SIAM responses on DMS name change

The DMS Name Change Proposal:
Responses from the SIAM Community

On October 12, 2011 SIAM members in the United States received an email concerning a proposal by the Director of the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) at NSF to rename the division to Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences. The email transmitted a letter from the Director making the case in favor of the change, and requested comments in favor or opposed to the name change. This report presents and summarizes the responses received, as requested by a committee of the NSF dealing with the proposal.

168 comments were received through December 13, 2011. These are appended below in the order of date received. Identifying headers have been removed, although many writers chose to self-identify within the message. Of the comments received:

Discussions were also held among the SIAM officers, Council, Board of Trustees, and Committee on Science Policy. The viewpoints and breakdown of opinions were very similar in this group.

Several arguments arise frequently within the comments from these groups. From the majority opposed to the change these include:

In the responses favoring the proposal the major points raised were:


Respectfully submitted,

Nick Trefethen, SIAM President
Doug Arnold, SIAM Past-President
Subject: about change of name DMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:47:42 -0400

I am against changing the name of this division. I think the part of statistics that belongs
under the umbrella of mathematics is already there and we don't need to emphasize it. If we
start adding sub sections then why not adding also "Theoretical Computer Science"? Division
of Mathematical Sciences is a wonderful name for a collection of difference sciences that  use
math in all its versions. Trying to add more to it will only make it less inclusive.

Best regards,

Gigliola Staffilani

********************************************************************************************

Gigliola Staffilani
Abby Rockefeller  Mauze Professor                        email: [email protected]
Department of Mathematics                                phone: 617-253-4981
MIT, room 2-246                                          fax : 617-253-4358
Cambridge MA 02139                                       http://www-math.mit.edu/~gigliola/

Subject: Against
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:07:37 -0400

I strongly oppose the name change. And the thinking
behind it.

--
William K. Allard
Professor of Mathematics
Duke University
Box 90320
Durham, NC 27708-0320
(919) 660-2861 Fax:(919) 660-2821

Subject: against
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:59:52 -0400

Hi Nick (?),

I believe that NSF should not insert "and Statistical" into the "Division of Mathematical
Sciences". Besides possibly belittling statistical sciences as seeming separate from mathematical,
this choice seems to single out a subfield of mathematics for special treatment, which does
not seem justified. I would advocate to keep the current umbrella title.

Martin

Martin Z. BAZANT, Associate Professor
Chemical Engineering & Mathematics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
http://web.mit.edu/bazant/www

Subject: AGAINST Proposed Name Change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:50:38 -0400

I would like to cast my vote against the proposed name change.  The
title of "Mathematical Sciences" already covers statistical
sub-disciplines.  To change it would imply that the field of
Statistics stands apart from the rest of Mathematics.  This would be
incorrect.

Thank you,
Andrew Kozak

Subject: a proposed change at NSF
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:53:36 -0500

I do not think it is a good idea to change the name of DMS to
something that includes also statistics.

Mathematicians have been hired by mathematics and non-mathematics
departments in many universities and they collaborate actively
and very successfully in many applied areas mention in the letter of
Dr. Pantula. This is a welcome development. But fundamental (and applied)
mathematics needs nurturing, care, support, and funding beyond
immediate applications. In my opinion, this is what DMS stands for
and it should NOT be changed.

I definitely oppose the change of the name.

R. Lazarov,

--

***********************************************************************
Raytcho Lazarov                         phones: (979) 845-7578(office)
Department of Mathematics                         (979) 693-1114(home)
Texas A&M University                               FAX: (979) 862-4190
College Station, TX 77843-3368           e-mail: [email protected]
                             http://www.math.tamu.edu/~raytcho.lazarov
***********************************************************************

Subject: comment
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:53:06 -0400

Hello,

I suggest keep the name

Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS)
at NSF

Best regards,

Constantin Andronache
Boston College
[email protected]
1-617-552-6215

Subject: Comment on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:06:39 -0500 (CDT)

I oppose the change of name. The paragraph included in your letter stated my reasons as well
as I could, so I simply reproduce it:

   The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
   Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
   been discussed or justified.

William W. Symes
Noah Harding Professor in Computational and Applied Mathematics
Professor of Earth Sciences
Co-Director, Center for Computational Geophysics
Director, The Rice Inversion Project
Rice University
6100 Main St.
Houston TX 77005
fon: 713-348-5997
fax: 713-348-5318

Subject: comments on the name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:55:09 -0400

I would like to voice my opposition to name change.
Amongst several reasons for my opposition are:
1. singling out one discipline is arbitrary.
2. mathematics is a broad field, and statistics is a part of it.
3. Preferential treatment, even in the name, may lead to tangible differences
4. singling out a name of one of the field may lead to eventual separation of statistics.
An additional barrier would be created. Unfortunately, such a barrier can sometimes
serve to protect lower standards in one field versus another.

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:11:33 -0400

Although I do believe that at times statistics gets the short shrift within DMS, I strongly oppose
the name change. Statistics is not only a mathematical science, it is in fact a subdiscipline
of mathematics, even if statisticians insist it is not. If statistics is a separate discipline,
then so are analysis or topology, or even partial differential equations and combinatorics. DMS
is about mathematical sciences and statistics is one of them and singling it out as it is with
the new name is completely unfair to the other mathematical sciences.
   The real problem at NSF with the mathematical sciences is not the how statistics is treated,
   but is the fact that computer science has its own directorate. This is completely insane. CS
   is a mathematical science as well but somehow it is deemed to deserve a directorate while
   the rest of the mathematical sciences have to share a directorate with physics, chemistry,
   and the geophysical sciences. Does anyone think this makes sense? No it doesn't. For one
   thing, it greatly skews resources towards a single department in universities; for example,
   just examine how much easier it is to get an NSF CAREER grant in CS than in MPS departments.
   What NSF should be talking about is creating a Directorate of Mathematical Sciences, perhaps
   consisting of applied and computational mathematics, computer science, pure mathematics,
   and statistics divisions.
   Another issue NSF should be talking about is how to better serve computational science and
   engineering research and training. Right now, everyone at NSF does CSE, or so they say,
   and yet CSE has no home.
   Worrying about how statistics is viewed should not be a high priority, and the arguments
   put forth for doing the name change are unconvincing.
    I'd be pleased if my name (Max Gunzburger) is included in this message.

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:01:15 -0400

To whom it may concern:

As a long time NSF-DMS awardee,   I strongly oppose the proposed
the name change from DMS to MSS.  Besides I agree with the concerns
of three previous DMS directors,  I also feel that the proposed name change is not
necessary because the term "mathematical sciences" is broad enough to
include the data-driven applications. The proposed name not only favors
one sub-area but also causes a lot of confusions in the scientific community and to
the general public about the mathematical sciences.  In the society we
often hear that people (including educators and politicians)  use phrases
like  "mathematics,  science  and technology".  I do not think people use
phrases like "mathematics, statistics, science and technology".
Finally, let me also say that the term "mathematical sciences" is
well defined and understood in the scientific community and in the society.
Why to change something "good" to something "bad"?  If the current director of
DMS really thinks "statistical sciences" is so important and great,  I would suggest
that he should propose to the NSF to create a new "statistical sciences division"
instead of messing up with the good name DMS.

X. Feng
University of Tennessee

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:39:08 -0500

The following are my comments I have already sent to AMS.

With all due respect to my colleagues' opinions, I do not see the move as a negative one. In
fact, it could cause many descriptive statisticians to think more mathematically and make their
research more reliable. I believe, it is up to those who are to implement the change, if ever
approved, under type of policies they want to fund proposals. Currently, there are many grants
awarded for curriculum changes, etc. under the mathematical science umbrella that are nothing
but wasting taxpayers' money and damaging the name of researchers. I also think, this move
may bring mathematicians and statisticians much closer to each other for more practical basic
research collaboration than some isolated fancy researches that no human being will ever use them.

Best regards,

Haghighi

Aliakbar Montazer Haghighi, Ph. D.
Professor and Head of Department of Mathematics
Prairie View A&M University
P. O. Box 519, Mail Stop 2225
Prairie View, Texas 77446-0519
Tel: (936) 261-1970, Fax: (936) 261-2088
E-mail: [email protected]
Web: http://pvamu.edu/pages/385.asp
Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief of AAM, An International Journal: http://www.pvamu.edu/aam

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:42:00 -0400

I have not read the position paper, but simply note that statistics is a branch of mathematics--the
name change is vacuous and provides no additional information.

Yours sincerely,
-- J.S. Wettlaufer Yale University New Haven, CT 06520-8109 Tel: 203-432-0892
http://pantheon.yale.edu/~jw378 August-January NORDITA http://www.nordita.org/ Stockholm,
Sweden Phone: +46 8 5537 8444

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:45:32 -0500

I am writing to express my total disagreement  with a possible renaming of the DMS at NSF. The
program is already inclusive and geared toward basic research in mathematics and statistics. The
change is unnecessary and would potentially decrease the funding for basic research, which is
the very purpose of DMS.

Thank you.

Jorge Rebaza

Department of Mathematics

Missouri State University

Subject: DMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:36:51 -0400 (EDT)

Just to say that I oppose the name change - it's just dumb. DMS includes pure and applied math
and statistics - there is no special role given to statistics. Some stats depts are separate,
just as some applied depts are. It's a slippery slope to preferring one subfield. Can't we
persuade congress that statistics and "big data" all are rooted in mathematics?

Best,        Alex

*-------------------------------------------------------------------~-^`^-,.-'
|\   Dr Alex Barnett   Rm 206, Kemeny Hall, HB 6188, Department of Mathematics
| `                    Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, 03755
|  http://math.dartmouth.edu/~ahb                   tel: (603) 646-3178

Subject: DMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:40:17 -0700

do not change  - DMS is good.

Subject: dmsnamechange-11/12/11
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:15:39 -0400

As a mathematician at General Motors I shared and office with a statistician.  He would view the
statement that "The progression  and the culture of statistics do not justify its being viewed
as one of the mathematical sciences."    as totally absurd.  Both of us dealt with large sets
of data and each of us relied upon each others subdisciplines.

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:59:40 -0400

Dear SIAM leaders,
I do not agree with the proposed name change for DMS as it singles out Statistics for no
apparent reason.
Thank you,
Aleks Donev

--
Aleksandar Donev, Assistant Professor of Mathematics
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
Office: 1016 Warren Weaver Hall, New York University
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: (212) 992-7315; Fax: (212) 995-4121
Mailing address: 251 Mercer St, New York, NY 10012
Web: http://cims.nyu.edu/~donev

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:25:36 -0400

I am against the change.
I agree with the view:
The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area.

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:58:40 +0000

I support the change from DMS to DMSS.  Rather than diminishing "mathematics" as a discipline
or confusing terms, this change provides focus for those who might assume that DMS is devoted
solely to pure mathematics.

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:45:50 +0000

To whom it may concern:

I learned that there is a proposal being discussed of re-naming DMS into "Division of Mathematical
and Statistical Sciences". I am writing to express my opinion about this proposal.

To me, this seems to be a bad idea. I think Statistics should be considered a part of
Mathematics. The new name would suggest otherwise.

I am an applied mathematician, working now primarily in mathematical neuroscience (but also
on numerical methods for linear Boltzmann-type equations), and I have had support from DMS a
number of times over the years, including a current grant.

Best regards,

Christoph Börgers
Department of Mathematics
Tufts University
Medford, MA 02155

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:56:22 -0700

I would recommend AGAINST changing the DMS name.
As many SIAM people are likely to point out, SIAM has
already been through this debate in the reverse direction
when SISSC was renamed SISC.

Michael Saunders
Institute for Computational and Mathematical Engineering
Stanford University

Subject: DMS Name Change for NSF
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:05:49 -0400 (EDT)

To SIAM from:
Dr. Robert B. Smith  (001024200)
Phone:     612-789-3698
E-Mail:     [email protected]

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I would argue that the DMS name should not be changed to Division of Mathematical and Statistical
Sciences.  The name would be too ambiguous and subject to misinterpretation.

My reasoning starts with the view represented in Nick Trefethen's example of the against
paragraph.  It elevates the role of the statistical sciences to the same level as the whole of
all mathematical sciences.
That is not beneficial and is unjustified by logical argument except seemingly for the purposes
of marketing and grantsmanship. That is not at all scientific or professional reasoning.

In the two paragraphs of brief for & against arguments I sense an ambiguity in the meaning of
"statistics", and the two arguments are talking past each other.  The arguments are not engaging
each other and a resolution of the differences will not be solved easily.

On the one hand mathematicians in general probably have in mind statistical analysis or
application of statistical methods (and not the data accumulation itself).

On the other hand many people, non mathematicians, use the terms "statistics" and "statistical
sciences" as being the collections of data and its interpretation.  Certainly the general public,
journalism and writers use "statistics" to refer to the data, its collection, classification,
simple interpretations.  "The statistics are in and show that ... "

Statistical Sciences is too ambiguous in general and is not helpful to clear thinking to
include it as part of the name of an NSF Division.  Statistical Analysis is certainly a subset
of mathematical sciences not apart from it and deserving elevation.  Nearly the same is true
of Statistical Sciences.  Is political polling, of timely interest, a part of Statistical Sciences.

I think the NSF can do better. Firstly they need to resolve and sharpen up the meaning of what
the pro and con arguments are talking about.  Otherwise there will be too much ambiguity about
the meaning of the division name.

My reaction to Dr Pantula's letter is that it is largely political  -- perhaps that is the
director's job.
But it also seems an effort to appropriate parts of too many other areas into the Mathematical
Sciences.  "--- sustainability, energy, massive and complex data, economic development, health,
environment, and security ..."  as well as  "--- other domain sciences and engineering --- ".
Those other areas may object to such an appropriation.

Subject: DMS name change: no
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:00:16 -0400

This is pointless; statistics is a branch of applied mathematics,
appending this to the name of the division serves no purpose

        Predrag Cvitanovic'
                Glen P. Robinson Chair in Nonlinear Sciences
                School of Physics
                Georgia Institute of Technology
                Atlanta, GA 30332-0430, USA

Subject: DMS or DMSS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:43:47 -0400 (EDT)

      I just sent the following letter to "[email protected]."  It contains my thoughts on
      this issue.

Sincerely yours,
George Andrews
SIAM Fellow

   Last January, in my waning moments as AMS President, I wrote the following letter to
   Sastry Pantula after the Joint meetings in New Orleans.  My letter was in response to a
   continuing use of the acronym SMACS (Statistical, Mathematical and Computational Sciences)
   by Director Pantula in public presentations.  Here are the relevant paragraphs that I sent
   him:
   
     *********************************************************************
     I would like to follow up a little on the question that I raised at
     the beginning of the question and answer period after your talk.  As you
     recall, I asked you if the use of the acronym, SMACS (Statistical,
     Mathematical and Computational Sciences), signalled a new emphasis at the
     NSF with concentration on Statistics and Computational Mathematics.  I was
     greatly reassured by your response.  However in light of your assurance
     that Statistics and Computational Mathematics will in no way be privileged
     during your reign, I would like to recommend that you not use SMACS in
     referring to your domain at the NSF.

     A number of mathematical scientists have expressed their concern about this acronym.
     The reason that it causes concern is because of its non-parallel construction.  It is like
     saying that there will be a Mackerel, Fish and Halibut project at the local aquarium. Because
     mackerel and halibut are two species of fish, one assumes that these two will dominate
     the project. Everyone understands that Statistics and Computational Mathematics are two of
     the several mathematical sciences under your jurisdiction.  I am sure from your response
     in New Orleans that it is not your intention to make anyone think that Statistics and
     Computational Math are going to get special treatment; indeed, you were quite emphatic
     about this.  Using the acronym SMACS makes one draw incorrect conclusions about your
     intentions, and I hope that you will return to using the simple phrase, Mathematical
     Sciences.
     *********************************************************************

   Now, for reasons not explained, Director Pantula has reduced his campaign from SMACS to
   DMSS. Considering the evolution from SMACS to DMSS, I become even more concerned about where
   this is leading.  What was the point of originally including "Computational Sciences" and
   then dropping them?  One cannot escape the impression that a cosmic shift in emphasis was
   contemplated for DMS. Once opposition arose, the effort was scaled back to merely getting a
   further S in DMS.  However, Director Pantula's letter suggests strongly that while it is to
   be just DMSS; SMACS with a corresponding shift of emphasis to mission research rather than
   basic research is what is contemplated.  If the NSF diminishes its support for fundamental
   research, there is no other Federal Agency charged with taking over that that vital aspect
   of science.  I strongly oppose the proposed name change.

Sincerely yours,
George E. Andrews
Immediate Past President, AMS

Subject: keep it as DMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:59:07 -0700

--

Subject: Name Change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:14:55 -0400

My $0.02 - Division of Mathematical and Decision Sciences.   I believe one of the outcomes
from a successful project is the ability to make better/faster/more certain decisions.

Roy R. Creasey, Jr., Ph.D.
Senior Program Analyst

Patricio Enterprises, Inc.
PO Box 3044
Stafford, VA  22555

125 Woodstream Blvd., Ste 105               540-628-7276 (office)
Stafford, VA  22556                                       434-414-4872 (cell)

540-288-2225 (fax)
www.patricioenterprises.com                  [email protected]

LEGAL DISCLAIMER:  The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copy, distribution or any action taken
or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Subject: Name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:35:21 +0000

I AM STRONGLY OPPOSED TO THE PROPOSED NAME CHANGE.

Peter Bates
517-353-4875

Subject: Name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:52:04 -0400

I think the name should remain the same.

Subject: Name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:17 -0400

I am strongly against the proposed name change and support the stance taken by the previous
directors who feel this name change is preferential to one subarea and implies that statistics
is not a mathematical science.

Linda Lesniak
Drew University
Emeriti Professor of Mathematics

Subject: Name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:22 -0400

I support changing the name to Mathematical and Statistical Sciences.  Statistics is not a
sub-field of mathematics but rather its own discipline.

Subject: Name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:37:16 -0700

Retaining the same name is the right thing to do. Statistics is part of the general mathematical
sciences.

Subject: Name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 21:20:32 -0700

I'm in favor.

Professor Peter Salamon
Dept. of Math & Stats
San Diego State University
San Diego, CA 92182-7720

(619) 594-7204
[email protected]
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~psalamon/

Subject: Name Change for the Division of Mathematical Sciences
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 21:16:12 -0400

I have worked in industry for a number of years forming applied mathematics groups that are
often separate from statistics groups for programmatic  or organizational reasons.  I have had
to make a special effort to ensure working relationships between these groups remain good.
The skill sets are complementary and collaborations are often fruitful.  What was usually
the one bone of contention was the formation of an applied mathematics group implied that the
statistics groups didn't do mathematics and were not applied.

The name change suggested for the DMS will certainly partially or even fully divert the attention
of the two communities from one of complementary skills and collaboration to one of competition
for control, funding and recognition.  There are already too many negative influences on US
funding agencies from congressional micromanagement to pork-barrel legislation.  Polarizing the
statistics and mathematics communities would be yet another unnecessary distraction or worse.
Best regards.

Jeff Saltzman
Senior Director - AstraZeneca Predictive Computational Sciences

Sent from my iPad

Subject: Name change opinion
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:42:13 -0600

Honestly, don't people have better things to do with their time?

David Eyre

________________________________________
David Eyre
VP, Business Systems

Idaho Technology Inc.
390 Wakara Way
Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA

USA: 1-800-735-6544
Bus:+1 (801)736-6354 x312
Fax:+1 (801)588-0507

www.idahotech.com

________________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-mail and any attachments are confidential information of the sender
and are for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this E-mail or any attachment is
prohibited. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning
it to the sender and delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.

Subject:
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:01:09 -0400

  The name change seems to specify one area over another.
Statistics is a mathematical science.   If statistics was not a mathematical science, then we
would not have any statisticians at
DMS which we do.

Subject:
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:37:01 -0400 (EDT)

I am opposed to the name change.

Many of the recent forays of statistics into data mining and "big" data
have considerable overlap with computer science, and are mostly funded by
CISE.  Since computer science is long gone from the fold the mathematical
sciences (where it originated), this renaming seems a transparent attempt
to regain some of the statistical machine learning from CISE as a
"statistical science."  For many of us computer science (distinguished
from hardware and computing technology) is still a mathematical science
(the existence of CISE notwithstanding), as is statistics.  To argue
otherwise seems to be motivated more by politics and resources than
truth.

=====
Layne T. Watson
Departments of Computer Science and Mathematics
Mail Code 0106
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA   540-231-7540  [email protected]

Subject:
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:46:11 +0000

Dear Director of DMS,

I am writing to ask that you not change the name of DMS to Division of Mathematical and
Statistical Sciences.  I have been supported by DMS continuously since 1982 (except for an NIH
grant for a few years the 1980s and an Air Force contract for a few years in the 1990s).

I am concerned that the name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical science,
that is: is not already under DMS.
I am worried that the name change implies diminished relevance of the *other* mathematical
sciences.  Such a change would be against common usage and would be preferential to one
sub-area--statistics.
I worry also that this indicates the desire for a realignment of resources without discussion
or justification to the mathematical community.

NSF support has been invaluable to my research over the years and patents have come out of my
NSF work along with the opportunity to mentor students and postdoctoral associates.  This NSF
support has helped the infrastructure of mathematics and broader impact.  If any specific field,
such as statistics, is singled out, as I wrote above, it indicates it would have more support
and the other fields would have less.

Please leave the name and mission of DMS as it is now.

Thank you.

Subject:
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:55:40 +0000

Dear Doug and Nick,

I think this change is a terrible idea.  Statistics is an important part of the mathematical
sciences, but it is only a part. I simply don't believe that other areas of mathematical sciences
won't remain equally  important as we move forward, even in the understanding of large data
sets-- one must after all have models to begin with (!) -- and singling any one area out as being
special is going end up having negative repercussions on the way the development of mathematics
proceeds, as well as the ways members of the community think the NSF feels about different areas.

Michael

Subject:
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:38:41 -0600

I am against the name change

Subject:
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:42:19 -0500 (CDT)

I agree with the arguments opposing the name change:

The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
   Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
   been discussed or justified.

Luis Caffarelli

Subject: Oppose DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:37:32 -0400

I speak as a mathematician employed in the Department of Defense and
as a member of SIAM.  This is a personal opinion that does not
represent a position of the US Government.

I urge the DMS not to make the proposed name change.

At my agency, statistics is regarded as a mathematical discipline.  We
solve problems by applying appropriate tools without regard for
whether they might be considered mathematical, statistical, or
computational.  The proposed name change reflects a distinction of
interest primarily to academics.  The distinction is artificial from
the viewpoint of real-world problem solving.  While statistics is not
mathematics, it is properly regarded as a mathematical science,
therefore the current name is appropriately inclusive.

-- Emil Volcheck [email protected] http://EmilVolcheck.com/

Subject: oppose name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:37:30 -0400

I oppose the change for the same reasons as leaders of the AMS oppose it.

The large portion of Statistics is mathematical should continue to be
under the umbrella of "Mathematical Sciences". While Statistics is
increasing important in our world, I do not think that the overall goals
of the Mathematical Sciences and the benefits that MS offer to the country
would be well served by the change.

Subject: oppose such a name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:45:33 +0000

Subject: Opposition to DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:53:33 -0400

Dear Nick and Doug,

Eric Friedlander, the president of the AMS, sent a message to the mathematical community with
compelling reasons (attached below) for opposing such a name change. I agree with these reasons,
especially the third one, and also strongly oppose such a divisive proposal.

Best regards,

Guillaume Bal
Professor of Applied Mathematics
Columbia University

---------

1.)  The mission of the NSF is to fund basic research.  Much of
     mission-oriented Statistics is funded by other federal agencies,
     hospitals, industry, etc.  This name change suggests a move within
     DMS to relax its focus on basic research.
2.)  The suggestion of "new resources to all core programs" is far
     different from any commitment to seek new resources to support the
     basic research of these programs.
3.)  The current name (Division of Mathematical Sciences) was crafted to
     be inclusive.  The inclusiveness of DMS has resulted in increased
     funding for many programs including Statistics.  The Mathematical
     Sciences should work together, emphasizing commonality and presenting
     the best case for the importance of the Mathematical Sciences.
4.)  Statistics is only one of 10 programs supported by DMS.  In 2010, of
     the 2978 proposals submitted to DMS core programs, 242 were submitted
     to the Statistics program.  It is natural to ask why Statistics
     appears to be uniquely selected by DMS for special emphasis.
5.)  The analysis of big data is indeed important, and the Mathematical
     Sciences will play an important role in developing fundamental concepts
     and approaches to manage the "data deluge" and extract useful content.
     That said, National Science Foundation support of the Mathematical
     Sciences should energetically embrace basic research in all aspects
     of the Mathematical Sciences to advance fundamental knowledge and
     initiate unexpected revolutionary applications.

Subject: opposition to name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:00:24 -0400 (EDT)

Statistics is a branch of applied mathematics that has undeniable importance for a number
of disciplines.  Yet, it is only one such branch. Others include logic, optimization, linear
algebra, differential equations, and analysis.  Elevating one branch suggests that it is more
worthy of attention and perhaps funding than others.  As a consequence, other branches would
be lowered, perhaps in priority for funding. Resentment will flourish.

I do not support the proposed name change.

--
Lenwood S. Heath            Professor
2160J Torgersen Hall            Office phone: (540) 231-4352
Department of Computer Science        Cell phone: (540) 392-6672
Virginia Tech                FAX:   (540) 231-7040
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0106        Email: [email protected]
WEB: http://people.cs.vt.edu/~heath/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Message and signature   (c)2011 Lenwood S. Heath  All rights reserved
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: outrage
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 21:22:21 -0400

Dear Doug and Nick,

Thank you for taking the initiative to gather our opinions. Here is my blurb:

As an interdisciplinary mathematician working with ‘big data', and a PI for grants that
precisely deal with data and knowledge, I strongly oppose the proposed name change for DMS. The
risk is high that the move will not pay off in terms of extra revenue for the division. In
an environment of budget uncertainty and short-term rotation of the officers, the mere intent
that the funding level should remain unchanged for disciplinary mathematics is unconvincing. Is
aggregating disciplines in this fashion an invitation to downsizing them?  Should the division
director have negotiated a budget commitment before proposing his idealistic move? There is
already a fair amount of external pressure to run calls for interdisciplinary research. If one
is going to willingly dilute the intent of the NSF to invest in basic research yet one more time,
one should at least be rewarded for it.

Subject: Please do not change name
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:29:39 -0400

Please do not change name, statistics is a subset of mathematics

Subject: Proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:54:19 -0400 (EDT)

I do not favor the proposed name change for DMS.

I support the argument against the change that was given in SIAM's email requesting feedback:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
sciences to data. This violates common usage and the inclusive
view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
by DMS for many years. The proposed name is preferential
to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
been discussed or justified.
--------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, I believe that both applied mathematics and statistics
are strengthened by maintaining the traditional view of both disciplines
as areas (along with mathematics) within Mathematical Sciences.
I do not believe that either discipline will benefit from weakening
the connection between the two.

Mark S. Gockenbach
Professor and Chair
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Michigan Technological University

Subject: Proposed Name Change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:55:03 -0500

 Nick and Doug,
            While I find myself knee deep in bayesian statistics these days, I do not favor
            changing the name of DMS. I agree with the argument registered against the change.
            Regards,
            Tinsley

____________
J. Tinsley Oden
Associate Vice President for Research
Director, ICES
Institute for Computational Engineering & Sciences
ACES Building, Room 4.102
1 University Station (C0200)
The University of Texas at Austin
Austin, Texas 78712
Phone: 512-471-3312
Fax: 512-471-8694
[email protected]
http://www.ices.utexas.edu

What starts here changes the world.

Subject: Proposed name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:11:17 -0400

Dear Board Members,

I oppose the proposed name change, for reasons well set out by
prior commenters: first, it is not necessary, since mathematical statistics
already falls under the umbrella of DMS  (see, e.g.,
http://www.math.cornell.edu/ADMIN/Grants/Packet/dms-areas.pdf),
and, second,  it implies an effective policy change that I expect would
be detrimental to basic mathematical research, and one that should be imposed
if at all only after due consideration by interested parties and in explicit rather
than implicit fashion.

I believe that Mathematical Biology is a good comparison point, and would
suggest a similar handling of Statistics/large data problems if those are decided
to be a current target of emphasis, without changing the basic structure of DMS.
Emphases, after all, come and go with evolution of the field and the needs of applications.

Sincerely,
Kevin Zumbrun
Chair, Mathematics
Indiana University

Subject: proposed name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:38:06 -0400

I am opposed to the change of name from
Division of Mathematical Sciences to
the Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences.
At the heart of  Dr. Sastry's view is a characterization of
Statistical Science as being intrinsically interdisciplinary
and the implication that Mathematical Sciences are not.
I believe this to be, on the whole or "statistically", false.
Data analysis, central to statistics, is an area of accelerating importance.
It fits very well into the heading of Mathematical Sciences.

Subject: proposed name change for DMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:02:18 -0400

Dear Colleagues

I strongly oppose the proposed name change from Division of Mathematical Sciences to
Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences.  Like other similar changes
at CISE, this is almost certain to be counterproductive and divisive.  The
term "mathematical sciences" is already inclusive of statistics, and the
proposal will likely presage a shift away from support of basic research.

Sincerely
Michael Overton
Professor of Computer Science and Mathematics
Courant Institute
NYU

Subject: Proposed name change of DMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:59:20 -0500

I agree with the opposition and also feel that including statistics in the name would not be
beneficial in the long run if our goal is to treat Statistics as a part of mathematical science.

--
Dr. Aminul Huq

Assistant Professor
Center for Learning Innovation
University of Minnesota Rochester
Phone: 507-258-8210, Fax: 507-280-2820
Email: [email protected]

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:53:29 -0400

The proposed name change is absurd.  Statistics is one of the mathematical sciences.

The justification for the change is just politics.  Maybe some higher-ups believe that anything
with "mathematics" in its name is abstract and useless, but it is better to educate them than
to make confusing name changes.

  Jonathan Eckstein



Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:53:51 -0400

The change in name is a bad idea.  It is especially unfortunate that the Director has attempted
to implement it without due consideration of the consequences.

Jed Keesling, Chair
Department of Mathematics
University of Florida

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:54:03 -0700 (PDT)

Greetings,
I'm against the name change since I agree with the primary arguments stated below:

   The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
   Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
   been discussed or justified.

Kind Regards,
Derya Ozyurt, PhD, PE

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:01:19 -0400

Why leave out computer?

If the name is changed, why not to

COMPUTER, MATHEMATICAL AND STATISTICAL SCIENCES

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:02:13 -0400

I agree strongly with the arguments AGAINST the change.

Thanks,
--
Cory D. Hauck
Computer Science and Mathematics Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory and
Department of Mathematics
University of Tennessee
1 Bethel Valley Road, Bldg. 6012
Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6367
Phone: 865.574.0730
Fax: 865.574.0680
Email: [email protected]

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:09:58 -0400

Keep the name as is, it is more inclusive and generic.

--VA

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:13:23 +0000

The proposed change is actually a bad idea. Mixing of the two will make the program lacking
of focus. Mathematics, including Industrial and applied math, focuses on ways and method of
computations, while statistics, including applied statistics, focuses on data, analysis, and
outcomes. Statistics needs a lot of math but is not math.

NSF should, instead, have a Division of Statistical Science.

Ding Yuan

_______________________

Ding Yuan, Ph. D.
NSTec Los Alamos Operations
Contractor to the US DOE
PO Box 898
Los Alamos, NM 87544
Tel. 505-663-2085
Email: [email protected]

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:23:07 -0700

For the very reasons stated below by the three former DMS directors, I agree that there is no
need to change the name of the Division of Mathematical Sciences to one that includes the word
"statistics" and that doing so sends the wrong message about mathematics.

In the Boeing Company, we have an "Applied Mathematics" group which includes a smaller statistics
group as a part. We do not have an "Applied Mathematics and Statistics"g roup. It is understood
that applied statistics is a part of applied mathematics. (I'd bet that a statistician or two
has lobbied for such a name change in the past, but this seems very much to be special interest
oriented.)

I believe that statisical ideas will become more and more prevalent in applied and pure
mathematical research in the future, but I see no need to call out this one trend or area as
proposed any more than including any other area emphasis.

Michael Bieterman

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:34:28 -0700

101211

Statistical sciences are mathematical.

Ron

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:35:28 -0400 (EDT)

A "Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences" clearly would have
to be the primary home to statistical, thermal, and condensed matter
physics (among other areas of modern physics), as these are statistical
sciences by definition. In fact, statistical mechanics is among the oldest
of the statistical sciences. The term "statistical science" is
simultaneously too broad and too narrow (both overdetermined and
underdetermined). The intersection of mathematical science and statistical
science is too small, while their union is too large.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:47:25 -0400

I agree with the views of the three former DMS directors. The proposed name is preferential to
one sub-area.
Why not single out computational mathematics for example.  It has been the basis for incredible
developments
over the last two decades.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:53 -0400

I write as an observer with no axe to grind (any longer) since I have been retired for 11
years and do not seek funding.  However, I had many opportunities to observe the interactions
between and views of various disciplines as a former Computer Science department head, former
SIAM President, and former President of the NEC Research Institute.

While many mathematics departments would like to view statistics as a sub-area of mathematics
(and certainly it draws heavily on mathematics) it is certainly not viewed that way by many
other disciplines - many of which teach their own courses on the topic (or ignore it, which was
unfortunately true in much of computer science the last time I was involved).   In many ways
it is not a mathematical discipline but one which uses mathematics (especially computational
mathematics) in a broader framework.  Bayesian theory, for example, is not mathematics, but a
theory that uses mathematics to get to its results.

For these reasons like this, I think that the proposed name change is appropriate, particularly
from a "political" perspective.   If mathematics continues to classify statistics as a subarea
of mathematics, there is a significant danger that some other discipline will co-opt the field.
By recognizing it as an important partner, that outcome could be forestalled.

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:32:38 -0400

I'd prefer Mathematical Sciences and Statistics since most of the social scientists would argue
that theirs are "Statistical Sciences".
Kathleen Shannon
Professor of Mathematics
Salisbury University
DH 104
Salisbury, MD 21801
410-543-6476

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:57:29 -0500

Dear SIAM Presidents,

I am not in favor of the name change exactly for the argument you gave below.

Best,
Beatrice

--
Beatrice Riviere, Associate Professor
Department of Computational and Applied Mathematics
Rice University
6100 Main Street, MS-134
Houston, TX 77005
(713) 348-4094

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:02:07 -0400

If the idea for this name change  is to enter the era of big data and to broaden the  interaction
with
other  disciplines and professional categories that rely on mathematics and statistics, then
why not change the name to "NSF Division of Mathematical and Analytic Sciences."

The use of the word "Analytic" connotes a very specific data+statistics approach to
most practitioners of big data - for example "database analytics" or "web analytics"
and is of course broad and extrinsic enough that no  field in the mathematical sciences
should be offended by this addition.

In fact, Wikipedia defines Analytics is the application of computer technology, operational
research, and statistics to solve problems in business and industry.

As you can see from my signature below, we at IBM already made this departmental
name change many years ago.

sincerely,

Dr. Ramesh Natarajan
Research Staff Member
Business Analytics and Mathematical Sciences
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
Rm. 33-256, P.O. Box 218
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
(914) 945-2766
Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:32:32 -0600

Dear SIAM Presidents,

The change makes no sense as regards semantics: statistical
sciences *are* part of math.  It seems just a political gambit given the
increased funding for UQ  under DOE and DOD.  The name
"Mathematical Sciences and Applied Statistics" would be
more appropriate as a focus differentiator.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:43:45 -0400

Dear SIAM,

I think that the proposed DMS name change is not a good idea.

For one thing, Statistics is already a disciplinary research
program within the DMS at NSF.  So, it is acknowledged that
there is a mathematical side of Statistics.  The situation
does not seem different to me than for other sub-fields
of Mathematics which attract researchers at the interface
of Mathematics and other Sciences/Engineering disciplines
(e.g., computational mathematics and mathematical biology,
which are disciplinary programs in the DMS as well).

LD

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:46:11 +0000

I agree with the arguments against the name change:  (quote)

Briefly, the primary arguments that have
been made against the change are:

   The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
   Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
   been discussed or justified.

Change is in the Air - Smoking in Designated Areas Only in effect.
Tobacco-Free Campus as of July 1, 2012.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:54:35 -0700

I don't think the name change is required. Statistics has always
been a branch of mathematics.

--Sunil.

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:10:33 -0500

As a PhD Mathematician that has worked in industry for 35+ years, I have read and used Feller's
classical books, and applied many statistical theories from others in real life research. I
do indeed consider Statistics a part of Mathematics, and find “Division of Mathematical and
Statistical Sciences” a name appropriate for the Department of Redundancy Department.

Bill Kamp

[email protected]

(952) 681-9947

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 21:23:53 -0500

Dear Nick and Doug,

What a surprise: a statistician arguing for separating statistics from mathematics.
Frankly I found all the argument for the name change baloney.
If we want to separate statistics from mathematics then let us do the same with applied and
pure mathematics, and some other areas.
I can understand the name change if it indicates a future separation maybe due to the large
size of the program.
As I understand this is not the case now.
In my opinion the name should stay because statistics is part of the mathematical sciences.
But don't  take my word for it. I am not a statistician.

Best regards,
========

Andras Balogh
Professor and Interim Chair
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Mathematics                   | phone: (956) 665-3460
University of Texas - Pan American     | phone: (956) 665-2119
Edinburg, TX 78539-2999                      | fax:   (956) 665-5091
http://www.math.utpa.edu/abalogh       | [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 21:29:33 -0700
[email protected]

The letter from the current director of DMS does not do a
sufficient job to justify this name change.

I will agree that NSF is confused by what constitutes the
mathematical sciences. For example, Operations Research
(OR) is in the Engineering directorate.

The main reason suggested in the letter for the name change
is to get more money. The letter does not address at all why
statistics is different from a mathematical science. In fact, the
change would seem insulting to statisticians, since it would
imply that their work is not done with mathematical rigor.

The letter suggests the emergence of big data as a reason
for raising the visibility of statistics. But big data is also very
much a focus of research supported by CISE at NSF. The
areas of data mining and learning theory are at the center
of this effort, as well as scalable high-performance computing
to handle the load.

The letter also implies that statistics is more interactive than
other areas of the mathematical sciences. I would propose a
test of this hypothesis by quizzing faculty in statistics departments
and applied mathematics departments to see which ones
know more about the technical fields they interact with. I am
willing to place a bet on the outcome of this test.

There is definitely a need to review organization and names
at NSF to reflect modern trends. NSF nurtured early CS research
and eventually CISE emerged at NSF as a Directorate. All of
the information sciences have become more significant in much
the way that Google emerged to replace General Motors as an
industrial leader in the USA.

However, the current proposal is lacking a sufficient basis
to support the recommendation. Maybe it is a good idea, but
I cannot see clear reasons why.

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:45:42 +0000

I totally support the arguments against the change.

The purpose of DMS is well represented in the inclusive title.

Subject: STEM distinction continues to erode through the professional administrator
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:09:11 -0400

Dear Dr. Trefethen,

I am an applied mathematics classical physicist.  My Ph.D. is in computational multibody which
is dominated by ODE's, PDE's, DAE's and the Eigenvalue Problem.  Lots of math here and
my devotion is directed to the math side not the business engineering side.

And that's my point of contention, there is too much manipulating being done by the American
business administrator in STEM methods to make them more comprehensible to his business sense.
I have witness this invasion over the last 40 years of my career.  I live in the Detroit, MI
area and have watched the brilliant MBA, most Harvard variety, come into the auto world and
take the STEM process away.  Much of the auto engineering science work was done locally but now
has been shipped out to lower cost foreign suppliers, many in Asia and Europe.  Consequently we
had two major American companies go belly up while the administrator walked away with tens and
hundreds of millions in dollars.

The problem here is the professional administrator has power and influence over the operations.
While STEM scientists think and work deeply in their research or development, the business
administrator is stealing away the process.  This suggests more STEM scientists need to grab
control of their profession, which you are doing now.

I see this action taking place in the simple change of a name.  Having worked with people
involved with the Six Sigma process for quality improvement I've gained some awareness of
how the business philosophy and approach has infiltrated and consumed the real science of
improving technical things.   At the root of the Six Sigma approach is statistics and the
businessman understands percentages and statistical parameters.  No real science is done
with Six Sigma, its just a philosophy of organizing the statistics.  Hence, I see the NSF
administrator wrangling with the current title to pull out a functioning of the NSF process
from the mathematical expert and fit it into the pocket of the MBA.  I've seen this done over
and over in American automotive and hoped there was a safe haven STEM could be comfortable in.
Apparently that niche is being renamed at NSF.

Thank you in asking for opinions.  If you need more, I can write more and hopefully point out
the bold challenges being taken by the business administrator.

Sincerely,

Allen P. Kovacs, Ph.D.
10199 Royce Drive
South Lyon, MI, 48178
[email protected]
734 434-7615

Subject: Text already sent to AMS
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:30:48 +0000

I am myself interested in statistics and its applications. It has many aspects. It must be
encouraged and funded.

It is not a new field.  If one believes that it is no more a part of Mathematical Sciences,
in view of the data deluge evolution, then one should create a new division, like Computer
Science has been created not so long time ago.

If the objective is to increase the funding with no reduction for Mathematics, that is what
should be done.

Mixing Mathematical Sciences with something else will not increase the funding, as history
can tell very clearly. Both Mathematics and Statistics will lose, and internal conflicts will
inevitably come out.

Mathematical Sciences is a well established division. It must remain as such. New divisions
can be created, as it has been the case in the past. It is  a normal  and good thing. NSF could
claim an  additional budget for  this new division.

Why is this option not considered?

Alain Bensoussan
International Center for Decision and Risk Analysis
School of Management
The University of Texas at Dallas
800 West Campbell  Rd, SM30
Richardson,TX 75080-3021
Tel 972-883-6117
Cell  214-677-6691

Subject: against change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:37:56 -0500

changing the name to include statistical science smacks of a flavor-of-the-day mentality. What
will you do when another area becomes prominent? And I thoroughly disagree with the suggestion
that statistical thinking is different from mathematical thinking. That reveals an overly
limited concept or mathematics.

--
[email protected]
cell 847-212-7462
123 N. Waukegan Rd. Suite 207 Lake Bluff IL 60044

Subject: Against the name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 07:37:27 -0400

The name change seems to imply a dichotomy between mathematics and the
presumably non-mathematical statistics.  In my view, it is not reflective
of the enlightened practitioners approach  in trying to understand
tera/peta scale data sets.  There are many emerging approaches to enable us
to understand the richness of the data and dividing the analytics into
statistical and non-statistical detracts from that pursuit.

Michael B. Ray
Director, Resources Sciences Laboratory
Corporate Strategic Research
ExxonMobil Research and Engineering
1545 Route 22 East, Annandale, NJ 08801
Voice: 908.730.2138  Fax: 908.730.3323

If you can't do it safely, don't do it.

Subject: arguing against the proposed name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:47:05 -0400 (EDT)

Dear Colleagues,

I am a former member of MPSAC and a member of the SIAM Board of Trustees as well as a Professor
of Mathematics at the Courant Institute. I strongly oppose the proposed name change from (DMS
to DMSS) for the following reasons:

(a) Statistics is indeed interdisciplinary. So are other parts of DMS's activity (including almost
everything it does in Applied Mathematics, and much of what it does in Scientific Computing). If
the current set of programs and structures do not adequately fund Statistics as an area, this
should be addressed by substantive changes. The proposed name change does nothing of the sort. If
the name change is intended to presage a shift of funding or emphasis, then the discussion
should be about *that*, rather than about an apparently-symbolic change such as the name of the
division. If the goal is to attract new funding through new initiatives involving Statistics,
then the focus should be on formulating those
initiatives not changing the name of DMS. If the problem is that Statistics does not currently
have a single home at NSF, I would point out that it is far from being alone in this respect
(for example, Scientific Computing and Theoretical Computer Science both lie partly in DMS and
partly in CISE, and there is plenty of Scientific Computing in other parts of NSF as well).

(b) The director of DMS should represent the interests of the entire mathematical sciences
community. It is natural for him to use his expertise to push for specific initiatives. But
a structural change that mainly serves his particular segment of the community is rather
different. Such a change seems appropriate only if it has reasonably broad approval from the
community, which this one does not.

Yours,

Robert V. Kohn
Professor of Mathematics
Courant Institute, NYU

Statistical Sciences_-189.txt <==
Subject: Comment in SUPPORT of changing the name of DMS to "Division of Mathematical and
Statistical Sciences"
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:02:12 -0400

Dear Presidents Friedlander, Trefethen, and Arnold:

I am writing to SUPPORT the proposed change of DMS to the Division of Mathematical and Statistical
Sciences, advocated by Director Pantula.

Because it is clear that the AMS leadership have made up their minds to oppose this proposal,
and because I am currently
an untenured member of a mathematics department at a major research university, I would request
that this comment remain
as anonymous as possible.

I think the trends are clear: if we are to thrive as a profession, mathematicians of all stripes
need to work harder to embrace connections to the
empirical sciences.  It is unconscionable in this day and age that, for example, many mainstream
undergraduate programs do not require
mathematics majors to take a single course in statistics, nor much in other sciences.  If we
are to hold on to a significant share of a shrinking
basic research budget nationally, we are going to have to get our heads out of the clouds and
grapple with more real world problems.   The
proposed name change, and the implied shift in emphasis towards embracing empirical aspects of
the mathematical sciences, makes sense
both intellectually and as a survival strategy.  I hope President Friedlander will reconsider
his opposition to it.

Subject: Comment on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:25:23 -0500

I am opposed to changing the name of the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS)
at NSF.  The proposed change would do more harm than good.

-- Donald W. Fausett
   Retired Professor of Mathematics
   Former Chair of Department of Mathematical Sciences (note: including statistics)
   Georgia Southern University

Subject: Comments on proposed DMS name change (fwd)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:30:50 -0700 (PDT)

Name change is unnecessary because:

(1) the theoretical aspect of statistics is no different from probabilisitc analysis, well
covered by mathematical sciences;

(2) the applied or data driven aspect of statistics can be
integrated into either computational mathematics or
machine learning, a subset of computer science.

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:38:04 -0700

Do not change the name.

1. Statistics is a mathematical science.

2. What science other than statistics is a statistical science?

-- John Gill Electrical Engineering Department, Stanford University

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 21:36:04 -0400

“Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences” means Mathematics and Statistics are
a sort of independence. Of cause, things are developing. But is statistics so developed now
that it has achieved a role as mathematics (sum of all other math), in both logics and role
of importance?   --- not time yet to me.

Hansong Tang

CCNY

Subject: DMS Name Change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:19:13 -0400

I do NOT support the name change.

Subject: DMS Name Change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:34:21 -0600

Greetings,

That Statistics is a mathematical science is well established. It says so
on the ASA web page. To call out Statistics as more important than other
subfields is inappropriate. While data is becoming more important because
of the increased importance of computation, it is no more important than
computation itself. Should we call  it the The Division of Mathematical and
Computational Sciences? Of course not. They are all Mathematical Sciences.

I believe this to be an ill conceived proposal.

Tom Manteuffel
Former SIAM President

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:01:12 -0700

Our department changed its name to Mathematical and Statistical Sciences several years ago,
and the division in our department has only widened. It has allowed certain administrators
to give preferential treatment to the statistics group, which has furthered animosity within
our department. This was definitely a very bad idea from the perspective of those of us
in mathematics. Our resources have fallen with faculty numbers in math plummeting, while
statisticians have remained roughly constant in number. I strongly oppose the name change as
it provides administrators additional cover to give special treatment to certain groups at the
expense of others.

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:32:12 -0700

I strongly oppose the proposed name change of DMS at NSF.
It definitely should stay with the current name of Division of Mathematical
Sciences.  As the three prior directors of DMS have argued against the change
by saying that:

   The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
   Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
   been discussed or justified.

I wholeheartedly concur with this argument.  In my opinion, statistics is
an important field of mathematical sciences, and it is not necessary to state
"statistical" explicitly in the name of the division.

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:36:11 +0000

To whom it may concern:

Having worked as a mathematician in both academia and industry, using lots of mathematics
and some statistics, I certainly feel that the name “Mathematical Sciences” implicitly
includes statistics as a subfield.  On the other hand, it seems pretty clear from my current
industry experience that data analysis is rapidly becoming a major, if not dominant, object
of investigation and of interest from parties outside the field.  Given that interest, I
think that the proposed name change could very well help the DMS in the internal and external
competition for resources at the NSF.  If one takes a look at the organizational chart of
divisions (http://www.nsf.gov/staff/orglist.jsp), it is clear that there are other divisions
which could easily make a case for their involvement in ‘big data' research.  So, if the
proposed change would enable DMS to defend and increase its share of resources for mathematical
research, and do so without diluting research support for the mathematical sciences other than
statistics, then I am for it, but note the strong conditional in bold.  If, on the other hand,
the result would be to push support for more researchers onto DMS without adding proportionately
more resources, or if the result were to reallocate resources within DMS toward statistics and
away from other mathematics, then I am opposed.

Doug Costa

Director of Quantitative Research

SIG, LLP

IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately
delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure
or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly
prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed
as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial
instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates
makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained
herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.

Subject: DMSS or DMSSSC?
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:43:47 -0500

I am not in favor of the name change. If statistics is not a
mathematical science, what is it then?

My second reason: scientific computing or computational science (to be
distinguished from computer science) is another discipline, which is
fast growing in spite of "purist" math departments in the US. It would
be significant from a funding perspective as well as for the
recognition in departments if it would be added to the name.

But then, we would end up entering all kinds of fields. Thus, keeping
the current umbrella-name and adding a descriptive line might be a
better choice.

Subject: Name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 07:19:13 -0400

Hi Nick & team.  I am a practical guy so I would chose the name that covers the most domain
space that is relevant and provides the best chance therefore of gaining a budget that moves
the science ahead.

Regards,

Dr. Michael P. Haydock

IBM Distinguished Engineer

[email protected]

[email protected]

Cell: 612-839-2640

"The information content is found in the derivative"

Subject: name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:01:06 -0400 (EDT)

Sirs:

The debate over the proposed change is a waste of time and money.  The current name has historical
weight and there is no need to change it.

- Sincerely, Martin Dowd

Subject: name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 08:04:39 -0600

An important question is whether statistics is already viewed as part of mathematical sciences,
by folks outside the area.

If there is some prevailing sense that the name Mathematical Sciences does not include statistics
then we should make the name change.  There are often separate mathematics and statistics
departments at colleges and universities, for instance.

But I suspect that Mathematical Sciences *does* include statistics in most folk's minds,
so to highlight a particular subarea of mathematics in the name does not seem right to me.

Subject: Name Change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:13:14 -0400

Please do not change the name.

Subject: name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:48:30 -0400

It seems clear that this proposal is indicative of an agenda.
I find it particularly disturbing that a Director who is himself a statistician would make
such inappropriately partisan proposal. The argument that in any event, an increasing portion
of support will go to statistics, may well be self-serving.  Surely, the
mathematics community does not want to abet a process which would result in
statistics being supported at the expense of mathematics.

Jeff Cheeger

Professor of Mathematics
Courant Institute

Subject: name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 00:30:43 -0400 (EDT)

To whom ...

I find the arguments against the proposed name change more convincing than those in favor.

Jim Case,
Member SIAM, MAA, and founding member Dept. Math. Sciences*, the Johns Hopkins University.

* name recently changed to "Dept. Applied Math & Statistics".

Subject: Name Change for the Division of Mathematical Sciences
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:42:57 -0400 (EDT)

I write to support the proposal to change the name of the Division of Mathematical Sciences to
the Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences.

First, the proposal makes sense, in that the Division does support both disciplines, and thus
there is no reason not to describe exactly what the Division supports.

Secondly, the proposal to change the name having been made, it would be very bad form for the
mathematical community to slap statistics in the face by refusing to do so. And it must be
recognized that, in most research universities, there are separate departments of mathematics
(with various variations) and of statistics.

Finally, as a former Director of the Division, I believe that the argument being made that the
change of name will add some visibility and (probably) resources is correct.

Thank you for asking for my views.

E. F. (Jim) Infante
Director, DMS, 1982-84

23 Hastings Landing
Hastings-on-Hudson, NY 12464
914-674-9810

PO Box 216
Phoenicia, NY 12464
845-688-5205

Subject: Nomen est omen
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:48:57 -0400

Dear Siam,

There is a funny and a more serious response to this naming conundrum.  The funny response is
that there is no need to
change the division's name, because Statistics is already included by the trailing 's' in
Mathematics (statisticians, on average, tend to find this less funny than other mathematicians).

More seriously, I strongly share the sentiment that this name change would be a mistake for
NSF and the community, sending the wrong signal.  Basically, despite the unquestionable and
growing importance of big data crunching, there is little or no evidence that the goals or
methods of fundamental mathematical science have shifted to the extent that a name change of
this magnitude is called for.  Surely, DMS can be responsive to perceived shifts in the funding
landscape without changing its name and singling out one sub-discipline for special mention.

If there were a vote, I'd vote against the name change.

Faithfully,
Oliver Buhler

-----------------------------------------------------------------
oliver buhler                                [email protected]
professor                mathematics and atmosphere ocean science
director of undergraduate studies                     mathematics
courant institute of mathematical sciences    new york university
251 mercer street, new york, NY 10012, USA   tel: +1 212 998 3265

Subject: no name change, please
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:40:59 +0000

I agree that he name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
  science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
  sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
  view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
  by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
  to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
  Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
  been discussed or justified.

      Richard M. Weiss, Tufts University

Subject: Nonesense
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:15:38 -0400

The proposal is silly game playing of little efficacy - - - if Pantula's argument has any validity,
I should suggest that "Logic" be also added to the name - - - Cordially - - - Duncan Morrill,
member MAA and SIAM

Subject:
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 04:41:53 -0400

The name change of the DMS will be another blow for mathematics in this country.  NSF does not
always know what it is doing.  It has focused on ridiculous projects like this on the past and
continues to do so now.

Many of our undergraduates are taught by incapable people in  mathematics education, math biology,
or statisticians. Now they want to blurry the lines between mathematics and statistics between
the damage that they have done is not enough.

--
___________________________________
Tony  Shaska, Associate Professor of Mathematics,
Oakland University
https://sites.google.com/a/oakland.edu/shaska/

Subject:
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 17:18:06 -0400

I fully agree that (a) the name change suggests that statistics is not a
mathematical science and (b) that it is divisive for no good reason.

Subject:
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 23:36:05 -0400

I oppose the name change of the Division of Mathematical Sciences  to the Division of Mathematical
and Statistical Sciences.  I believe that DMS is a broad and inclusive designation that ought
to be preserved.  While I like the intent behind the name change, I believe it will ultimately
diminish the prominence of mathematics in other funded areas and strategic interests.  Special
programs within DMS and cross-cutting programs can always identify specialties.  While I agree
that 'statistics is broadly accepted as a data-centric discipline', it is incorrect to suggest
that statistics is the dominant subfield or the driving force behind the exploration of 'big
data'.  Following this reasoning, DMS should have renamed itself the Division of Mathematical
and Computational Sciences long ago.

We are what we do.

The program name should reflect the enduring breadth of mathematics.

--
"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory." --Leonardo da Vinci
Louis F. Rossi                Professor
Director of Undergraduate Studies       Section Editor, SIAM Review
Department of Mathematical Sciences    [email protected]
University of Delaware            http://www.math.udel.edu/~rossi
Newark, DE 19716
(302) 831-1880 (voice)               (302) 831-4511 (fax)

Subject: NSF Name Change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:47:25 +0000

All of my degrees, a long time ago, are in Mathematics.  But I now call myself a Computational
Scientist.  Then I have to explain the difference between Computational Science and Computer
Science.  I wish we had a better name for the interdisciplinary field that surrounds scientific
computing.  Perhaps NSF could help with "Mathematical, Computational and Statistical Division".

   -- Cleve Moler

Subject: Proposed name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:51:18 -0400 (EDT)

    I wish to vote in favor of the proposed name change.

Subject: Proposed name change at NSF
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:33:42 -0400

Statistics is part of mathematical sciences, by putting a word statistical separate will divide
the mathematical sciences group and bring unwanted division among people, so I oppose the idea
and strongly support to have as  just division of mathematical sciences

Subject: Proposed NSF DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:26:17 -0400

Hi,

If I survey the use of mathematics in modern technology, I think it would be a crime to  not
have the DMS focused on a broad palette of basic research. (On the other hand I have not been
able to get a research award from the DMS, only conference grants, but I attribute that to
limited resources in this "post-cold war" period).

Sincerely,

Robert Kotiuga

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:15:18 +0000

Why not be more realistic and change it to "Division of Mathematical Sciences and Big Data Money"?
The proposed name change is redundant, shallow and potentially dangerous.  I am completely
opposed to the idea.

T.J. Healey, Professor
Department of Mathematics and
Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY  14853
607-255-8282,255-3738, 255-5062
Fax 607-255-2011
http://www.tam.cornell.edu/Healey.html

I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.  -- Ian Anderson (1972)

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:22:57 -0700 (PDT)

The name should NOT be changed.
1. Statistics is a branch of mathematics, simple enough!
2. It is not justified that "The proposed name would put the Division in a better
   position to vie for new resources in this era of big data
   and to collaborate with other divisions."
3. If more people believe "The progression
   and the culture of statistics do not justify its being
   viewed as one of the mathematical sciences", which I highly doubt,
   advocates should seek to set up a new division in NSF called "Statistical Sciences"
   or what ever name, instead changing the name of current division.
best,
SIAM member

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:56:26 -0600

This seems reasonable at first thought.   I have served on two review
committees for NSF in the math and computer science areas.  Members of
these committees all have a rather narrow view of what should be
supported, in my experience.  The NSF umpire is looking for
breakthroughs - high risk, high return proposals with merit.  The
reviewers never agree on what might be a breakthrough.

Combining stat and math experts in this review process would just not
work to the advantage of either discipline.  The practitioners have
very different world views.  I can just imagine the discussions!

Underlying the proposal for the name change might be the need to form
a political coalition so as to avoid serious cuts in federal funding.
If that is the case, then combining the names seems desirable.  But it
is most likely to result in a messier reviewing process.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:09:06 -0400

Hello,

In brief, I like the proposed change.  Statistics is mathematical, but
it is distinct in character from some other areas of mathematics.  I
think broadening the title is a good idea.

dave

> >
> > --
David Feldman
Professor of Physics and Mathematics
College of the Atlantic
105 Eden St., Bar Harbor, ME 04609
[email protected]
207 801.5709 (0)
207 288.3780 (F)
http://hornacek.coa.edu/dave

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:24:36 +0000

Hi,

I am strongly opposed to the change for essentially the same reasons as stated by the former
three directors of the DMS.
In my view statistical sciences are part of the mathematical sciences.
Therefore, the current division name is sufficiently inclusive.
Changing the name would create a dangerous precedent where something transitional (funding
opportunities) forces revision of what is supposed to be a broad and enduring notion of what
is mathematical science.

Regards,

Pavel Bochev
Distinguished Member of the Technical Staff

Numerical Analysis and Applications
Sandia National Laboratories
P.O. Box 5800, MS 1320
Albuquerque, NM 87185-1320
505.844.1990 (O)
505.845.7442 (F)
http://www.sandia.gov/~pbboche/

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 21:09:45 -0400

Comments from Jim Greenberg
Professor Emeritus
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Carnegie Mellon University

The new name seems like a real GAME CHANGER and hopefully the implications
of the change have been well thought out by DMS and NSF Management.

Here are some things I would like to know before advocating supporting or
rejecting the proposed change.

(1) What Directorates/Divisions/Programs today interact with the
Statistical Science Community and how do the budgets these units expend on
the Statistical Sciences  compare with the portion of the DMS budget spent
on the Statistical Sciences? Is DMS the major NSF unit dealing with the
Statistical Science Community or simply one of many/several--I would
conjecture the latter but I don't know.

(2) If my conjecture is correct, I would like to know what the other
relevant NSF units think about the name change and what impact this change
will have on their operations--will parts of other Directorates have to be
transfered to the new DMS/SS Division (along with relevant budgets) or
will there simply be a name change with no articulated change in
responsibility and no new budget put in place? I think that a lot of care
will have to go into explaining to the Statistical Science Community what
the NSF hopes to accomplish with this proposed change.

Hopefully, this action should not be taken in haste.

Jim Greenberg

Subject: Re: Your input on a proposed change at NSF
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:11:00 -0700
[email protected], [email protected]

Dear Colleagues,

As a former Division Director of DMS, (1993 and 1994),  I also would argue against the proposed
name change.  In addition to all the reasons stated in the emails from Eric Friedlander, Nick
Trefethen and Doug Arnold, the anonymous letter from an AMS member forwarded by Eric and those
advanced by many other colleagues I have spoken to about this issue, I want to mention the
following observations:

1)  Like many mathematicians, I have also been involved in research, applications and teaching
of statistical methodology.  From personal experience, I have found it difficult to accept the
argument that Statistics is not a mathematical science (which I have heard for years from many
friends and colleagues in statistics).
2)  Times have changed from the days when statisticians (and applied mathematicians) were
under-appreciated or marginalized within a big tent.  Some statisticians are now comfortable
being in a Mathematics Department without having "Statistics" in the department name.
3)  At the same time, I am comfortable having statisticians in a separate Statistics Department
(as in three of the four academic home in my life - U of British Columbia, U. of Washington,
and U. of California, Irvine - while there is not a separate statistics department at the fourth
- MIT).  So if statisticians still feel that they have different goals in, and approach to
research funding, I have no problem with them advocating for a separate Division of Statistics
so that they can be on their own.

Best,

Fred Wan

P.S.  I might have inadvertently sent off an incomplete message to [email protected].  Please ignore
that incomplete message.

Frederic Wan
510B Rowland Hall
Department of Mathematics
University of California, Irvine
Irvine, CA 92697-3875

Telephone:  (949) 824-5529
FAX:  (949) 824-7993
[email protected]
http://math.uci.edu/~fwan

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 09:45:23 -0600 (MDT)

I view statistics as part of mathematics and see no need for a
name change.  The existing, more concise name is preferable.

Subject: DMS Name Change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 08:53:58 -0500

I am strongly opposed to the name change.
It separates statistics from mathematics and
at the same time makes it of equal importance
- which it certainly is not.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 08:28:43 -0400 (EDT)

I am an applied mathematician at a national laboratory working on large-data problems from a
probabilistic perspective.  I believe it is wise to try to position for this field.  However,
mathematical sciences is the better term in that it is in fact, I would claim, broader than
"Mathematical and Statistical Sciences".  In the context of statistical sciences, "mathematical"
will mean a more narrowly defined area.  I, for one, advocate the broadest possible view of
mathematics, including statistics and algorithms and probabilistic modeling.

Good luck on your decision.

Erik

Erik M. Ferragut, Ph.D.
Cybersecurity Research Scientist
Computational Sciences and Engineering
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
(865)574-9389 (office)   (865)230-2933 (cell)

Subject: RE: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:04:16 -0400

Dear President Trefethen and Past-President Arnold,
In my opinion this name change is not a good idea. Especially it would seem that other areas
would want to
have their "name" incorporated, such as "system sciences" or "biological mathematics," etc.,
areas that
would in the long run seem just as, or even more, important than "statistical sciences." Thanks
for the
chance to put input to this, Bob Newcomb

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:10:32 -0400

I have a PhD in biostatistics, but from a purist viewpoint I agree with
the arguments against a name change.  However, over my career I have
tried to introduce more applied mathematical concepts into statistics
and vice versa but these ideas have met with resistance from both
applied mathematicians and statisticians.  It seems that each views the
other as largely irrelevant.  It may be "religion" or it may be laziness
or something else.  I can't tell.  Interestingly, most scientists I work
with in data-rich fields see mathematics and statistics as being
equivalent.

Most likely it comes down to training. In complex disciplines,
specialization is the norm.  Most statisticians do not know any
mathematics beyond calculus, some much less.  At this point it would
take a generation or two to fix this.  Unfortunately, as the DMS
Director correctly points out, the funding, political clout, and lay
recognition lies with the statisticians.  I believe DMS would be better
off to embrace these differences than to fight or ignore them.  The
additional resources may help non-statistical mathematics develop a
better image and an increased perceived value.  From a practical
standpoint, I have to agree with the name change or suggest the NSF
create a new Division of Statistical Sciences.  I think the second would
make the situation worse, not better, but most statisticians would
probably disagree.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:06:32 +0000

I would argue to keep the name unchanged.

Statistics is an integral part of mathematics. To explicitly show the names implies that some
form of applying statistical methods and software without mathematical understanding is a
separate and valuable activity to support. This is not the case. If anything the statistical
methods in use in most research needs improvement in rigor and quality, not less.

Regards,

Erik

Dr. Erik Deumens
Director UF Research Computing
New Physics Building 2334                                                [email protected]
University of Florida                                                http://www.hpc.ufl.edu
Gainesville, Florida 32611-8435                                                 (352)392-6980

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:36:50 -0400

Dear Nick and Doug,

I fully agree with the second opinion.
The proposed name change will mean that Statistics is not a mathematical science which does
not make sense. Furthermore, this opens the door to future  changes such as Mathematical,
Statistical and Algebraic Geometry Sciences. I also agree that this proposed name change will
prefer one area of  other areas of mathematics.

Best regards.

--
Professor Slimane Adjerid
Graduate Program Director
Virginia Tech
Department of Mathematics MC 0123
225 Stanger St.  460  McBryde Hall
Blacksburg  VA 24061  USA

540 231 5945
http://www.math.vt.edu/people/adjerids

Subject: Re: proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:39:22 -0400

Dear Dr. Seidel,

I strongly oppose the proposed name change from "Division of Mathematical Sciences" to "Division of
Mathematical and Statistical Sciences", for the same reasons given by the three prior directors
of DMS, namely:

   The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
   science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
   sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
   view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
   by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
   to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
   Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
   been discussed or justified.

With best regards,

Gino Biondini
Professor and Graduate Studies Director
Department of Mathematics
State University of New York at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14260-2900
Telephone: 716-645-8810
Facsimile: 716-645-5039
Email: [email protected]
http://www.math.buffalo.edu/~biondini

to the Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences-222.txt <==
Subject: proposal to change the name of the NSF Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) to the
Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:11:00 -0500

Thank you for asking for input on this important question. I have read several letters addressing
the issue.

I am against the proposal to change the name of the NSF Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS)
to the Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences. I will be brief. Statistics is an
important field, and is growing very quickly at this time, both in theoretical scope and in its
applications. Individuals in very many other fields, from the sciences to the social sciences
to the newer connections with humanities (e.g., statistical analyses of texts), are finding
statistics meaningful. I appreciate statistics' role, and encourage all students to study a
healthy dose of applied statistics.

My concern with such a name change has primarily to do with how funding to the new division
would work. There are many statisticians doing great work, and much data-driven work requires
substantial funding (this work often requires funds in a way that traditional mathematical
research does not -- large scale computational ability, access to data, etc.). This work is
critical to our understanding of the economy, public health issues, resource sciences, to name
a few, and therefore focuses on critical problems of the moment. It would not be far-fetched to
imagine a large portion of current DMS funds to go to such work, leaving basic mathematics the
poorer sibling. As a secondary concern, people outside of our fields might come to view math
and statistics as inseparable, and perhaps rightly view statistics as the more prominent field
of the two. These two concerns -- funding for research and the view of the fields from outside
(general public) -- cause me to be against the name change. I have heard another argument against
it; some mathematicians do not value statistics on philosophical grounds. This argument I do
not agree with; data driven statistics is an important field, and will drive many advances in
medicine, sciences and social sciences over the coming years.

Sincerely,
Karen Saxe

--
Karen Saxe

Chair, Anneli Lax New Mathematics Library Editorial Board

Professor and Chair
Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science
Macalester College

651 696 6041
[email protected]

Subject: Proposed DMS name change
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 10:48:29 -0700

Though my appointment is in an engineering department, I have received funding from DMS, served
on their panels and also served on the DMS Committee of Visitors.  Therefore, I write as (i)
a stakeholder in DMS and (ii) as someone who is knowledgeable about the relevance of mathematics
to other fields especially regarding the use of big data.

I believe that the proposed name change is short-sighted, and a crude pander to the fashion
of the day.  First, the Division already acknowledges that it is broader than Mathematics by
calling itself Mathematical Sciences.  So the proposed change of name makes little sense since
Statistics is a Mathematical Science.   Second, this is a slippery slope.  It is Statistic today.
Will it be Division of Mathematical and Statistical and Computational Sciences tomorrow?  And ...
Third and most important, there is public perception of Mathematics not being useful or relevant
to real life.  DMS should be leading the fight against it, and has done so within the Foundation.
This proposed change of name - in remarkable contrast - feeds this perception by pandering to it.

I end by sharing my sadness that DMS feels the need to degrade a subject that has served humanity
over millennia.

***********************************************************************
Kaushik Bhattacharya
Howell N. Tyson Sr. Professor of Mechanics and Professor of Materials Science
Executive Officer for Mechanical Engineering
Mail Stop 104-44, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125

Tel: 626 395 8306                                       Fax: 626 583 4963
Email: [email protected]                       Homepage: www.mechmat.caltech.edu
***********************************************************************

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:05:46 -0400

Dear President of SIAM,

Statistics is part of mathematical sciences. The proposed name implies it is not. Separation of
statistics from mathematical sciences, as indicated in the new name, is not only illogical but
also has the danger of breaking up the mathematical sciences community as it encourages other
subgroups of mathematical sciences to do the same in order to increase their own share of fundings.

I found the proposed name change backward.

Best regards,
Yvonne
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Miao-Jung Yvonne Ou, Ph.D.
408 Ewing Hall
Department of Mathematical Sciences
University of Delaware
Newark, DE 19716, USA
Tel: 302-831-3381                         Fax: 302-831-4511
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 16:43:42 -0400

I am against this change. Viewing statistics as not a mathematical science is a mistake.

Subject: DMS Name change
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 17:45:21 -0600

I agree with the sentiment that "Mathematical Sciences" is inclusive. It includes, for example
"Applied Mathematics" which is my area. I do not see the need to single out a particular
sub-discipline of Mathematics for special mention.  Thus I think the current name should be
retained.

I am currently the proud recipient of several NSF grants from DMS, so I suppose that makes
me biased.

--
James Meiss
Applied Mathematics
UCB 526
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0526



Subject: DMSS
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:19:28 -0500

I think the name change is fine.  If it helps to acknowledge and support the important and
distinct field of Statistics, I think it is a good idea.

Julie Mitchell
Associate Professor
Mathematics and Biochemistry
University of Wisconsin - Madison

Subject: Re: proposed DMS name change
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:53:13 +0000

As I was reading the first paragraph of the letter with the proposed name change I could not
understand the need for this change since statistics is a subject within mathematical sciences.
I was later on happy to see that this is also the opinion of three prior DMS directors. I fully
agree that renaming the division is against the inclusive view of mathematical sciences that
has been advocated in recent years at NSF and in SIAM.

I hope that the final decision will be against the name change.

Moshe Matalon

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:19:57 -0600

I am opposed to the proposed name change.

It is very valuable to keep the term "mathematical
sciences" as a broad umbrella that encompasses
mathematics statistics. Lifting up the term "statistics"
to be on an equal footing would absolutely indicate
a preferential treatment of one of the subfields.

Best regards.

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:27:34 -0400

Dear Nick and Doug,

Thanks for your email about this subject.

As a dynamicist in the field of biology, I am aware that statistics is
grossly under-utilized in applications of dynamical modeling to
scientific questions, where it could ensure more meaningful
constraints on models and parameters, and provide a clearer measure of
predictive success. There is certainly insufficient use of
experimental data in dynamical modeling, partly due to a lack of tools
that map between the disciplines. (On the other hand, there is
typically far too much lazy simulation of large systems, creating
unnecessarily large data sets that are not in the context of a well
considered scientific question.) In principle, I might have innocently
accepted the name change at face value as a form of encouragement for
the greater inclusion of statistical methods among applied mathematics
of other kinds, and greater unification of approaches.

I am, however, very concerned about the trend towards Big Data and the
NSF's framing of the matter. While I am all for data-driven science,
the new perspective led by NSF and other champions is that creating,
sharing, and using raw data is primary, with theory and the
methodology for appropriate drawing of conclusions from the data
implied to be secondary. Theoretical tools and "deep thinking" about
problems are being increasingly downplayed in comparison to number
crunching algorithms for gathering data and finding correlations, etc.
within them. While there is great value in these new data
opportunities, I am worried that the name change will further push us
down a slippery slope to devalued theory, despite the lip service
claiming the contrary.

Ultimately, then, I agree with the prior DMS directors that the
perceived realignment of resources has not been fully discussed with
the mathematical community and may not be justified. Given my cynicism
about changes at NSF about Big Data I am skeptical of changing the
name without a longer period of discussion and feedback from the
community (which I would like to see occur). Thus, I do not currently
support the change.

Subject: Keep name the same
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:04:38 -0400

hello,

i would not change the name, but rather keep it the same. statistics is a branch of
mathematics. splintering of our discipline does not seem to be the right way to proceed.

thanks, amit bose

Subject: My opinion
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:42:53 -0400

I tend to support this change of name, but the matter is not worth provoking a fight within the
math and statistics communities. The argument that the proposed change would help with future
math/statistical sciences budgets seems valid.

Wendell Fleming

Subject:
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:32:13 -0400

I strongly oppose the name change of the DMS. I consider statistics to be one of the mathematical
sciences, and I view the name "Mathematical Sciences" as clearly inclusive of sub-areas, such as
Statistics, Discrete Mathematics, Computational Mathematics or Applied Mathematics. I believe the
other areas suffer when statistics is raised to a separate level from other areas in the math
sciences. If we were to consider one sub-area to separate out, it seems much more obvious that
it would be the applied mathematical sciences, which I would argue includes much of statistics
(and I can think of a number of universities that apparently agree, as statistics is included
in their applied mathematics departments). I recommend against separating out any sub-area,
since I believe keeping a consistent message about what mathematical sciences encompasses aids
our funding requests. Please do not change the name of the DMS based on the request of a person
who favors one sub-area! Our community has too much at stake to do so.

Helen Moore
Senior Scientific Consultant
Pharsight - A Certara Company
100 Mathilda Place, Suite 160
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
[email protected]
408-737-6057_________________________________________________________________
NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the designated recipient(s) named above. This message may be
an attorney-client communication, may be protected by the work product doctrine, and may be
subject to a protective order. As such, this message is privileged and confidential. If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering
it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in
error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
telephone and e-mail and destroy any and all copies of this message in your possession (whether
hard copies or electronically stored copies). Thank you.

Subject: proposed DMS name change
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:38:48 +0000

I agree with the presented arguments against the change.

--

Aimé Fournier

Senior Research Geophysicist

GeoSolutions / Earth Model Building Technologies

Schlumberger WesternGeco, Houston Tx 77042

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:06:33 -0400

Dear Colleagues,

Dr. Sastry Pantula proposes to change the name of the NSF "Division of Mathematical Sciences"
(DMS) to "Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences" (MSS). I strongly urge the Society
for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) to oppose this proposal.

Disclosure: I am a professional applied mathematician and former DMS Program Director with more
than six years of experience in the DMS Applied Mathematics and Computational Mathematics programs.

The proposed name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical science. This may be
the opinion of some in the statistics community, but Dr. Pantula does not provide evidence
that this opinion is shared by all or many in the statistics community. Statistics shares the
language of mathematics with the other areas of the mathematical sciences, has made significant
contributions to the body of mathematical knowledge and is, in my opinion, an integral component
of the mathematical sciences.

The NSF Division of Mathematical Sciences, under the leadership of its previous directors, has
been very successful in presenting the image of mathematics and statistics as partners in the
search for new knowledge. The coming "data deluge" is a challenge for all programs in DMS, not
only for Statistics. In fact, it offers one more opportunity to demonstrate the universality of
mathematics and the broad applicability of mathematical ideas. The proposed name change points
to a (non-existent) dichotomy and damages the image of inclusiveness.  Notice that the NSF
recognizes the inclusive nature of the mathematical sciences in the title of its Directorate for
"Mathematical and Physical Sciences" (MPS).

I am afraid that the proposal to change from DMS to MSS does not do justice to the many other
activities that currently take place under the umbrella of "Mathematical Sciences."  It will
lead to confusion and recrimination, the last thing we need while the budget for basic science
is under pressure.

I strongly support the suggestion to look for new sources of funding for DMS; after all, a
healthy budget is one of the primary responsibilities of the Division Director. But the best
way to accomplish this is by pointing to success stories, not by changing a label.

Best regards,
Hans Kaper

 **************************************************
 Dr. Hans G. Kaper
 Co-director, Mathematics and Climate Research Network

 Adjunct Professor
 Department of Mathematics and Statistics
 Georgetown University

 Sr. Mathematician Emeritus
 Mathematics and Computer Science Division
 Argonne National Laboratory

 Mailing Address:
 3335 Reservoir Rd, NW
 Washington, DC 20007
 USA

 Phone: (+1) 202 333 2902
 E-mail: [email protected]
 URL: http://mcs.anl.gov/~kaper
 **************************************************

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:58:40 -0400

I believe that this is more than just a name change. Director Pantula
refers to attracting new funds (and new resources) in several
locations of his letter. Where will the new funds come from? Are they
to come from other NSF divisions, or from outside?

It is unclear if the two communities are merging under this banner.
Will there be new programs and program managers to cater for
statistics communities? Will those be in addition to what DMS
currently have (seems unlikely), or would some of the existing
programs be curtailed or canceled outright to make way for these new
initiatives? If some of the current programs are to be cut, which
ones? Why? This needs a full discussion.

Subject:
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 20:54:54 -0500 (CDT)

I think that the proposed name change for DMS is a very bad idea
for the mathematical community. The funding implications of
such a name change are dangerous for the health of research in
the mathematical sciences .
best wishes
Susan Friedlander

Subject: NSF name change: a poorly thought out idea
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:21:30 -0400

I think this proposed name-change for DMS has not been
well thought out and would likely have very damaging
long-term ramifications.  It seems likely that basic research
in mathematics would be starved of funding, which is not
just a problem for mathematicians, but e.g. for (1) national
security, given how critical mathematics is e.g. to NSA,
including having a healthy math community in which new
talent is continually being developed, and (2) all sorts of
other areas of science which have mathematics as their
backbone.

As a mathematician, I don't think it's my place to judge how
much funding non-mathematical parts of statistics should
receive from NSF.  However, if they do warrant more funding
from NSF, I think the appropriate solution would be to fund
non-mathematical parts of statistics from other parts of NSF.
Trying to squeeze two critical areas into one program will
only starve them both.

I've served on NSF panels for postdocs in multiple years and
on other general mathematical panels.  I've been impressed at
how well these have functioned, including evaluating the more
mathematical parts of statistics.  I cannot imagine a panel with
two completely different disciplines functioning anywhere near
as well; I very much doubt that issues like this have been carefully
thought out yet.  Changing the role of statistics at NSF would
be a big deal.  Any such change should be carefully thought
out in advance, planning for all the ramifications as much as
possible -- this is the way to implement a good plan, not just
the one the program director believed he could politically
maneuver to make happen.  I really hope this short-sighted
move can be stopped.

A concerned mathematician

Subject: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:14:25 -0400

Please make the change to Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences. This change will
not suggest that statistics is not a mathematical
science and will not imply diminished relevance of the mathematical sciences to data. The
logical “and” took care of any disparity that could have been interpreted in the wrong way.

Best

Norman

Norman W. Loney, Ph.D.

Professor and Chair

Otto H. York Department of Chemical,

Biological & Pharmaceutical Engineering

(973) 596-6598

[email protected]

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:01:56 -0400 (EDT)

I have read Dr. Pantula's letter, and find the logic faulty.

The current name, DMS, **is inclusive**.  I am in favor of keeping it unchanged.

Dr. Pantula says that the proposed name, DMSS

"recognizes explicitly the two major disciplines served by the division".

Are we to view `Mathematical Science' as one discipline and `Statistical Science' as the other,
somehow separate and distinct, that is not a mathematical science?

Sorry, this does not make scientific sense.

..NM

Subject: dms namechange
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 16:36:02 -0400

Dear Nick Trefethen, SIAM President and
   Doug Arnold, SIAM Past-President,

Thank you for your message concerning the proposed DMS name change.  I agree with the arguments
opposing the name change in your message and also with most of those in the message of the AMS
president.  A name change is more than a name change.  I find the arguments of Prof. Pantula
short sighted.

I would ask the Foundation to keep in mind that we find ourselves in a state of extreme stress.
This does not need explanation.  In such an arena, variations like name changes destabilize,
rather than simply degrade, our funding environment.

My role as a stakeholder:  In the last twenty plus years, I have worked very hard with my
colleagues for applied mathematics, both toward the development of enhanced applications with new
mathematics and toward the education of young mathematicians.  My former postdocs and students are
in leadership positions in the US and Europe.  I have been tireless, if not always successful,
in seeking resources for these purposes.  I have been a PI or Senior Scientist on approximately
$27,000,000 of NSF funding in the past 20 or so years.  I have been a PI or senior scientist
on approximately $60,000,000 of DOD funding in the past 20 or so years.

Yours sincerely,

David Kinderlehrer
Alumni Professor of Mathematical Sciences
Department of Mathematical Sciences
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
office  412 268 5729
secretary  412 268 2545
mobile  412 708 1225
http://www.math.cmu.edu/math/faculty/kinderlehrer.html

Subject: namechange
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:38:47 -0700

I think mathematical sciences is broad enough to cove r ,statistics,signal processing,machine
learning etc.
The only merit I can see is that it might increase DMS funding.I believe that could be better
achieved by adding "Information sciences" rather than "Statistical sciences"

Subject: DMS namechange
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 01:01:34 -0500 (CDT)

The arguments for and against the name change are clear, and there is little
to be gained by individual letters repeating them in one direction or the other.

It seems to me that the appropriate action for SIAM is to quickly prepare
a detailed survey conducting not only a preference vote yes or no but also
gauging the strength of support for the various arguments.  Results can be
analyzed based also on the constituency of the respondent.

Only in this way can the extent of opposition be demonstrated.

Sincerely,
Douglas West

--
Douglas B. West        217-333-1863     [email protected]
Professor of Mathematics                http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~west/

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 11:08:01 -0500

Hi,

I wanted to register my strong opposition to the DMS name change.
The fact that the three prior directors of DMS have argued
against the change should be enough, but in my view the name
suggests that statistics is not a mathematical science.

A vaguely similar situation happened when the SIAM Journal
on Scientific Computing was re-named the the SIAM Journal
on Scientific and Statistical Computing. I was an associate
editor of the journal at the time and argued against the change.
I was overruled.

This journal has now again been renamed to the original
 SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing.

I suspect that the same will happen if the DMS name change
does happen.

The main argument in favor of the change, namely that this
would place the Division in a better position to vie for new resources
in this era of big data and to collaborate with other divisions, sounds like
a false claim. Is there any data to support this assertion?

Jorge Moré
Argonne Distinguished Fellow
Argonne National Laboratory

Subject: name change
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 16:15:00 -0400

Changing the name of DMS does not seem like a good idea to me.
While statistics is an important part of the mathematical sciences, I think that adding it to
the name draws an unneeded distinction between the
fields. Further it may lead to more areas requesting specific mention in the name, This would
end up dividing us rather than uniting us.

Thank you.

%%%%%%%%%
Ruth Haas
Center for Women in Mathematics
Smith College
Northampton, MA 01063

(413) 585-3872
[email protected]

Subject: Proposed Name Change
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:01:56 -0400

Hello,

I do not support the proposed change from DMS to DMSS as statistics is a subset of mathematics.

Regards,

George Harriott, Ph.D.
Computational Modeling Center
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:20:15 -0700 (PDT)

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am AGAINST the change, for all of the reasons outlined in your
email message.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

          Sincerely

          (SIAM Member)

Subject: Name change
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:18:46 -0500 (CDT)

    I am opposed to the name change, since it suggests that statistical
    science is something inherently different than mathematical science,
    whereas heretofore the former was recognized as a subset of the latter.
    One can make an equally, perhaps even more, compelling argument to break
    out computational sciences, since a large part of statistical science is
    computational, and computational science is much broader than statistical
    science. However, such fragmentation dilutes the centrality of
    mathematical science to many areas of science and engineering, and thus
    I believe the name should remain as it is.

Hans G Othmer                Office: (612) 624-8325
School  of Mathematics            Fax: (612) 626-2017
270A Vincent Hall            Department: (612) 625-9845
University of Minnesota            Email: [email protected]
206 Church St SE            Web site: www.math.umn.edu/~othmer
Minneapolis, MN 55455

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 14:55:55 -0500

People have already given many good arguments against changing the name of the "Division
of Mathematical Sciences" because it would harm or distort its role in the National Science
Foundation. I agree with most of these arguments.

But I will add what I believe is the most persuasive argument, separate from the role of DMS
in NSF. For the past half century, mathematicians, statisticians, computer scientists and
other closely related scientists and engineers have struggled about the proper interaction
of their various fields. As mathematics spread and expanded its influence, groups within
universities and (in some cases, industries) struggled to find ways to foster cooperation and
to view their subject, whatever its name, to be inclusive and broadly defined. In many cases,
it was a difficult struggle, sometimes never fully resolved. But the ultimate outcome was to
settle on an inclusive name for all mathematically-connected fields-that name was "mathematical
sciences". New divisions of mathematical sciences sprang up in universities and colleges;
consortia of departments formed under the title; groups of mathematical associations coalesced
under the name (CBMS,the Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences).

Changing the name of DMS affects far more than merely the National Science Foundation. It
risks destabilizing a half-century-long effort to bring together many areas under a common
name. The term "mathematical sciences" represents more than a name; it represents cooperation
and interaction between MANY disciplines that are connected to mathematics. Dismissing that
name because someone claims it is not inclusive is both ahistorical and foolhardy.

Surely we don't want the community to move backwards, reigniting territorial arguments about
what is "real" mathematics (or "real" statistics!). Surely we don't want the National Science
Foundation to intrude in the delicate balance within universities about how to distribute
the mathematical sciences within their organizational frameworks. Surely we want to foster
cooperation and interaction rather than internecine struggles about group labels.

I implore the National Science Foundation to set aside this suggested name change as quickly
as possible.

John Ewing
President, Math for America
Past Executive Director, AMS

----------------------------
John Ewing
President, Math for America
160 Fifth Ave, 8th fl
New York, NY 10010
646-437-0910
-----------------------------

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:40:20 -0400

I'm in favor of a name change. There are enough separate departments around the world that
could be united under this one umbrella, and I agree the extra emphasis on "big data" is worth
the effort. Hopefully it triggers some new money, too.

Subject: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:23:41 -0400

I urge against the proposed name change.  I concur with the summary reasons promoted by the
former NSF DMS Directors.

Subject: Comments on DMS name change by John Guckenheimer
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 08:55:31 -0400

I suggest that the AMS respond to Pantula's proposal to rename DMS with
constructive suggestions for better ways of addressing the issues described by
Pantula in his letter. Specifically, how does the NSF react to the evolution of
statistics into a discipline whose distance from mathematics has increased with
its growing emphasis upon "large data?"

Discussion within the mathematics community reflects disagreement about whether
statistics today is still a mathematical science. If it is, then the current
name of DMS is appropriate. Perhaps a more important issue is whether the ways
statistics functions as a discipline fits with the rest of DMS or whether there
are limitations stemming from the way DMS operates. Operations research and
computer science (as a "software" science) are disciplines that were started by
mathematicians but evolved to establish their own identity so that they could
tackle problems that fell well outside the boundaries of mathematics or applied
mathematics. Statistics is in a more ambiguous state currently, but there
appears to be a consensus within at least part of the discipline that
mathematics is no longer at the heart of statistics. The American Statistical
Association web pages about careers in statistics demonstrate this ambiguity.
Their definition of statistics reads:

"Statistics is the scientific application of mathematical principles to the
collection, analysis, and presentation of numerical data. Statisticians
contribute to scientific enquiry by applying their mathematical and statistical
knowledge to the design of surveys and experiments; the collection, processing,
and analysis of data; and the interpretation of the results."

On the other hand, a set of power point slides on this web page quotes the
definition of statistics from the American Heritage Dictionary:

“The mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of
numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by
inference from sampling.”

The difference between the "mathematics of ..." and the "scientific application
of mathematical principles to ..." seems to reflect the discomfort of statistics
today with the constraints of being a "mathematical science." Slide 28 of this
series says that the way to become a statistician is to

"Major in statistics, applied mathematics, or a closely related field (i.e.
epidemiology, engineering)."

Mathematics is not a listed major! If the path to becoming a statistician does
not include study of core undergraduate courses in mathematics, it seems hard to
maintain that statistics is still a mathematical science. Mathematical
statistics remains part of the discipline, but perhaps a less vigorous
enterprise than most mathematicians think is optimal for the future of
statistics. That is a value judgment that mathematicians can make, but it will
not and should not constrain the development of statistics by statisticians.

The key question for the NSF in addressing Pantula's proposal is whether DMS
should broaden the scope of DMS so that it remains the primary home for
statistics within the NSF. I think that there are better ways to accommodate
disciplinary support for statistics. The methodological role that statistics
plays in diverse disciplines has become deeply embedded in the subject. The
issues surrounding statistics present an opportunity for the NSF to improve its
treatment of this inherently interdisciplinary science.

The large data problems faced by statistics cannot be divorced from the
databases that organize the data itself. Advances in the floating point
performance of highly parallel computers continues to outstrip the advances in
communication speed and energy efficiency. How data is organized will constrain
what can be learned from mining it. If statistics is to flourish as the science
of large data, it should be integrally involved in the technologies and
organizations that assemble the data and it make it available. Similarly,
computational scientists should be integrally involved in the creation of
databases that will used as a substrate for modeling and simulation. Examples
include global atmosphere models, landscape ecology, metabolic networks and
social science research based upon census data.

Much is to be gained from exploiting commonality among the problems that surface
in different disciplines. The power of mathematics and statistics for science
resides in the solution of problems distilled and abstracted from the settings
in which they initially arise. These solutions frequently find application far
beyond the domain in which they first arose. The NSF has been slow to implement
research programs that seek to advance this type of common solution to problems
arising in large scale computing. The Office of Cyberinfrastructure and its
predecessors have supported technology advances, provided large scale computing
support for research groups, funded research on "grand challenges" and more
recently on the organization of large data. What they have not funded (much) is
fundamental research that develops new algorithms and methods of data analysis
which are needed because existing methods became ineffective with increasing
problem scale. As an evolving discipline, statistics has much to offer in this
realm. I suggest that OCI, rather than DMS, is the organization within NSF that
should broaden its scope by providing this type of support. It can serve as an
interdisciplinary meeting ground to coordinate all of the groups creating and
using large data. It should also provide direct support to disciplines like
statistics that are critical to using large data more productively.

Postscripts:

1) Similar comments apply to computational science and engineering, an
important area that needs more support for its "core."

2) I suggest that SIAM, AMS and other math organizations discuss their responses
with each other before replying to the NSF. This may be an occasion for a meeting
of JPBM as the coordinating body it was created to be!

--
John Guckenheimer ([email protected])
Mathematics Department, 565 Malott Hall,
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Phone: (607) 255-8290 Fax: (607) 255-7149

Subject: Name change comment
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:43:54 -0700

To Whom It May Concern:

I am an applied mathematician, trained in areas of nonlinear science that overlap with
theoretical physics, chemistry, optics and biophysics.   For the last approximately 7 years
I have worked as a statistician in a department of approximately 150 statisticians in the
biotech pharmaceutical industry.   Prior to that I was an assistant professor in a mathematics
department, doing research in interdisciplinary applied math.  In my current job, I use tools
and take advantage of experience from both backgrounds regularly.  I am a member of both SIAM
and the ASA.  I feel I know, to some extent, both "cultures".

First and foremost, I don't think the names matter as much as the quality and integrity of the
research, nor are names as important as the effectiveness with which research is communicated
to the broader community.    Second, big data and noisy data are becoming central to much of
science, particularly that which touches on biology; statisticians definitely have particular
skills and tools to handle such data and should play an increasingly important role in how
science in general deals with such data.

However, I think the proposed name change highlights an unfortunate viewpoint that statisticians
tend to have about the other mathematical sciences.  I think the sentence in Dr. Pantula's
letter that states, "Statistical sciences are inherently multidisciplinary" shows this.
Many statisticians - particularly within academia - are essentially mathematicians, although
perhaps the majority of statisticians work has an applied focus.  But statisticians don't
have a monopoly on interdisciplinary work, nor do mathematicians have a monopoly on purely
theoretical work.  I'm sure that  DMS does not need to be reminded of the long and productive
history of interdisciplinary applied mathematics.    In fact, some of the very best applied
mathematicians and the very best statisticians move gracefully from theory to application and
back again.   Mathematics itself is inherently interdisciplinary; statistics is an important
example of that, but not the only example.

The proposed name change strikes me as unnecessarily divisive.  I agree that the original name
of Mathematical Sciences was designed to be inclusive and I think it serves that purpose well.

That said, Dr. Pantula's motivating arguments also strike me as wise and visionary.    Perhaps we
can take the compelling arguments for the name change and use them to motivate not a name change
for DMS but rather a program to effectively define Mathematical Sciences so as to highlight
and promote the strengths and versatility of this group of disciplines - a group that includes
the community of statistical scientists.  That is, to promote the Mathematical Sciences as
having strengths and versatility needed to take on the challenges posed by the science of the
21st century:

    * the need to appropriately handle "Big Data" and noisy data
    * the need to collaborate effectively across disciplines
    * the central need to do science which is rigorous, reproducible and stands up to the
    highest standards of integrity.

I hope that my comments are helpful.

Sincerely,
Lisa Bernstein

--
---------------------------------------------------
Lisa J. Bernstein, Ph.D.
Nonclinical Biostatistics
Genentech, Inc.
1 DNA Way
South San Francisco, CA 94080
650-225-7301
[email protected]
-------------------------------------------------

Subject: name change
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 18:47:01 +0000

Hello,

    I could be happy either way.  I have a BA and an MA in mathematics from UW-Madison, and a PhD
    in statistics from UW-Madison.  For the first seven years of my post-graduate career, I was
    a member of the Statistics and Probability Group of the Mathematics and Statistics Division
    at Lawrence Livermore National Lab.  There I was officially classified as a mathematician.
    For the last 23 years I have been a member of the Statistics Group at the USDA Forest
    Products Laboratory.  Here I am officially classified as a mathematical statistician.
    I do experimental design, data analysis, computer programming, and also occasionally write
    papers that include theorems and detailed proofs.  Sadly, I really do not think that I
    could claim to be a mathematician.   On the other hand, I am also not a data miner.  I do
    think of myself as an applied mathematician.  If the name change would attract more money
    to pure mathematicians, applied mathematicians, statisticians, and data miners, I would
    be fine with it.  If the name change would lead to unjustified transfers of money from the
    more theoretical to the more applied, I would oppose it.

                                                          Sincerely,

                                                          Dr. Steve Verrill
                                                          Mathematical Statistician
                                                          USDA Forest Products Laboratory
                                                          Madison, Wisconsin

Subject: Against Name Change
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 12:08:17 -0400 (EDT)

  For what its worth, I view the proposed name change as divisive
  and thus a very bad idea.  Mathematics has not been helped by the
  previous divisions; it won't be helped by this one either.

  _________________________________________________________________

   _            _    _____     _______
  | |    /\    | |  |  __ \   |__   __|   Dr. Joseph D. Fehribach
   \ \  /  \  / /   | |__| |     | |      WPI Mathematical Sciences
    \ \/ /\ \/ /    |  ___/      | |      100 Institute Road
     \  /  \  /     | |        __| |__    Worcester, MA  01609-2247
      \/    \/      |_|       |_______|   USA

                                          REMRSEC Senior Fellow and
                                                Visiting Scholar
                                          CSM Mathematical and
                                                Computer Sciences
                                          Golden, CO 80401-1887
                                          USA

                                          [email protected]
                                          http://www.wpi.edu/~bach

                                          Phone: 508.831.5069

  _________________________________________________________________

Subject: DMS Name Change
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:32:30 -0500

Dear Sirs:

    I write to share my thoughts in favor of the proposed name change of the NSF's
Division of Mathematical Sciences. I am sending this email to
both the MAA and SIAM, since I am a life member of both organizations.

    I agree that "The progression and culture of statistics do not justify
its being viewed as one of the mathematical sciences."  Statistics is a mathematical
science only in the sense that it uses mathematics as a tool for precise reasoning.
The same is true for physics, meteorology, finance, most branches of engineering, and many
other disciplines that are not considered mathematical sciences per se.
The role of mathematics in any of these disciplines is in no way diminished
by recognizing that they have subject matters and cultures of their own.  This line of
reasoning allows us to see that some of the other objections (violating common
usage, establishing preference for one sub-area) are non-sequiturs.
In fact, I would even favor completely splitting mathematical sciences and
statistics entirely.  Within MPS, the separate physics and astronomy divisions
have more in common with each other than the mathematical sciences do
with statistics.

    I offer this view as a physics-math double major, Ph.D. recipient in
theoretical physics, and for the last 9 years, a professional statistician.

    The views expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my
employer.

Christopher Tong, Ph.D.
Life member, Mathematical Association of America
Life member, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Life member, American Physical Society
Permanent member, International Chinese Statistical Association
Permanent member, International Indian Statistical Association
Member, American Statistical Association
Member, Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences

Subject: DMS name change
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 18:22:17 -0400

The discussion about the proposed name change within SIAM has been very educational for me,
and there have been many thoughtful arguments, mostly in opposition to the name change.
But I did not get the feeling that the arguments in favor have been sufficiently explored.
My personal view is very practical. I am in favor of whatever brings additional resources and
recognition to the mathematical sciences community.

The main point made by the DMS Director is that the analysis of large data sets is a topic that
will take up significant resources and attention, on Capitol Hill, the scientific community
in general,
and at the NSF in particular. There are parts of the mathematical sciences that can make important
contributions to this problem area, and it is therefore the responsibility of the DMS Director to
make sure that DMS obtains its appropriate share of funding related to this growing field.

The statistical sciences will obviously be an important player. At the same time, the
statistics community does not seem to feel that it is adequately represented as one
of the mathematical sciences, and does not feel that it gets enough attention within DMS,
as outlined in a letter from the Executive Director of the ASA. As was pointed out by others,
this is an assessment we have to accept, not withstanding the many intellectual arguments
that statistics
is indeed one of the mathematical sciences. This leaves three possible scenarios.

(1)  There is no change in the DMS name. Statisticians who do theoretical research can continue
to apply to the DMS statistics program, and the rest of the community can find other funding
sources,
within and outside NSF.

(2)  The name is changed to DMSS, which then tries to accommodate a larger portion of statistical
research,
presumably with an increased level of funding, as DMSS will be more closely tied to the analysis
of large data sets.

(3)  There is no name change and DMS can nonetheless expand its funding to include increased
research in statistics
and its application to large data sets, and keeps the statistics community within the DMS
“fold.”

In my opinion, scenario (3) is possible, and the most desirable, but unlikely, given the
circumstances.
Scenario (1) will likely serve to further isolate mathematics from its applications, because
it is based
on the inappropriate view that research can be neatly separated into “theoretical” and
“applied,” to
be funded from different pots of money. Increasingly, this is not the case in problem-centric
team-style research, which is likely to become more prevalent.

I certainly agree that this issue has been handled very poorly on the part of the DMS Director.
And I would very much like to see more concrete arguments from him and the PMS leadership
for option (2). I do think that there are possible merits for it, and it is important that we
discuss those seriously.

Anybody who tries to make a case to nonmathematicians, whether it is other scientists,
politicians on Capitol Hill, or the general public, that mathematical research deserves
increased financial support relies largely on demonstrations that mathematics is useful,
for better or for worse. Yet, our experience is that many times the attention is given to other
fields such as computer science, engineering, or physics, and the underlying mathematical
contributions are ignored. No matter how many times we point to the Google page rank algorithm,
we have a hard time claiming credit, in my experience. Anything we can do to link mathematics
more closely to its applications will help the entire community.

Reinhard Laubenbacher
Virginia Tech
SIAM Vice President for Science Policy

Subject:
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:08:58 +0000

Director Pantula, in his letter to Fred Roberts, makes clear that his motivation for pushing
the name change is to position the division to seek new resources for the "union of two large
but different communities." Although he claims that he does not "envision reducing funding
for core areas of mathematics and statistics," he does appear to be advocating an enlargement
of the scope of research pursued under the banner of the division. Unfortunately, there is
no indication at all, either in his letter or in the information being circulated by the AMS
and SIAM, that the purported new resources will be of sufficient magnitude to truly make the
broadened research scope a win, in terms of resources, for both basic research in mathematics
and mathematical statistics as currently pursued under the umbrella of DMS and the broad,
multidisciplinary statistical research Director Pantula proposes to add to the division's
purview. In conclusion, without further details about the implementation of the proposed shift
in research scope, I am opposed to the proposed name change.

Subject: Comments on DMS name change
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:54:47 +0000

Statistics should continue being included as "Mathematical Science."  As the summarized argument
in favor of the name change points out, among all of the mathematical sciences, this proposal
will indeed "signal more inclusiveness of the growing field of statistics".  It suggests that the
analysis of data by statistical methods will receive far greater support than other mathematical
fields that are at least as important, if not more so, ranging from pure areas to applied and
computational fields that SIAM represents.  Statistical analysis of data is already supported
in different forms such as Biostatistics in various divisions across NSF.

Just because current technology advances, made in large part due to insights in mathematics,
allow for the collection of massive data sets, it would be foolish in the long term to continue
reducing support for mathematical research in favor of the narrower statistical analysis of
the data.  It would be similar to suppressing support for basic science, that can lead to future
breakthroughs, in favor of engineering that applies past scientific breakthroughs.

I simply don't see the same quality of scholarship and intellectual progress in Statistics as
in core pure and applied Mathematics, so cannot understand why it should be singled out for
special attention and support in this way.  It is the field of Statistics that is itself trying
to pull away and get more resources, much as the statisticians in universities like mine form
a separate department and successfully demand higher salaries, lighter teaching loads, etc.,
simply because data are everywhere.  Their scholarship and impact simply don't compare to those
in pure and applied Mathematics.

Jerrold R. Griggs
Carolina Distinguished Professor and Chair
SIAM Fellow
Department of Mathematics
University of South Carolina Columbia, SC  29208   USA

Subject: DMS Name change
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:15:24 -0400

To whom it may concern,

This message registers my opposition to the proposed name change for the Division of Mathematical
Sciences of the National Science Foundation.

The assertion that statistics is distinct from, and does not fall under the umbrella of,
the mathematical sciences is unconvincing. Many areas of applied mathematics are highly
interdisciplinary and are becoming more so. Hence, this does not distinguish statistics from the
mathematical sciences as a whole. Similarly, computation and data are used ever more frequently
and intensively even in areas of pure mathematics. As with other areas, statistics encapsulates
a range of activities/inquiry from abstract and theoretical to specific and instrumental. There
seems to be no clear criteria that set statistics apart from the rest of the mathematical sciences.

  Sincerely,
  A. David Trubatch
  Associate Professor

--
A. David Trubatch
Dept. of Mathematical Sciences
Montclair State University
Montclair, NJ 07043

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:38:03 -0800

I concur with the statement below and therefore oppose the proposed change.

> Others, including the three prior directors of DMS, have argued
> against the change.  Briefly, the primary arguments that have
> been made against the change are:
>
>    The name change suggests that statistics is not a mathematical
>    science and implies diminished relevance of the mathematical
>    sciences to data.  This violates common usage and the inclusive
>    view of the mathematical sciences successfully advocated
>    by DMS for many years.  The proposed name is preferential
>    to one sub-area, and will provoke discord in the community.
>    Some feel it may portend a realignment of resources that hasn't
>    been discussed or justified.

Subject: opposed to the name change
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 01:37:24 -0600

I write as a mathematical scientist who cares deeply about the NSF
and DMS.  I owe a great deal to the Foundation and the Division
in their support of my research and career, and I have also
served them in variety of ways, including serving on the MPSAC.
I take a broad view of the mathematical sciences, and strongly
agree with Sastry Pantula and Ed Seidel on the high and increasing
importance of data and of the tremendous opportunities this opens
to the Division.  I believe that statistics has been a vital part
of the mathematical sciences and this part could increase in the
near future.

However, I STRONGLY OPPOSE the proposal to change of name of the
Division of Mathematical Science.

Many arguments have been put forth on both sides, generally with
some merit.  However, I feel that the arguments against the change
are far more convincing.  To me, the most persuasive of these are:

  Statistics is an integral part of the mathematical sciences.
  This is common sense, long expressed both inside and outside of
  statistical community, and an important part of the message that
  the mathematical sciences community and the DMS have delivered
  consistently for decades.  Suddenly implying the opposite sounds
  like doublespeak and suggests to members of the community that
  there must be hidden agendas and manipulation.

  The name change implies preferential treatment for one subfield
  in the Division.  The fact the field represents about one tenth
  the activity of the Division, but is proposed to be half the
  name, again excites undesirable suspicions.  There have been no
  convincing arguments proposed for why such special treatment is
  appropriate for statistics more than it would be for numerous
  other subfields, such as applied mathematics, computational
  mathematics, mathematical biology, quantitative finance,
  operations research, etc.

  Finally, while the proposal was presented as an attempt to bring
  together the community, it is clear that it is accomplishing
  the opposite.  If this change is made, it will certainly do
  major damage to the relations between statistics and the rest
  of the mathematical sciences community, and I believe it will
  hurt statistics for years to come.

I urge the NSF leadership to withdraw this proposal as soon
as possible.  This will create an opportunity to join together
with members of the community to repair the damage that has been
done, and return to addressing the challenges that face the math
sciences and, indeed, the nation.

Subject: Comments on the Name change
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:59:49 -0700

In thinking about this -
Applied Mathematics - well that isn't exactly "mathematics" - applied
mathematicians think about some applications - so we need Applied
Biological mathematics - well that includes use of biological expertise - so
we need "Bio" too - as distinct from Applied
Computational -always historically - what you do if you are "not a
mathematician" - so I think we need Computational too

So far we have then Division of ABC Math and Statistical Sciences

I think we could keep going - and expanding on the name

In retrospect- perhaps we really all do different flavors of mathematics, and
honestly, isn't statistics just another flavor?

Seriously considering the funding aspect of this - in general there are many
statisticians sitting in university departments that are not statistics or
mathematics departments. Surely they will see a renaming of DMS to DMSS(??) as
a call for proposals in statistics funded from the MS pool. Will this help the
MS in general - I somehow doubt this. Funding for MS is not extreme as it
stands, and enlarging the community that will consider applying to the DMS
pool sounds negative to me.

In summary, no I cannot see the argument for renaming MS to MSS.

Subject: Re: Comments sought on proposed DMS name change
Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2011 02:59:05 -0600

I am not in favor of the name change. I think the
arguments of the prior DMS directors are sound, particularly
the caution/concern about singling out a particular
sub-discipline (statistics) to the potential detriment
of others.

    -Nancy Amato

--
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nancy M. Amato
Professor, Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering
Co-Director, Parasol Laboratory
Deputy Director, Institute for Applied Math and Computational Science
425H HR Bright Building
Texas A&M University, 3112 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-3112
tel: +1-979-862-2275, fax: +1-979-458-0718
email: [email protected], url: http://parasol.tamu.edu/~amato/
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject: proposed DMS name change
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 10:08:40 -0500

I am opposed to the suggested name change
 of "the Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS)"
 to "the Division of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences".

This new name seems less accurate as it places statistical analysis
 on an equal footing as mathematical analysis.  Statistical analysis is a
 subcategory of mathematical analysis.

 I don't think the proposed change makes sense.
Donate · Contact Us · Site Map · Join SIAM · My Account
Facebook Twitter Youtube linkedin google+