.

• JRO gave a very brief review of the history of Study Groups, indicating how the format is thriving throughout the world. Or particular note is the first Study Group planned for Turkey in 2008 and further study groups in India. A meeting on the topic of Industrial Mathematics took place in Heidelberg last week convened by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Following this, the OECD will shortly issue a report to national governments encouraging them to stimulate the interactions between mathematics and industry.


• As far as UK Study Groups are concerned, the grant application for the next 5 years of Study Groups is currently in preparation. This evening’s meeting gave participants at Study Groups the opportunity to voice their suggestions and concerns in the light of this bid.


• The four issues raised were
  
  1. Report writing
  2. Mechanisms for encouraging further interactions between academics and industrialists
  3. The breadth of problem areas
  4. Representation from Industry and Academics


• Report Writing. The production of reports last year was unsatisfactory from many perspectives. Reports took a long time to produce and some academic colleagues felt that the pressure to write reports was unevenly distributed. Report writing is seen as a somewhat thankless task, and the incentives to academics for prompt production are negligible.


• JRO advertised the existence of a new electronic peer reviewed journal to be published by the Toronto-based Fields Institute for Mathematical Sciences; the Journal of Case Studies in Mathematics and Industry will accept good papers from study groups, with a very rapid turnaround of review and publication. One effect of such a journal is that it introduces an incentive to academics to write study group reports since there is now the prospect of a peer-reviewed publication. Information on this initiative can be found on our website by following this link.


• Mechanisms for encouraging further interactions between academics and industrialists. Dr Ruben Schulkes (Norsk-Hydro) gave an industrial perspective. He sees the study group as a mechanism to engage academics in an ongoing research relationship. A short timely report is preferred over a longer later one; but what he would particularly value would be for academics to visit his firm in person to make a presentation. This could then foster interest within the company in a way that a report rarely does.


• JRO remarked that this was an excellent idea and should be recommended to the wider study group community and encouraged in future ESGI meetings. It was observed that in principle this idea could be initiated in the present ESGI.


• The breadth of problem areas. Dr Eddie Wilson observed that there were a lot of problems in continuum mechanics; he would like to see a broader range of problems. Dr Paul Dellar said that on balance in recent years there has been a tendency to include problems from areas other than continuum mechanics. JRO commented that perhaps one might wish for more problems in the area of stochastics and probability. In any case the emphasis must be on problems which are suitable for handling in the Study Group environment.


• Representation. Soundings from EPSRC indicate that they would like to see wider academic and industrial participation. The KTN will do some analysis on representation to date, but it believes that a core of experienced academics is required to provide inspirational leadership to younger researchers, whose churn rate is much higher. Also, it is a healthy sign to see repeat business from companies whose expectations were met in previous years.

Minute prepared by Dr Tim Gardener
Industrial Mathematics KTN
29 March 2007