NSF ACCESS Allocations for High-Performance and AI Computing Resources

NSF ACCESS Allocations for High-Performance and AI Computing Resources is sponsored by U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) - Advanced Cyberinfrastructure Coordination Ecosystem: Services & Support (ACCESS). NSF's ACCESS program provides U. S.

researchers, educators, and students with free allocations of high-performance and GPU computing time across a national network of supercomputing resources, in support of AI and machine learning research.

ACCESS Allocations: Allocations Policy ACCESS Allocations Policies The ACCESS allocations process opens the door for the community of researchers who come to the ACCESS research computing and data ecosystem to pursue their science objectives.

ACCESS welcomes requests not just for traditional high-performance computing (HPC) activities, but for any work that can benefit from resources in the ecosystem, including machine learning, data science, science gateways, software development, and more.

The policies and their associated practices and procedures provide consistent and well-defined approaches, using merit-review principles consistent with the spirit of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), to ensure the most efficient and effective use of these resources.

We want to make the allocation process a welcoming gateway for the pursuit of scientific discovery while continuing to serve an essential curation role when demand for resources exceeds the available supply.

These policies ensure that access to the NSF-funded national cyberinfrastructure is equitable for all U.S. researchers no matter the size of the institution, the scale of the planned work, the discipline of the research, or the demographics of the requestor. We also want the allocations process to be open and transparent, both in the mechanisms of review and the process of making awards.

The process should be easy to navigate for the many researchers with small-scale needs, with escalating levels of justification and review applied as the researchers' needs grow. The ACCESS allocations policies are guided by our goals to: Create an open, inviting, and democratized allocations marketplace to empower the science and engineering community and to provide access across disciplines, computing modalities, and institutions.

Implement an efficient, scalable, and simplified request and review framework to reduce real and perceived barriers in connecting researchers to resources. Develop a robust, decentralized, and flexible software platform to extend the allocations environment into new user communities and encompass novel resources and varied usage modes.

These policies are maintained and updated by the ACCESS Resource Allocations Marketplace and Platform Services (RAMPS) team with input from the ACCESS Executive Council, the ACCESS External Advisory Board, RAMPS User Group (RUG), the ACCESS-affiliated Resource Providers, members of the ACCESS Allocations Review Committee (AARC), and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The policies and procedures are approved by NSF.

The allocations procedures and processes are managed and implemented by the RAMPS team. Any feedback regarding these policies or the associated allocation processes can be submitted via the ACCESS feedback form . Roles and Responsibilities The ACCESS allocation process relies on many individuals contributing to the successful submission, review and award of project requests.

The key roles in these policies and their primary responsibilities are outlined here. ACCESS Allocation Coordinator. The ACCESS Allocation Coordinator is responsible for enforcing and interpreting the allocation policies; managing the submission, review, and processing of requests; supporting researchers as they navigate the allocations process; and coordinating with Resource Providers throughout the process.

Principal Investigator (PI). The PI has primary responsibility for an allocated project and is expected to be aware of collaborators' activities as part of the project, the overall consumption of allocated resources, and the direction of the project's computational efforts.

PIs are responsible for submitting management requests (extensions, supplements, adding users, etc.) in support of the project, but can delegate this responsibility to co-PIs or Allocation Managers. The PI of an allocated project can be but does not need to be the PI for the supporting grant. Co-Principal Investigator (co-PI).

A co-PI on a project can submit management actions on behalf of an allocated project, including requesting supplements, adding users, and so on. Allocation Manager. An Allocation Manager on a project can submit management actions on behalf of an allocated project, including requesting supplements, adding users, and so on.

ACCESS Allocation Resource Committee (AARC). Members of the AARC are assigned to review proposals submitted to the allocations process, applying the review criteria to assist researchers in making efficient and effective use of the available resources. Resource Provider.

A Resource Provider site operates and maintains resources within the cyberinfrastructure ecosystem. Resource Provider staff support researchers by reviewing progress, approving requests to use their resources, and providing resource information essential to the effective and efficient allocation of their resources. In most cases, eligibility for ACCESS is simple: To qualify to lead an allocated project, you must be a U.

S-based researcher or educator, at the graduate-student level or higher. Work from any field of study, and funding from any source, is eligible. To see if any special eligibility rules apply to your situation, the following FAQ should provide the answer.

All project requests are considered against the review criteria , with scrutiny increasing with the scale of the request. For both PIs and users, your institutional email addresses must match your institutional affiliation listed; for example, gmail. com and yahoo.

com domains are prohibited. Eligibility: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) What if I'm a researcher affiliated with an academic institution? If you are a researcher affiliated with a U.S.-based academic institution , then you are eligible to receive an allocation.

If you are a postdoc at a U.S.-based academic institution , you are eligible to receive an allocation. You qualify to serve as project lead (called “principal investigator” or PI) on any project type . What if I'm a researcher affiliated with a non-academic institution?

If you’re from a U.S.-based non-profit, non-academic organization , then you are eligible for an allocation. This includes U.S.-based independent museums, observatories, libraries, research labs, professional societies, and any U.S. organization directly associated with education or research.

If you’re from a U.S. federally-funded research and development center (FFRDC) , you are eligible for an allocation—just as long as your agency typically does not provide its staff with resources that would work for your planned research. I’m from a military service academy If you’re from a U.S. military service academy , you are eligible for an allocation—since military service academies are treated the same as academic institutions.

I’m from the private sector If you’re a researcher from a U.S. commercial organization , you are eligible for an allocation as the PI. You’re especially likely to receive one if you’re from a small business with strong R&D capabilities , have a research grant from a U.S. federal or state agency , or have a cooperative project involving both universities and the private sector .

If you’re from the private sector and applying for ACCESS, then you must be prepared to publish your work in an open scientific forum . Proprietary or confidential work is not supported by ACCESS allocations. However, out of an abundance of caution, you should contact the ACCESS Help Desk before preparing a request for submission.

I’m a researcher who is currently unaffiliated with an institution (e.g., retired or self-employed) If you’re a scientist, engineer, scholar, or educator located in the U.S., but you’re retired, self-employed, or otherwise unaffiliated , you are not eligible for an allocation or eligible to use ACCESS resources as part of any allocated project.

If you are an educator or instructor at a U.S. academic, non-profit research, or educational institution, then you’re eligible for an allocation. If you have an adjunct or instructional appointment with a U.S.-based university or non-profit research institution, then you’re eligible for an allocation.

If you are a K–12 teacher at a U.S.-based accredited institution, then you’re eligible for an allocation to support class instructional activities. Eligible instructional activities include classroom or course work; training classes or workshops; hackathons; and undergraduate special projects or theses. What if I'm a graduate student?

If you are a graduate student at a U.S.-based academic institution , including NSF Graduate Fellows, you are eligible to lead Explore or Discover ACCESS allocations under guidance from your advisor. What if I’m a U.S.-based undergraduate or involved in K–12? If you are an undergraduate , then you’re not eligible to lead a project, but you’re welcome to work on a project under the guidance of an eligible advisor.

If you are a K–12 teacher , then you can apply for a classroom ACCESS allocation to support your students’ education. If you are a K–12 student , then you’re not eligible to lead a project, but you can ask your teacher to apply for a classroom allocation to support your learning. What if I'm a CI Facilitator or Campus Champion?

If you are a Cyberinfrastructure (CI) Facilitator for a program or organization, or a Campus Champion affiliated with a U.S.-based academic institution, you are eligible to receive an allocation to support your institution’s researchers and help them make the leap to ACCESS resources. CI Facilitators and Campus Champions help their communities obtain start-up allocations.

They can also receive their own allocations to allow local researchers to test the various resources and platforms with no barrier to entry. What if I’m based outside the U.S.? If you’re located in the U.S., and associated with a U.S.-based institution, then you’re eligible to receive an allocation.

If you are affiliated with the international campus of a U.S. institution , then you must also have collaborators who are located in the U.S. In general, your U.S.-based collaborator should be designated the project lead.

In rare cases, we can consider an exception, but you must explain the reason or benefit for having the PI located outside the U.S. If your project has foreign components (that is, any parts of the project taking place or funded outside of the U.S.), then your project must also include substantive intellectual participation by U.S. researchers.

If you’re an international researcher not located in the U.S. , then an eligible U.S.-based researcher must serve as the PI on your ACCESS requests and allocations. However, ACCESS will not provide an allocation to a PI that does not have a substantive role in the project: the PI may not simply serve as a proxy for a foreign researcher.

In order to add international researchers that are not affiliated with U.S. institutions, the PI must provide justification and receive approval before the allocation request is approved. An eligible PI may share their allocation by adding collaborators' user accounts to their project.

Collaborators may be graduate or undergraduate students as well as colleagues based outside of the U.S. however must comply with the following by not being listed: State sponsors of terrorism Export Administration Regulations (EAR) Entity List (15 CFR Part 744, Supp.

No. 4) Executive Order 14032 of June 3, 2021 Department of Defense 1260H List annually published as mandated by Section 1260H of the Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 116-283) Department of Defense 1286 List published as mandated by Section 1286 of the Fiscal Year 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 115-232) Some Resource Providers may have additional restrictions on international collaborators.

What if I'm in a niche field of study? You’re in luck! ACCESS welcomes requests from anywhere in the scholarly community.

Work from any field of study is eligible : physical sciences, life sciences, engineering, social sciences, humanities, and arts. If you’re applying for an ACCESS allocation, though, you must be prepared to publish your work and get the word out to the scholarly community. What if I don't have the right kind of grant (or any grant)?

You can have financial support from any funding agency or source and still be eligible for an allocation. Even if you don’t have any funding , you are still eligible for an allocation. However, PIs without funding are only eligible for one allocation, while PIs with funding awards can receive as many allocations as they have awards.

You don’t need to have a merit-reviewed funding award , but having one will strengthen your application. If you don’t have merit-reviewed funding, then, as part of the review process, we will need to evaluate your allocation request on its intellectual merit. If you have more than one merit-reviewed funding grant , you are eligible to request a separate project to manage the deliverables associated with each grant.

However, you can combine the work from closely related grants within one allocated project. What if I want to use a specific resource? If the particular resource you wish to use has specific usage requirements —whether because of its funding source, its specialized hardware, or for any other reason—then you will see those eligibility requirements spelled out in the resource description.

For more details, please see the appendix on Further details on eligibility . In addition to basic user eligibility rules, all ACCESS allocation requests are reviewed against common criteria to determine the appropriateness of work for ACCESS resources.

These criteria apply to all requests, regardless of the types of resources, the size of the request, or the domain of inquiry, with the level of scrutiny rising with the scale of the requested resources. In applying these criteria, investigator productivity and scholarly outcomes are the end goals.

PIs must provide justification for these criteria suitable to the nature of the request, and reviewers shall apply the criteria in the context of the request. If the reviewers conclude that the request is more appropriate on ACCESS resources other than those requested, they may recommend other resources instead.

Appropriateness of Methodology: Does the request describe appropriate tools, methods, and approaches for addressing the research objectives? These methodologies may be community codes or models, data analysis methods, or algorithmic formulations expressed in user-developed scripts or tools.

Appropriateness of Research Plan: Does the request describe necessary and sufficient computational experiments to answer the research questions posed? In some cases, the research plan may be more reasonably expressed as estimates of resource use, supported by past or early experience. Serious concerns about the research plan will be documented in reviews and may lead to reduced allocation awards.

Efficient Use of Resources: Has the request identified appropriate resources for undertaking the research plan with the proposed methodology? Will those resources be used as efficiently as is reasonably possible and in accordance with the recommended use guidelines of those resources? Supporting Grant Alignment: Is the proposed work supported by a grant or grants that have undergone separate merit review?

If so, is the allocation request consistent with the objectives of the supporting grants and is the scale of resource use commensurate with the level and purpose of support? Does the identified support provide necessary and sufficient human resources to complete the proposed work? When a request is supported by merit-reviewed supporting grants, the intellectual component is not subject to further review by ACCESS.

However, if a request is not supported by a merit-review award, reviewers will assess the intellectual merit of the proposed work in a manner consistent with the scale of the request and the NSF's intellectual merit criteria. General allocation policies All ACCESS allocation requests are subject to a common, basic set of policies and procedures, which are summarized in this section.

In general, the allocation opportunities in the ACCESS Marketplace allow eligible individuals or groups to pursue their research objectives with appropriate, manageable levels of effort. The opportunities provide increasing amounts of resource access, and as resource requirements increase, the submission requirements and review scrutiny also increase.

Submission requirements and review processes for each opportunity are described in later sections: Explore, Discover, and Accelerate ACCESS projects . Maximize ACCESS projects . Any type of intended resource use — computational research, science gateway, code development, educational, and so on — is acceptable at any opportunity if accompanied by suitable justification required for that opportunity.

Eligible researchers can make their initial ACCESS request at any opportunity. However, reviewers may recommend redirecting requests to a more appropriate opportunity. Upon determining that their resource needs are greater than that provided by the initially chosen opportunity, researchers may submit requests to transition their project to another opportunity.

Because of the ease of submitting Marketplace requests, RAMPS will hold firm to the resource limits defined for each opportunity in order to maintain fairness across the community. Researchers are encouraged to optimize their use of the resources to fit within a given opportunity. For all but the largest-scale resource needs, Marketplace allocations are awarded in ACCESS Credits.

After a project is created, the PI must exchange ACCESS Credits for allocations on specific resource(s) to begin computing. Resource Providers approve, modify, or decline these exchanges based on the appropriateness of the work for that resource as well as the availability of that resource. RAMPS provides an exchange calculator to help researchers to apply the exchange rates for ACCESS Credits on the various resources.

One project per funded grant In general, an eligible PI can have one project for each merit-reviewed supporting grant, or they may combine similar work spanning multiple grants into a single project request. The PI should select the allocation opportunity that is best suited to the scale of the computational work to be performed.

Similarly, closely collaborating researchers—e.g., researchers on a set of NSF “Collaborative Research” projects—should submit a single collaborative request rather than several individual requests. One of the collaborators should be designated as the PI, and others can be designated as co-PIs. For research activities not supported by a merit-reviewed funding award, PIs should consolidate their activities into a single request.

PIs may also request separate projects for activities representing distinct non-research situations: A PI may request a separate project to operate a gateway service that is distinct from their research activities. A PI may submit requests for any number of projects to keep classroom and training activities and users separate from research activities.

A PI has received guidance from the review panel via the ACCESS Allocations Coordinator that the panel will consider separate requests from the PI based on the lines of work discussed in a prior proposal. The requests should be divided as described in the panel's guidance. ACCESS-allocated resources ACCESS manages the allocation requests and awards for a set of cyberinfrastructure (CI) resources, many funded in whole or in part by NSF.

A full listing of allocated resources, architectural details, allocation units, and statements of recommended use is provided at the ACCESS website and within the allocation submission system. Each resource has a defined allocation unit and guidelines for how to calculate allocation amounts.

In addition, each allocated resource has a statement of recommended use that describes the Resource Provider's policies, any usage models that may be emphasized or not permitted, and any limits on requests. PIs are advised to review these resource details and guidelines before submitting requests for specific resources.

A PI's allocation request (whether by exchanging ACCESS Credits or making a specific resource request) must justify the requested allocation amounts, must fall within the recommended uses for those resources, and may need to describe how the project's research objectives require the capabilities of specialized resources.

For the opportunities allocated in ACCESS Credits, projects supported by a merit-reviewed funding award can be requested for and awarded up to the duration of the supporting grant. The allocation opportunity credit limits apply for the duration of the project. Projects in support of educational needs will have allocation periods that align with the length of each instance of the educational or training course (e.g., a semester).

The instructor may request that the allocation extend slightly beyond the end of the course, with suitable justification. For other ACCESS Credits projects not supported by a merit-reviewed funding award, allocations are awarded for 12-month periods. PIs can request 12-month extensions, up to a total of five years, as long as their resource use stays within the credit limits for the opportunity.

For the largest-scale requests (i.e., the Maximize ACCESS opportunity), awards are typically made for a 12-month period; shorter periods may be recommended by the review panel to ask for clarifications from a PI while allowing meritorious research to begin. With a brief explanation, a PI can request up to a six-month extension to continue using existing allocation amounts.

PIs can continue their activities in subsequent years through annual renewal requests. Forfeiture of unused allocation units At the end of an allocation period, projects forfeit any unused allocation units. At the Maximize ACCESS opportunity, significant unused allocations may contribute to reduced future allocations from the review panel.

A Resource Provider may also reduce an allocation balance during allocation management requests. Such reductions most commonly occur when a project with a large remaining balance requests a time extension.

Confidentiality of requests and reviews Information about approved allocation awards and descriptive project information (PI name and institution, title, and abstract) are not considered to be confidential and shall be publicly available through ACCESS services. This policy is consistent with NSF practice of publishing award abstracts and funding amounts.

All ACCESS allocation requests, request documents, and reviewer comments are considered confidential and are only made available to: the PI and co-PIs of the submitted request; members of the review panels without a conflict of interest; ACCESS staff, including relevant allocations and user support staff members; Resource Provider representatives; and Confidential information can be released beyond these limited groups only with permission from the PI.

For the Discover and Accelerate opportunities, PIs must use the provided proposal templates to ensure reviewers are provided the necessary information to make decisions on allocation requests. PIs are advised to read the available example proposals to make sure they are awarded the resources they need.

Progress reports are required in order to receive the second half of the available ACCESS Credits for Explore, Discover, and Accelerate opportunities.

In no more than three pages, a progress report should summarize the work accomplished to date, describe how the ACCESS resources were used to support the work, identify any publications in progress, and summarize how the project will be completed with the remaining ACCESS Credits (or plans to move the work to another opportunity). Published citable works should be entered separately via the supplement submission interface.

Progress reports are also essential to successful renewal requests at the Maximize opportunity. The progress report should summarize the work accomplished to date, describe any deviations from the originally proposed work, identify any publications in progress, and explain why any resource allocations were substantially underused (if applicable).

For resources without accounting charges, a PI must describe how the resources were used effectively and justify any continued need for resources in subsequent years. Failure to discuss the resource utilization may result in a reduced or declined allocation. Published citable works resulting from the prior allocation should be entered via the renewal submission form.

Upon the completion of any project, the PI must submit a final report that summarizes the work accomplished with the awarded allocations and describe how the ACCESS resources were used to support the work. Significant deviations from the originally planned work or reasons for being unable to accomplish the work should also be briefly described.

Publications or citable works resulting from the allocations should be added separately via the renewal submission interface. PIs should report all articles or other citable works that benefited from support by ACCESS-allocated resources. These research products can be reported via the ACCESS allocations interface as part of a PI's allocation requests, progress reports, or final reports.

Explore, Discover, and Accelerate ACCESS projects The Explore, Discover, and Accelerate opportunities are the available options for small- and medium-scale projects, and the submission and review policies are designed to balance the submission and review effort with ensuring a good fit between the project and the resources.

All options require completion of the standard request form, which collects information for use in review decisions and data to to help stakeholders such as NSF understand the nature of ecosystem activity. ACCESS accepts requests for these opportunities at any time, and the requests are reviewed and processed continually. These requests are typically reviewed and processed within two weeks of submission.

PIs are notified by email when a decision is finalized. Requests for projects in these opportunities are awarded in ACCESS Credits . Up to half the posted Credit limit for the opportunity will be awarded with the initial request.

The other half of the Credit limit will be awarded via a Supplement request accompanied by a Progress Report describing the work completed to date. Explore ACCESS: Explore ACCESS projects are intended for purposes that require small resource amounts.

Researchers new to the Marketplace can try out resources or run benchmarks, instructors can provide access for small-scale classroom activities, research software engineers can develop or port codes, graduate students can pursue theses and dissertations, and so on. Explore ACCESS requests require only an abstract to complete the submission.

Discover ACCESS: Discover ACCESS projects are intended to fill the needs of many modest-scale research activities or other resource needs. The goal of the Discover ACCESS opportunity is to allow many researchers to complete the work associated with funded awards with a minimum of effort. Discover ACCESS requests require a one-page description of the project (template provided) to address the review criteria.

Researchers can also ask for an advisory review of their planned work to guide them to appropriate resources. Accelerate ACCESS: Accelerate ACCESS projects support activities that require more substantial resource amounts to pursue their research objectives on ACCESS-allocated resources. Awards in this opportunity are still awarded in ACCESS Credits and can be submitted at any time.

Researchers are expected to have well-defined plans for their resource use, and to submit a 3-5 page project description (template provided) to be reviewed by members of the AARC. Reviewers may recommend the requested ACCESS Credits or may recommend a Discover ACCESS award. For projects with resource needs beyond those provided by the Accelerate ACCESS opportunity, a Maximize ACCESS request is required.

ACCESS does not place an upper limit on the size of allocations that can be requested or awarded to Maximize ACCESS projects; however, Resource Providers may have limits on allocation amounts for specific resources. In aggregate, Maximize ACCESS proposals for allocations represent a significant investment of the NSF. The review process therefore strives to be as rigorous as for equivalent NSF proposals.

The submission requirements for Maximize ACCESS requests are detailed in the ACCESS allocations documentation. The requirements may evolve over time to ensure that the reviewers have adequate information to assess submissions and ensure efficient and effective use of the allocated resources. Reviews and awards for Maximize ACCESS requests Maximize ACCESS requests are accepted, reviewed, and awarded semi-annually.

The ACCESS Allocation Review Committee (AARC) is convened to review requests and recommend allocation amounts. All funding used to support the work proposed in a Maximize ACCESS request must be reported in the submission process.

Reviewers use this information to assess whether the PI has enough support to complete the work, analyze data, prepare publications, etc. Maximize ACCESS requests are assigned to reviewers based on their expertise and the field of science for each request. External reviewers may be sought to provide comments if no AARC members have sufficient expertise.

After reviewers have been given time to assess their assigned requests, the proposals are discussed at a meeting of the full review panel, and the panel recommends an allocation amount for each request. The panel may recommend supporting the request with a Discover ACCESS or Accelerate ACCESS award. The AARC reviewers evaluate the merits of each request according to the allocation review criteria (above).

The availability of resources (i.e., the amount of service units available for allocation) is not considered in the review. Necessary reductions due to insufficient resources are made after the merit review, under NSF guidelines, by the RAMPS team and Resource Providers.

In consultations between the AARC, RAMPS staff, and RP staff, recommended allocations may be transferred to other resources for projects that are better suited for or that can take advantage of other resources, to help balance the load and maximize final awards. Consideration will be given to the impact of a resource transfer on the continuity of the research, if a researcher has been computing on a specific resource.

When the recommended levels considerably exceed the total amount available to allocate, a formulaic “reconciliation” process adjusts all recommended allocations to remove oversubscription. This reconciliation process reduces large allocations more than small ones and prioritizes projects supported in full or in part by NSF grants.

ACCESS Allocation Review Committee (AARC) The AARC is the committee convened to review large-scale requests submitted to ACCESS. The AARC consists of volunteer experts from the faculty and staff of U.S. universities, laboratories, and other non-profit and commercial research organizations.

All committee members have expertise in at least one area of computational science or engineering and serve a term of approximately three years, with a possibility of a one-time renewal. PI and co-PIs of ACCESS allocation awards may serve on the AARC. Requests for resources above a threshold level determined by ACCESS are merit-reviewed.

Written reviews of the resource requests are completed in a timely manner and made available to the requesters and ACCESS. Recommendations to ACCESS for the allocation of resources based on the requests, reviews, and the available resources are developed and documented. The environment for this process is consistent with the conflict-of-interest policy and confidentiality of requesters and their reviews is maintained.

Every effort is made to avoid conflicts of interest between reviewers and requests. AARC members are not allowed to review or be present for the discussion of requests from their home institution, former students, postdocs, advisors, or current and recent collaborators.

In addition, AARC members who are also PIs or co-PIs on Maximize ACCESS requests do not review requests for or otherwise participate in the AARC meeting to which they submit their requests. The complete Conflict of Interest Policy for ACCESS is included as an appendix. PIs who wish to appeal the outcomes of the AARC process may do so by submitting an Appeal.

An Appeal should be submitted within four weeks of the date when the PI is notified of the review results. An Appeal may be used to supply additional information or clarification requested by the reviewers to make a final recommendation. A PI may also use an Appeal to specify, in the PI's opinion, why the reviews of the original request and