SETB 04-20 Big Ideas - Assessment of New Submissions

OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
21st May 2020 Strategic Business – Discussion
ENGINEERING AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL
SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD

3rd Meeting – 21st May 2020
BIG IDEAS – ASSESSMENT OF NEW IDEAS

Claire Graves and Diane Howard
SUMMARY
This paper contains new submissions to the Big Ideas initiative, to be assessed by the
SETB for recommendations about how they could proceed.
ACTION / OBJECTIVES
The SETB are invited to:
• Assess the Big Ideas applications provided in this paper
• Make recommendations on the Big Ideas as per the guidance
Contents
This paper contains the following sections:
1. Overview
2. Panel guidance
3. Summary of Big Ideas to be assessed at this meeting
4. Action
Annex 1: Big Ideas Assessment Form
Annex 2: Big Ideas Applications
1
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
BIG IDEAS – ASSESSMENT OF NEW IDEAS

1. Overview
1.1. EPSRC has introduced the Big Ideas initiative to collect adventurous and exciting ideas from
the wider research community.
1.2. EPSRC are looking for a level of ambition and transformational potential embedded within the
idea. Big Ideas are those that are hard to achieve, require significant support (financial, people,
skills) to make them possible and have ground-breaking impacts. Big Ideas attract public,
industry and Government enthusiasm and excitement, either by the nature of the science itself
or by the potential socio-economic changes it could offer in the future. EPSRC welcomes
submissions across all areas of our portfolio.
1.3. This paper contains the new applications submitted to the Big Ideas process, and guidance
for the SETB to follow in order to assess the applications.
2. Panel Guidance
2.1. The key part of this session is for the SETB to assess Big Idea submissions and discuss the
way forward for each one. There are five submissions, and each one should make the case
as to why it is a Big Idea to develop further.
2.2. Each of the submissions has been allocated two speakers and a Speaker’s Form has been
provided in Annex 1 to help focus attention on some of the key goals for a Big Idea. At this
point EPSRC is looking for feedback regarding proposed next steps for each submission. This
may mean a submission is not a Big Idea at all, but could perhaps be considered through
other, established funding routes. Alternatively, a submission could be something that is the
core of a Big Idea but needs further development. The discussion should focus on what is
appropriate to further each individual submission.
2.3. Speakers may not be experts in the scientific area of the submission. As such the discussion
should be on how submissions fit as a Big Idea against the guidance provided in the Speaker’s
Form. The SETB should discuss each submission, providing narrative feedback against the
Big Ideas criteria, and provide a recommendation for the next steps for each submission under
the following headings:
a) Sift – please provide narrative feedback

b) Develop further – provide narrative feedback to proposer for further development and
bring back to a future meeting
c) Submit to Ideas Bank – EPSRC to keep on file for future opportunities (SETB may
indicate if there is a particular opportunity they want to link it to)
2.4. Following the discussion of individual ideas, SETB should discuss whether any ideas that have
been categorised as ‘develop further’, should be allocated funding to support workshops to
facilitate this development. Budget has been made available to support up to three
workshops following each meeting.
2.5. If there are more than three Big Ideas at a meeting SETB should prioritise which ones are
being recommended for workshop funding. There is no requirement for SETB to allocate all of
this budget, should it not be needed, or should SETB feel that ideas should be developed via
another mechanism. While there is no requirement for submitters to accept this budget, those
wishing to do so will have up to 6 months to spend their allocated budget.
2
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
2.6. Updates will be provided on the progress of these workshops during the dashboard run
through at the beginning of each meeting. Once workshops have taken place, submitters will
be asked to provide SETB with:
a) An updated version of the Big Idea

b) A 1-page summary of changes made to the idea, as a result of holding the workshop
c) A workshop report
3. Summary of Big Ideas to be assessed at this meeting

Internal or
Ideas Submitted
Title External Speaker 1 Speaker 2
reference by
submission
Internet of Materials:
Data-Centric Materials
Adrian
BIG 19-19 Discovery, Iain Todd EXTERNAL Phil Taylor
Mulholland
Characterisation and
Manufacture.
Continuously verified Leigh

BIG 19-20 Robert Smith EXTERNAL Su Taylor
intelligent assets. Lapworth
Mathematical modelling
Paul
BIG 20-03 for next generation Stacie Tibos EXTERNAL Jane Jiang
French
formulated products.
Empowering
Management, Decision Graham
BIG 20-05 Katie Blaney INTERNAL Mike Sutton
Making and Growth in an Niblo
Uncertain World
Living with Data - James Jonathan Susan

BIG 20-09 INTERNAL
Visualising Uncertainty Dracott Legh-Smith Rosser
3.1. Feedback from EPSRC themes and internal working group (BIWG): The following
summarises the main feedback points for each submission, reflecting input from both BIWG
and relevant EPSRC Heads of Programme.
Ideas
Title Main feedback points
reference
• Any further development of this idea would need a clearer

articulation of the international landscape.
Internet of • Any further development of this idea could also articulate
Materials: Data- who they are aiming the data at and how it will be accessible
Centric Materials
BIG 19-19 and updated beyond the lifetime of any award.
Discovery,
Characterisation • It could also highlight how it will link in alloys and mixed
and Manufacture. materials – as understanding how elements react together
would be an area of interest to business.
• Some overlap was noted with some of the thinking around
Digital Chemistry and new approaches in that space.
3
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
• The Office for National Statistics (ONS) and DEFRA are

pursuing opportunities in materials flows and data to
understand what materials are in the country and going out
of the country, which is at an early stage. Linking how
materials data can accelerate development as well as what
materials (for instance including rare earth metals) in a data
set would enable business to develop new materials quicker
and deliver them for manufacturers who know the base
material stock is available within the country. However,
linking these two projects would increase costs. If they are
developed separately, they should use a complimentary
platform to enable the datasets to be linked later.
• It was thought that this idea had the potential to

revolutionise non-destructive testing. It is seen to align to
the EPSRC delivery plan (notably: productivity, connecting
Continuously
research landscape to accelerate impact)
BIG 19-20 verified intelligent
assets. • Digital twins research is not listed as a key challenge to be
addressed. However, it should be borne in mind that a
developing digital twins capability in the UK would be
needed to compliment an investment in this area.
• This submission was thought to be enabling (rather than

transformative) and could provide a step-change regarding
the efficiency of manufacturing, if it is successful. However,
a question was raised regarding whether the scale of
ambition matched that expected from a Big Idea
• The economic case for the submission was well-made, and it
was thought to have the ability to enthuse Government. The
case for public benefit was less convincing.
• This submission should be of interest across a range of
Mathematical disciplines and Government departments.
modelling for next
BIG 20-03 generation
• A timeliness case was well-made from a maths perspective,
formulated but less so from the perspective of other disciplines.
products. • Any further development of the idea would benefit from
better highlighting the transformative impact beyond maths.
Would a different name better reflect its breadth?
• A clearer case around the risk of not providing support to
this idea would strengthen the submission.
To note: Two letters of support from Croda and Mondelez have been
received for this submission. They are not included as part of the
main submission, but will be made available in the “reading room”
should you wish to view them.
Empowering
Management,
No additional feedback available (internal submissions bypass BIWG
BIG 20-05 Decision Making
and progress straight to SETB)
and Growth in an
Uncertain World
4
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Living with Data -

No additional feedback available (internal submissions bypass BIWG
BIG 20-09 Visualising
and progress straight to SETB)
Uncertainty
4. Action
4.1. The SETB are invited to:

i) Assess the Big Ideas applications provided in this paper
ii) Make recommendations on the Big Ideas as per the guidance
FURTHER INFORMATION
Claire Graves, Executive Leadership Team
Email: claire.graves@epsrc.ukri.org
Diane Howard, Senior Manager
Email: diane.howard@epsrc.ukri.org
5
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
ANNEX 1: BIG IDEAS ASSESSMENT FORM
Big Ideas Speaker

Speaker’s Report Form
Big Idea Reference:
Principal Investigator: Organisation:
Title:
This form should be completed and brought to the meeting; it will be collected afterwards to help feedback to
applicants.
1 The Big Idea Vision
• Does this big idea have the ability to enthuse the Government and the public?
• Will the big idea be transformative or enabling if successful?
• Does this idea move beyond an individual research project or proposal e.g. a programme
grant? Does it require significant support at scale, in terms of both the value of investment
required, and the number of people that will have to be involved to achieve it?
6
2 Impact
• Is this idea likely to lead to significant impact e.g. through people, knowledge, society,
economy? Are the benefits well described and realistic?
• Is there a big win and can it be achieved?
3 Timeliness?
• Has the salience of the idea been explained?

• Has the research landscape (political &/or scientific) moved to make this idea increasingly likely
or possible.
• What is the risk of not doing this idea now?
7
4 Landscape
• Does the UK have the capacity/infrastructure needed to address this opportunity?

• Does the idea take into account the current international and UK context? Is further work
required to understand this?
• Does this fit within other UK strategic priorities? How?
• Will this idea galvanise communities to work together to realise the opportunity presented?
5 Deliverability
• Is this idea achievable? Are the timescales to delivery and scale appropriate and realistic
• Are the underpinning research challenges clear?
• Is the research EPS led? Should other councils or IUK be involved in delivery of this idea?
• Does the idea adequately address the relevant communities and sectors that need to be
involved? Does this need developing further?
• What level of resource do you consider to be appropriate to deliver this idea?
8
6 Recommendations
Please recommend one of the following options for this idea and add any narrative feedback on the box
below.
d) Sift – please provide narrative feedback

e) Develop further – provide narrative feedback to proposer for further development and
bring back to a future meeting
f) Submit to idea bank – EPSRC to keep on file for future opportunities (SETB may indicate
if there is a particular opportunity they want to link it to)
9
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
21 May 2020 Strategic Business – Discussion
ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS
Ideas Reference: BIG 19-19
Submitted by: Iain Todd
1. Big Idea Title (maximum 10 words) *

Internet of Materials: Data-Centric Materials Discovery, Characterisation and Manufacture.
2. Summary Pitch (maximum 30 words) *

Internet of Materials aims to place data at the core of materials innovation to remove constraints -
physical, resource, manufacturability - that currently inhibit its economic and societal impact.
3. VISION - WHAT is the ‘Big Idea’? (maximum 300 words)

• Give a description of the proposed opportunity, why it is exciting to researchers, government and the
public, in non-technical language
• Highlight the transformational aspirations of the idea
• Explain how this idea is beyond the scale of an individual research project or proposal such as a
programme grant
The discovery and development of new materials is of fundamental importance to the UK’s economy and
impacts a number of key sectors including aerospace, automotive, life sciences and renewable energy.
Material intensive industries invest heavily in R&D to allow them to create differentiated products in order
to maintain or grow their market position. New materials are at the heart of delivering the commitment to
net zero carbon and industrial strategy grand challenges of clean growth and future of mobility. However,
materials innovation is very challenging and expensive, with failures often occurring late in the
development cycle. There are multiple objectives to be optimised in materials innovation, resulting in a
huge number of constraints - for example resource availability, scale-up, manufacturability, energy usage,
supply chain stability, toxicity, recyclability - and many of these constraints are not be realised until
considerable R&D resources have been deployed.
The emergence and advancement of digital tools and technologies (industrial IoT, digital twin, machine
learning and AI) provides the opportunity for data-centric approaches to materials innovation with
potential benefits of accelerated discovery, scale-up and testing, and early identification of development
failures. There is a rich stream of data in materials research, however we are not capturing or using this
data in an appropriate way to accelerate innovation. A data centric approach will allow us to incorporate
less readily quantifiable industrial factors such as recyclability, scarcity and manufacturability. This new
approach requires us to bring together different academic communities - chemistry, material scientists,
manufacturers, data scientists and social scientists - to solve common challenges. If successful the UK
can take a leadership position in the development of new products and processes, delivering significant
economic and societal benefit to the UK.
10 BIG 19-19
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

4. IMPACT - WHAT impact would it have if successful? (maximum 300 words)
• What knowledge, people, societal and economic impact will there be? Please describe the benefits of
this.
• What would the 'big win' be for the UK if the idea is realised (both scientifically and non-scientifically)?
The discovery and development of new materials is of fundamental importance to the UK’s economy and
impacts a number of key sectors including aerospace, automotive, life sciences and renewable energy.
Material intensive industries invest heavily in R&D to allow them to create differentiated products in order
to maintain or grow their market position. New materials are at the heart of delivering the commitment to
net zero carbon and industrial strategy grand challenges of clean growth and future of mobility. However,
materials innovation is very challenging and expensive, with failures often occurring late in the
development cycle. There are multiple objectives to be optimised in materials innovation, resulting in a
huge number of constraints - for example resource availability, scale-up, manufacturability, energy usage,
supply chain stability, toxicity, recyclability - and many of these constraints are not be realised until
considerable R&D resources have been deployed.
The emergence and advancement of digital tools and technologies (industrial IoT, digital twin, machine
learning and AI) provides the opportunity for data-centric approaches to materials innovation with
potential benefits of accelerated discovery, scale-up and testing, and early identification of development
failures. There is a rich stream of data in materials research, however we are not capturing or using this
data in an appropriate way to accelerate innovation. A data centric approach will allow us to incorporate
less readily quantifiable industrial factors such as recyclability, scarcity and manufacturability. This new
approach requires us to bring together different academic communities - chemistry, material scientists,
manufacturers, data scientists and social scientists - to solve common challenges. If successful the UK
can take a leadership position in the development of new products and processes, delivering significant
economic and societal benefit to the UK.
5. TIMELINESS - WHY is the idea timely now? (maximum 200 words)

• Why is it important to do now?
• What has changed (in the development of the science, in the research landscape, and/or the political
landscape) to make the realisation of this idea more likely or possible now?
• What are the risks for the UK of not supporting this opportunity now?
The performance of a material, or system of materials, depends critically on a number of deeply entwined
factors - chemistry, structure, processing and properties. This entanglement means that identifying cause
and effect in materials innovation is challenging and often slow.
Advances in sensor technologies, deep learning, computational approaches and mathematical analysis,
coupled with the shift in manufacturing from statistical process control to manufacturing informatics
(enabled by industrial IoT), has created the space and opportunity to drive a revolution, not only the way
that we discover, process and characterise materials, but also how we understand their lifecycle,
performance and manufacturability – linking the fundamental science to the economics and impacts of
materials and their use.
We require co-ordinated action across many different disciplines, that are not altogether natural
collaborators. The presence and influence of national Institutes such as Turing, Henry Royce and Hartree
affords the opportunity for such large scale and diverse teams to come together. There has never been a
11 BIG 19-19
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

better time than now to tackle this problem and the UK has a uniquely positioned in terms of its integrated
R&D infrastructure.
6. LANDSCAPE - WHAT is the current investment landscape, both in the UK and globally?
HOW does the idea relate to other priorities in the UK landscape? (maximum 200 words)
• Does the UK currently have the capacity and infrastructure needed to address this opportunity?
• Describe how this idea fits in the international context and the UK's position in relation to this
opportunity
• How does the idea fit with other current UK strategic priorities?
• How will this idea galvanise the research communities to work together to realise the opportunity?
The UK is well positioned in terms of capacity and capability through its national level institutes. The
Turing Institute (data science, artificial intelligence), the national high-performance computing facilities
(ARCHER) and the Hartree Centre provide a strong computational and analytical base. Materials
research at the Henry Royce Institute and Diamond Light Source provide the framework for capturing the
rich data needed and the HVMC allows for “quick-wins” and the establishment of demonstrator platforms
through new facilities such as Future Forge (AFRC) and DRAMA (MTC). Data-centric materials science
and engineering will create value from both the legacy data we have and new data that we generate -
helping to resolve issues related to challenges such as the circular economy in materials.
Internationally, this field is driven by the US (Materials Genome Initiative) with a small but steadily
emerging trend seeking to develop and exploit new tools for both rapid material discovery and
manufacturability (active process control to achieve ‘right- first time’ manufacturing). The potential scale
of UK activity and our interconnected research landscape presents an advantage as does the focus
through the ISCF where Materials 4.0 would positively impact a number of themes (Driving the Electric
Revolution, Future Flight, Made Smarter).
7. DELIVERY - WHAT will it take to deliver this big idea? (maximum 450 words)
• Comment on the achievability of the idea. And on what timescales. Please give an initial indication of
the expected time to delivery (in years) and scale of investment required to deliver this idea
• Highlight the underpinning research challenges that are required to support the realisation of this
opportunity
• If multidisciplinary: what are the relevant disciplines? Is it multidisciplinary just across the EPS
disciplines or across other Research Council or Innovate UK remits too?
• Who/which research communities/industry sectors etc will need to be involved to realise the idea?
• How much effort and resource is needed to deliver this idea? (Skills; People: groups, universities,
industry)?
There are several critical mass investments supported by EPSRC that have “intelligent processing” or
“intelligent use of data” as core activities, notably the Sustain (Steels), Metrology and MAPP (Advanced
Powder Processing) Future Manufacturing Hubs. In addition, the Turing Institute has a research theme
related to data centric engineering at Cambridge. In the current situation, multiple large projects are
working successfully, but independently, on key early aspects of the same problem. If coordinated and
resourced through a larger programme of activity this would lead to economies-of-scale gains, synergies
of approach and more rapid progress in this important and emerging area of research.
The broad areas of activity we propose are:
12 BIG 19-19
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

Development of data centric tools and methods for materials science and engineering
Data centric materials discovery and processing
Creation of scalable technology demonstrators
The challenges we set ourselves here require a very different, and much broader skill set than is
traditionally employed in the field of materials science and engineering. Data is not simply an input for a
machine learning model - data streams contain information about the physical world that need to be
deconvoluted, understood and applied to the solution of problems. To solve this challenge we need to
bring together and build a broad research community, with specific expertise and input drawn from:
HRI - accelerated materials discovery, advanced materials processing and manufacturing, material
modelling and characterisation, high throughput validation.
STFC/ Diamond - advanced high resolution characterisation and in-operando and in-situ measurements
of material performance.
Turing / Hartree - data analytics, HPC specialisation, AI and deep learning, mathematical modelling
HVMC – advanced digital manufacturing and industrial IoT,
UK academia – informatics, advanced sensors, in-process monitoring and control, materials modelling
and discovery, mathematics, computing, robotics
Industry - from all sectors with a special emphasis on SMEs and university start-ups in this space
We estimate this to be a 5-7 year programme at a cost of £25-35M apportioned: 45% data centric tools
and methods, 45% materials discovery and processing, and 10% technology demonstrators. This
represents the relative effort in developing the tools and capabilities in
Informatics, computing and data-centric modelling.
Modification of existing facilities and building new ones capable of capturing data and acting the outputs
of the informatics driven models.
Co-creation of facilities with the HVMC to demonstrate the potential of the new approach to industrial
application.
8. WHICH of the following does this idea fit with? (you may select multiple boxes): *
Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund

Fundamental research
Multidisciplinary
If multidisciplinary: what are the relevant disciplines? Is it multidisciplinary just across the EPS
disciplines or across other Research Council remits too? (maximum 50 words)
This is Multicisciplinary with most disciplines falling within EPS Disciplines where input would be required
from Informaticians, Mathematicians, Computer and Data sciences, Materials Scientists and engineers,
Electrical Engineers, Control Engineers and Physicists. There are lessons to be learned and input
needed from the Pharmaceutical and biological sciences where informatics approaches play a role in new
drug discovery and from social sciences related to policy.
13 BIG 19-19
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
9. WHO has been involved in the development of this big idea? (Maximum 100 words)
The BIG IDEA has emerged from community engagement led by the Royce Institute, including two
symposia on ‘Data Centric Materials Science and Engineering’ (May 2017, May 2019) in collaboration
with The Turing Institute with attendees from industry, academia (HRI partners, Birmingham and Exeter),
HVMC (AFRC, MTC, AMRC) and national institutes (Hartree, HPC and Diamond). The idea emerged as
a key theme during a Royce Institute Advanced Metals Processing Theme event attended by all HRI
partner institutions plus WMG, Birmingham and Swansea universities.
10. Lead contact details
Name Iain Todd

Department Materials Science and Engineering
Organisation University of Sheffield
Email Address iain.todd@sheffield.ac.uk
11. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - Is there any additional information that is relevant to your
application that EPSRC staff and those who are part of the decision making process should
be made aware of, such as a conflict of interest or related submissions. (maximum 100
words)
This submission is related to the Henry Royce Institute as a whole and while i have submitted this it is on
behalf of that activity that it is submitted.
14 BIG 19-19
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Submitted by: Robert Smith

Continuously verified intelligent assets.

Transformative sensing and data analytics are imperative for safe, productive autonomous systems;
the UK has the expertise to be the world leader - a global provider rather than a customer.

programme grant
Autonomous, intelligent systems of Industry 4.0 (I4) need high-rate, complex information about
operational loads and structural condition, non-destructively and throughout life, building confidence in
their integrity and reducing costs. The ‘Big Idea’ is to bridge the emerging gap between current reality and
these integrity-information requirements - the state-of-the-art falls significantly short. In fact, six identified
challenges will become barriers to I4 if not addressed by this programme
Conventional non-destructive inspection underpins much of our world, ensuring safety, reliability and
integrity of most machines, vehicles and buildings. It does this by human comparison with designed-in
acceptance standards using established but time-consuming processes. For I4, the human must be taken
out of the loop so the process can be automated and information provided continuously – Automated
Non-Destructive Verification (ANDV).
The idea is to use cyber technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence and simulation to allow
continuous performance prediction whilst big-data analytics and digital twins will systematically build
confidence in life prediction. This will enhance productivity and efficiency of autonomous systems,
intelligent manufacturing and self-verifying assets
Required new ANDV technologies will include:
• modalities and sensors allowing robotic data acquisition, or from installed sensors, to feed information-
hungry autonomous systems,
• philosophies for large-area coverage based on sparse sensors and high data rates,
• automated analysis/verification that is faster and reliable without human intervention,
• models for performance-prediction given a known structural condition,
• big-data analysis of operational loads and structural-condition data for continuously improving life-
prediction accuracy,
• automated in-silico development and qualification of ANDV for bespoke components, and
• rigorous validation processes supporting the paradigm shift to automated decision-making.
This is an enabling idea: successful completion of a TRL 1-6 programme would lead to multiple cross-
sector outputs across the whole range of I4 benefits. A large consortium of universities and industrial
companies is required, spanning the many technologies and sectors involved.
15 BIG 19-20
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

this.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) will completely change the production and operation of nearly
every manufactured item in the developed world – often referred to as Industry 4.0 (I4). Intelligent
systems will supersede human decision-making in production and operation. Industry will no longer be
held back by human ability. Outcomes will be higher productivity, lower through-life costs and greater
safety and reliability, benefiting industry, the UK economy and everyone who uses machines or travels in
vehicles. UK expertise is well positioned to be the world leader, attractive to international investment - a
global provider of intelligent assets.
4IR/I4 is based around independence from humans and requires non-destructive evaluation (NDE) to
step up and introduce automated data acquisition, analysis and decision-making for high-rate, high-
complexity data sources. The global NDE industry is currently under-prepared for this but the UK is
poised to tackle the challenge through its recognised world-class research centre (RCNDE) and its strong
strategic leadership. A timely programme to meet this challenge will put UK industry in a world-leading
position in relation to the other main players in this area – Germany, Japan, USA and China.
The new automated data-interpretation methodologies will only be accepted if there is complete
confidence in their ability to detect all problems in as-manufactured or in-service components. In order to
take this opportunity for UK supremacy, the data science and engineering validation must be developed
immediately to define and achieve the required level of confidence in parallel with the development of
4IR/I4.
This programme will underpin autonomous machines/vehicles, factories and power plants that operate
intelligently, monitor condition, predict faults and suggest remedies. This sophisticated information will be
embodied in a ‘digital twin’ that can then be interrogated, modelled and tested in order to predict future
outcomes and allow intelligent decision making.

Industry 4.0 (I4) has been an established vision for future industry since around 2015 but progress has
been slow whilst each community and country positions itself to understand the concepts and establish
funded programmes to achieve the outcomes. The risk for the UK if this programme is not supported is
that UK industry would fall behind in the rapid global development of I4 autonomous and intelligent
manufacturing and asset management.
In a changing global scene, the uncertainty of the UK’s future trading position with the rest of the world
means that the UK needs a unique advantage over other countries to retain foreign manufacturers such
as Nissan, Honda and Airbus, attract new ones and keep manufacturing plants of UK companies like
Rolls Royce and GKN in the UK. The UK’s world-leading NDE community, with I4 at the MTC and Turing
and Royce Institutes, means the UK is well-positioned to develop that unique advantage during the move
to I4.
This ANDV solution must come from a combination of the NDE, structural integrity, design,
manufacturing, materials science and regulation communities. This will ensure an interconnected process
for continuous automated verification that reduces overall risk and cost while increasing confidence and
performance.
16 BIG 19-20
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
opportunity
Aligned UK investments totalling £118m since 2000 have created adequate capacity to address this
opportunity:
• RCNDE – £36m (EPSRC/industry)
• CDT – skills provision - £30m (EPSRC/universities/industry)
• HOIS - £10m (industry/HSE/OGTC)
• µVIS Southampton – £5m (EPSRC/MRC/BBSRC/ATI/Wellcome/industry)
• University of Strathclyde
- FIRST Lab – £1m EPSRC, £3m university
- RESL - £2.6m (university), 2019.
• AEMRI, TWI Wales, £14m (Welsh-Govt/industry)
• HVM Catapult NDE facilities:
- AFRC – Robotic Inspection Cell - £2.5m (ATI/IUK)
- MTC – NDE Cell - £2.7m (Catapult/industry)
- NCC – CIV Cell - £1.3m (ATI)
• X-ray CT National Research Facility. EPSRC current-call: £10m.
There is a strong relationship to other UK priorities, with funding at potential partners:
• RCNDE & FIND CDT – global lead on NDE
• MTC – UK lead on I4
• Alan Turing Institute – data science and AI
• Henry Royce Institute –advanced materials
• DigiTwin – Digital Twin CDDB £4.9M EPSRC
• UKCRIC, CIRIA and Network Rail – identified I4 as a challenge for civil infrastructure.
• ISCF, ATI and APC – I4 interests
The UK’s 4IR/I4 investment is similar to the leader: Germany, which has a substantial government I4
programme, and USA and China but is well ahead of Japan who invested in heavy industries instead.
Only the UK, Germany and the USA have established ‘NDE 4.0’ committees in their NDE societies.
opportunity
industry)?
17 BIG 19-20
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

The urgency of this 4IR/I4 challenge requires a coordinated R&D ecosystem spanning TRL 1-6. This will
enable university research groups to progress fundamental science on ANDV, supply-chain companies to
develop ANDV-compatible products and end-users to work with regulators to develop ANDV-qualification
frameworks.
Six NDE challenges will become barriers to I4 if not addressed by this programme (with examples of
required university groups):
1. In Additive manufacturing (AM), a shortfall in NDE capability is the barrier to structural use of AM
components (Nottingham, Southampton, Imperial, MTC). In intelligent manufacturing (IM), NDE
information is required for process control – methods for predicting defect occurrence need to be
developed (Bristol on composites, Strathclyde/Imperial on metallics).
2. Robotic deployment of NDE is achievable but I4 needs a step change: new modes are required; all
modes need optimising for automation (Strathclyde, Warwick, Heriot-Watt, Imperial).
3. The Internet of Things requires sensors allowing decisions on integrity. Many required sensors are not
available, especially for harsh environments (Strathclyde, Warwick, Bristol, Imperial on installed sensors,
Nottingham, Warwick, Manchester on non-contact sensing). New philosophies are required for validating
sparse, distributed-sensor systems (Imperial, Bristol).
4. Big Data Analytics. The combination of operational-loads history and structural condition will come
from sensors of different kinds. The opportunity is to continually improve life prediction based on data
mining and statistical combination of this information (Strathclyde, Bristol).
5. Artificial intelligence may provide complex automated analysis and decision-making; the challenge is in
establishing confidence. That requires new methods of validation and provision of training data in much
higher volumes than before (Bristol, Turing Institute).
6. Modelling and simulation build confidence by generating training data sets and exercising automated
decision-making processes through their operating envelope. New, rapid modelling methods are needed
for all non-destructive inspection decisions (all the above groups). Structural-integrity modelling is also
required for performance- and life-prediction (Bristol, Bath, Manchester, Royce Institute).
A core £20m programme of TRL 1-3 research is required, together with an £20m TRL 4-6 programme - a
6-year programme worth £40m (50% UKRI, 50% industry).
Significant leverage is expected from stakeholders as follows:

NDEvR’s 14 Industrial members and 38 Associate members (75% SMEs).
HVM Catapult (MTC/NCC/WMG/AFRC/AMRC/NAMRC),
ORE Catapult,
Industry-funded: TWI, HOIS, CIRIA (civil infrastructure), OGTC,
MoD (AWE/DSTL)
Institutes: BINDT, IMechE, FESI
Technology-transitioning routes will build on RCNDE’s experience and its mature system for determining
technology readiness and recommending an appropriate transitioning route. The proposed higher-TRL
programme will make technology transfer faster.
18 BIG 19-20
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

Multidisciplinary
n/a
The directors of the UK Research Centre in NDE (RCNDE) and the NDE Research Association (NDEvR)
have worked with the Manufacturing Technology Centre (MTC), the RCNDE Board and the British
Institute of NDT (BINDT) to formulate this Big Idea. They are also involved in establishing an NDT
Leadership Forum to provide UK strategic leadership. They have consulted in the UK and internationally
with other organisations in the NDE field with multiple industrial members in order to enhance the cross-
sector coverage. A presentation on this subject was given to EPSRC Engineering Theme and Business
Engagement on 9th Dec 2019.
Name Robert Smith

Department RCNDE Director
Organisation UK Research Centre for NDE (RCNDE)
Email Address robert.smith@bristol.ac.uk
words)
I have also submitted this by email to BigIdeas@epsrc.ac.uk and to Simon Crook of the EPSRC
Engineering Theme.
19 BIG 19-20
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Submitted by: Stacie Tibos

Mathematical modelling for next generation formulated products

The drive towards rapid, smarter, greener and personalised formulation requires the development of
innovative mathematical approaches which are predictive. Understanding microstructure, complex
processes, perception and how these can be linked, will unlock productivity gains in formulation sector.

programme grant
The Formulated Products Sector contributed in excess of £ 149 bn to UK GVA in 2016. [ 1]. The UK relies
on this sector to provide food, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, paint and many other chemical products vital
for everyday life.
There is a growing shift towards rapid, smarter, greener and personalised formulations. The shift requires
novel, predictive methods which link multiscale models, complex multiphase behaviour and provide
insight into how products will be perceived. For example, a move towards sugar reduction may
necessitate rapid reformulation without prior knowledge of material behaviour. Predictive methods for how
new novel formulations behave and are perceived are vital for productivity across a range of sectors.
The fundamental mathematical science required to address this shift are under-developed, complex and
multi-disciplinary. Despite the importance of the formulated products sector, securing funding has
historically been difficult with small and sporadic investment in comparison with other sectors [Error!
Bookmark not defined.].
The scale of the challenge requires input from chemical engineers, statisticians, neurologists, biologists,
physicists and others. It is proposed here, that predictive design for the formulated product sector can be
transformed using the mathematical sciences as a framework; providing the underpinning methodologies
built upon multidisciplinary ideas. This proposal would be transformative by enabling a cross-sector
ecosystem for predictive design built firmly upon innovative mathematical science.
This proposal has been developed from a week’s meeting at the Isaac Newton Institute [ 2], where
mathematical scientists met with industrial counterparts to co-create projects. During this process, these
projects were abstracted into three larger themes which captured the entirety of the challenge space and
provided clear mathematical science themes. These themes cut across multiple sectors and research
disciplines and are pre-competitive, allowing space for fundamental science to engage with multiple
industrial organisations on an equal footing. The sharing of knowledge across themes, sectors, and
research areas are a key element to this proposal.
1 https://admin.ktn-uk.co.uk/app/uploads/2018/07/Formulated-Products-Sector-Strategic-Priorities-2018-Final.pdf
2 http://www.newton.ac.uk/event/ooew01
20 BIG 20-03
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

this.
The proposal aims to provide the mathematical underpinning to the formulated product sectors shift to a
more sustainable, green, rapid, and personalised sector. The knowledge generated will be in the
fundamental sciences and provide multiple UK organisations access in a pre-competitive manner, and
thus cut across multiple societal challenges. The proposal highlights the importance of software and tools
development, ensuring that the fundamental knowledge is embedded into the formulated product sector.
Through implementation of the knowledge through research, people and tools, the formulated product
sector will accelerate its ability to innovative, and ultimately:
• Reduce expensive development cycles in industry through better predictive modelling

• Reduce waste, electricity and water through efficient processes design by mathematical methods
• Provide a step change in the ability to create innovative products by fully exploring possible
formulation designs

From a mathematical science perspective, there have been a number of reviews in recent years which
highlight the importance of mathematically inspired, industrial interventions. The Bond Review [ 3] and the
Deloitte report [ 4], both highlight the scale and breadth of impact mathematical science has when
effectively translated by the research base into the economy. This proposal would create a programme by
which the mathematical sciences could have a profound impact on one of the UK’s biggest sectors.
This proposal is timely to support the formulated product sector transition to a more rapid, green,
sustainable and personalised formulation, which is reflected in detail in sector specific strategy
documents [ 5, 6, 7]. These strategy documents identify pre-competitive innovation needs in predictive
modelling, “right-first-time” manufacturing, product structure design and digital manufacturing, improved
models of existing formulations across length scales, advanced process analytics and modelling to
reduce the number of trials as key enablers for a productive formulated product sector.
According to [1], there is sporadic funding into the fundamental methods in formulation science which is
vital to address the inherent complexity of future formulation challenges. In addition, the multidisciplinary
nature of the challenge requires coordination across research topics. It is proposed here that with a
coordinated, and mathematically inspired research endeavour, the landscape can be equipped with pre-
competitive methods and tools for use by UK companies. In some of these research themes, the infancy
of this field represents a significant opportunity for the UK to become the World leader, for example in
relation to perception modelling.
3 https://epsrc.ukri.org/newsevents/pubs/era-of-maths/
4 https://epsrc.ukri.org/newsevents/pubs/deloitte-measuring-the-economic-benefits-of-mathematical-science-research-in-the-uk/
5 https://www.fdf.org.uk/events/Pre-Comp-Food-Booklet-Final.pdf
6 https://admin.ktn-uk.co.uk/app/uploads/2018/02/Food-Sector-Precompetitive-Needs-and-Alignment-with-the-Industrial-Strategy-
V7.1.pdf
7 https://www.nationalfoodstrategy.org
21 BIG 20-03
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
opportunity
The UK Formulated Products Sector is vital to the UK economy and plays a key role in tackling the
societal challenges that we now face. The UK has a strong competitive advantage in formulation and is
poised to take a global competitive lead to drive and take advantage of future market growth. Sales of
formulated products by UK companies currently total around £180 billion per year – larger than
the Aerospace and Automotive sectors combined – and there is a rapidly developing overseas market.
The UK has a strong competitive advantage in formulation and is poised to take a global competitive lead
to drive and take advantage of future market growth. The UK has state-of-the-art capabilities including the
National Formulation Centre. There is also a strong academic base that can be leveraged, for example
RTO investment, and a number of Centres for Doctoral Training that underpin the skills base in the sector
[Error! Bookmark not defined., 8].
To coordinate the accelerated innovation required across the identified research tracks required for
predictive design, an engaged mathematical science community is required. The UK boasts a diverse
mathematical science community which has strong links with certain industry sectors. However, links into
the formulated product sector and materials modelling are weak or non-existent, as are requisite links into
chemical engineering, neurology, and psychology, and other research areas needed for this challenge.
These links would be made and strengthened by this proposal to enable its outcome.
opportunity
industry)?
This proposal will be structured into three funding streams:
1. multidisciplinary research studies,

2. usable tools, and
3. knowledge dissemination.
These streams are can be delivered in parallel over five years. The underlying research areas have been
co-created with industry so that multiple sectors and organisations may benefit from the research outputs
in a pre-competitive fashion. Given the breadth and interaction between the themes special attention is
given to knowledge sharing and commercial software development to enable seamless transition into
implementation. A breakdown is detailed below:
8 https://epsrc.ukri.org/newsevents/news/formmfrres/
22 BIG 20-03
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

1. Multidisciplinary Research Studies (Years 1 - 5) – Total £ 14.0 m
• PhD Students (Years 1 – 3) Total £ 4.0 m;

• Call for multi-disciplinary proposals (Years 1 – 5) Total £ 10.0 m: These calls will be in the areas
suggested below and involve a mathematical scientist.
Work at the INI has focussed the mathematical science community into three areas of interest under
which the above should align with:
a. Scalable methods for heat & mass transfer and reactions in multiphase systems: developing
scalable and predictive methods which model complex, multiphase systems over differing
timescales; could include powder flow, emulsion stability, complex rheology and processing.
b. Transforming Microstructure: Systematising the understanding of commercially important systems
in which the microstructure transforms during processing. Develop quantitative links between
inputs such as materials and process parameters and outputs in the form of final microstructure
and macroscopic properties. Novel developments to multiscale methods; appropriate capture of
mesoscale processes
c. Mathematics of Feel (Quantification of Sensory Perception): developing mathematical models
that, given a product, can quantify and simulate taste, feel and dissolution / breakdown processes
- matching sensory perceptions to user groups' preferences.
2. Usable Tools (Years 3 – 5) – Total £ 3.0 m
• Innovate UK CR&D: To engage with commercial software vendors, software engineering

departments, and CPI NFC to develop the next generation of formulated product tools based on
the emerging science developed in the Multidisciplinary Research Studies.
3. Knowledge Dissemination & Coordination (Years 2 - 5) – Total £ 1.2 m
• Internships (£ 0.8 m): Short term placements to support the translation of knowledge from the
Multidisciplinary Research Studies where sector or companies specific input is required.
• Study Groups (£ 0.3 m) Yearly Study Groups will stimulate future projects and provide fertile
ground for the multiple research areas to work together.
• Yearly KE Conference (£ 0.1 m) Given the focus on multi-disciplinarily around a mathematical
science framework, these conferences will share research findings, provide guidance on future
priorities.
This proposal cuts across UKRI, whilst the proposal aims to draw the mathematical science community
into, and provide the framework for its aims, it will necessarily require input from chemical engineers,
biologists, psychologists, neurologists, and others. As such, a multi-council approach would be beneficial
to engage those in BBSRC, and MRC communities. In addition, developing useable tools could be
achieved through interaction with Innovate UK.
Research scientists in the continuum mechanics, numerical analysis, complex fluids, rheology, soft
matter, neurology, and others will need to be engaged. Industrial sectors which cover health & pharma,
food & drink, home & personal care, paints & coatings, speciality chemical & agri-chemicals and fuels &
lubricants will also need to be engaged.
23 BIG 20-03
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

Multidisciplinary
chemical engineering, neurology, biology, and psychology
David Abrahams, University of Cambridge

Tim Addison, National Formulation Centre, CPI
David Allwright, University of Oxford
James Andrews, University of Birmingham
Graham Benham, University of Cambridge
Chris Breward, University of Oxford
Chris Budd OBE, University of Bath
Dean Bugg, Scott Bader
Matt Butchers, KTN / EPSRC
Mike Cates FRS, University of Cambridge
Jon Chapman, University of Oxford
Brenndan Conchuir, IBM UK
Stephen Cowley, University of Cambridge
Gemma Cupples, University of Birmingham
Mohit Dalwadi, University of Oxford
Rosemary Dyson, University of Birmingham
Josh Gill, EPSRC
Ian Griffiths, University of Oxford
Cameron Hall, University of Bristol
Lawrence Harris, Mondelez International
John Hinch FRS, University of Cambridge
John King, University of Nottingham
Malcolm Kinninmonth, Walgreens Boots Alliance
Andrew Lacey, Heriot Watt University
Peter Lillford CBE, PepsiCo
Bruce Linter, PepsiCo
Hilary Ockendon, University of Oxford
John Ockendon FRS, University of Oxford
Bernard Piette, Durham University
Colin Please, University of Oxford
Andreas Poulos, Unilever
Gavin Reynolds, AstraZeneca
Mike Sutton, Lubrizol
Stacie Tibos, PepsiCo
Joseph Westwood, EPSRC
Robert Whitakker, University of East Anglia
Helen Wilson, University College London
24 BIG 20-03
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Name Stacie Tibos

Organisation PepsiCo International
Email Address Stacie.Tibos@pepsico.com
words)
none
25 BIG 20-03
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Submitted by: Katie Blaney

Empowering Management, Decision Making and Growth in an Uncertain World

An end to end approach to address the problem of uncertainty, an underpinning issue that can undermine
results, increase costs, limit the effectiveness of advice and ultimately cost lives.

programme grant
Imagine anticipating, planning for and responding to Covid-19 style pandemics and other uncertain
situations with (inter)national implications in more sophisticated ways, building on the latest
interdisciplinary expertise. This big idea will do exactly that enabling the UK to radically transform the
science and methodology behind reducing risk and uncertainty building on an interdisciplinary whole
systems approach.
There is widespread recognition that uncertainty needs to be characterised and communicated to

undertake effective analysis and make decisions in complex situations. Currently, there are pockets of
research in the problem of uncertainty, however, these tend to be disparate and focused on specific
applications and do not take an end to end approach. A consolidated research effort to bring researchers
and practitioners together will result in new and improved techniques for making complex decisions under
uncertainty which will have wide ranging impact across government, healthcare and industry.
Effort in this area needs to involve a cross discipline team, engaging researchers from across UKRI.
Without this breadth, advances would be disjointed and piecemeal: mathematics without a focus on the
decision maker; psychology without the underpinning mathematics; sociology and visualisation without
understanding of the impact or underpinning models.
Irrespective of research area, uncertainty is the single biggest underpinning issue that can undermine
results, increase costs, limit the effectiveness of advice and ultimately cost lives. The rapid advancement
of computational capability has outstripped our ability to calculate and combine the associated
uncertainties, particularly where we are dealing with the so called “deep uncertainty” of situations where
the outcomes cannot be numerically assessed.
Research into uncertainty calculation and communication has not, to date, moved forward to reflect the
rapid advancement over the last few decades in scientist’s ability to understand and model the world
around us, all of which has brought the impact of uncertainty to the fore.
26 BIG 20-05
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

this.
The core scientific benefit will be primarily for Government Departments and their agencies as well as
local authorities to have more robust risk management and decision-making processes and tools. The
benefits also carry to the wider UK base, including advancing scientific knowledge and creating
environments where academics are trained in a multi-disciplinary, collaborative environment so
enhancing the skill set in this complex landscape.
At present, much of the existing research in this area is focused on a specific research question. For
maximum impact to occur, there needs to be integration across disciplines and the concepts of
uncertainty, risk management and decision making need to be approached as an integrated process.
There needs to be an integration between strategic and operational risk management i.e. linking a long-
term, broad view with one that is more dynamic which poses a research challenge but would enable their
best features can be combined.
Risk and uncertainties are experienced by and through different people depending on their social
situations and abilities to respond to uncertain events. Cultural differences also play a part and these
factors can cause a conflict of stakeholder interests when decisions have national significance. The
current Covid-19 pandemic demonstrates the importance in being able to effectively communicate risk
and uncertainty to the public and policy makers in a clear way and is illustrative of the huge impact on
policy making that research in this area could achieve.
Furthermore, communication of uncertainty has hindered the ability of research to inform policy and have
the impact it should have had in spheres such as climate change and misunderstanding of how to treat
uncertainty appropriately has led to well-publicised mistrust of the research community.
There is an opportunity to link research in this area with UKRI’s public engagement goals
https://www.ukri.org/public-engagement/.

In a world that is increasingly complex and connected traditional risk management approaches fail to
provide effective resilience strategies, often leading to ineffective or lack of action because of the
uncertainties present. While research networks have identified the challenges of risk management of
complex system, there has been limited substantive fundamental research progress.
Never has the time seemed so right to act quickly in an area such as this. The current Covid-19 pandemic
illustrates some of the issues the world faces and although a pandemic is listed in the Government Risk
Register, there is no strategy to dealing with the unknown characteristics of this global crisis or an
understanding of the public perception of risk and risk uncertainty.
Furthermore, the Ministry of Defence Research Interest document highlights specifically the need to be
able to show levels of certainty or uncertainty within analysis of large volumes of information. Key themes
from across Government Areas of Research Interests include linking risk management to decisions,
preparing for low probability/unseen events, risk management under complexity, rapid (real-time)
27 BIG 20-05
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

response and using data to improve risk understanding. In addition, uncertainty analysis is a key
underpinning area for digital twins.
opportunity
A cross council call between EPSRC, ESRC and NERC resulted in funding for two networks (M2D and
CRUISSE) in 2016 to undertake scoping activities and produce landscape documents outlining future
research needs. The resultant documents highlighted UK capability and the cross-council nature of the
problem. They concluded that progress is hampered by this community’s work not falling into the remit of
any one council within URKI. This means that there are crucial pieces of the fundamental and applied
research area that have no funding mechanism.
World leading research looking at uncertainty, risk and radical uncertainty is undertaken by communities
in France and America, but this is an area of research where the UK lacks the infrastructure required to
fund and promote appropriate progress. However, the UK has many world leading experts in this area
and the community of researchers is small enough to form one integrated community. This provides the
UK with a unique opportunity to bring together a cross discipline research team that can address the full
spectrum of issues faced across the research councils into one integrated research effort. With careful
management the UK could easily become the world leading force in this area and drive progress
worldwide
opportunity
industry)?
Domain experts from across the UKRI remit will be required to ensure success. Uncertainty research
requires researchers to design resolutions to problems which are being dealt with under uncertainty or
radical uncertainty. Key to the success of this idea is the role of mathematical scientists in underpinning
the research being undertaken and ensuring that the most up to date techniques are used.
The following research challenges have been identified but there are likely to be others:
Underpinning mathematical modelling

• Fundamental work in developing new approaches for quantifying uncertainty
• Development of existing methodologies for application to new areas
• Research into the integration of disparate cross discipline methodologies to produce meaningful
outputs
28 BIG 20-05
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

The psychological and sociological processes of decision making
• The development of narratives
• The role of emotion in decision making
• Adaptive heuristics, simple rules and conviction narratives
Decision making under radical uncertainty
• How does radical uncertainty link to quantitative analysis?
• How do decision makers react move forward under radical uncertainty?
It is suggested that a national programme is created to evolve a new science of risk and decision making
that can be applied across a broad range of sectors. Such an initiative must be inter-disciplinary
supporting the learning of lessons between applications. At the core of the new research should be
integration of processes between disciplines to create an end to end process (including uncertainty, risk,
decision making) and diffusion of knowledge between application areas/sectors. A focus on process
integration and knowledge diffusion, will ensure the research leads to fundamental understanding of risk
and associated research areas, while also maximising the impact the research will have, particularly for
Government Departments.
As part of this programme, there should also be a stream to consider the moral and ethical considerations
required when making decisions. For example, where the lives of others are at stake, decision-making
and the handling of uncertainties have important ethical consequences. In a potentially dangerous
situation, uncertainty can trigger ethically adjusted behaviour that aims to avoid dangers and diminishes
risks, but this may not be the most appropriate response. Research is needed to provide evidence based
ethical guidance in such situations.

Multidisciplinary
This could stretch across the whole of UKRI. However, a bid would likely be more successful if it
concentrated on applications in a specific sector and therefore the remit would be dependent on this.
Primarily discussions with EPSRC have been led by Professor Veronica Bowman (Dstl) with involvement
from Dr Miles Elsden (UCL). Support is also anticipated from several government departments and it is
understood that some parts of the mathematical sciences community are considering a large-scale
project in this area.
Name Katie Blaney

Department Head of Mathematical Sciences
Organisation UKRI EPSRC
29 BIG 20-05
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Email Address katie.blaney@epsrc.ukri.org
words)
none
30 BIG 20-05
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
Submitted by: James Dracott

Living with Data - Visualising Uncertainty

Enabling better decisions through making complex data sets and analytics easier to understand and
access through new visualisation and virtual interaction technologies.

programme grant
AI is now able to identify patterns and make recommendations. But people still need to make the key
decisions. For decision makers, data should be accessible and displayed in a way that can be easily
understood, including the uncertainty, the possibilities and the outcomes from these possibilities. Nearly
every data set we work with has some uncertainty, and whether and how we choose to represent this
uncertainty can make a major difference in how accurately audiences perceive the meaning of the data.
Statistics can help make sense of these uncertainties, but standard error techniques can often lose their
visual space in data graphics, leading to judgements based on simplified summaries. For both experts
and non-technical people, better, more graspable data visualisation and experiential techniques make
data easier to understand and input into decision making.
This idea will bring together computational data scientists and statisticians who are developing
algorithms, experts in robust social science methodologies, and experts in human-computer interaction
and design who can create visually appealing, easy to use software. Co-creation of novel data
visualisation techniques will enhance the communication and exploration of data in ways that are most
appropriate for the consumer of the data and, crucially, allow better decisions to be made. This would
include visualisation and visual, physical and audio interaction to allow reliable trends to be extracted
from data. This is particularly challenging when trying to understand, test and visualise uncertainty. It will
build on statistics and data science research and link them to perception and psychology through human-
computer interaction.
A large, collaborative activity will enable sufficient user engagement to co-create methodologies, attract
the appropriate stakeholders and bring expertise from across disciplines. It will provide scope to include
verification of methodologies, to ensure methods are fully evaluated and benchmarked to provide trust
and confidence in outputs.
31 BIG 20-09
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

this.
The size and complexity of today's data sets are beyond what humans can easily understand without
years of training. While AI can provide interpretation of these data sets, humans still make the key
decisions. In today’s complex, interconnected world, policy makers make decisions that have a ripple
effect on individuals and society, often working with real time, complex and unstructured data. The
current crisis has highlighted policy makers dependence on making data driven decisions, publicly
revealed how population and modelling is visualised and conveyed, and brought home the real world, life-
or-death implications that interpretation of data can have. We must have the right, easy-to-use tools to
make the most use of existing and future data to drive the best decisions. They must drive fast and
trusted decision making that accounts for all available evidence, to ensure we can act in our continued
fight against Coronavirus and enable national resilience to future pandemics and global challenges.
Success would transform the abilities of decision makers to take evidence-based decisions; in
government, in business, in society. It will enable us to unlock the potential of the vast library of data
available to us, be it scientific, social or economic. It will greatly enhance our ability to move to a fully
digital society and to maximise the economic and societal impact from decisions.
Beyond political decision making, the investment in AI and the increasingly data-centric economy requires
additional tools to allow the population, businesses and society to co-exist with increasingly sophisticated
technologies. Developing and enabling novel technologies and techniques will facilitate the workforce to
operate alongside computer compiled and synthesised data sets, giving human input to digital minds.
This will be crucial to realise the gains of our investment In AI and increase our national productivity.

There is an ongoing challenge to visualise data across government departments to inform decision
making. If a decision is made on educational practices, are young adults more or less likely to encounter
the criminal justice system and what might the effect be on future earnings? How can we project climate
data in such a way that economic decisions can be made around energy policy? Connecting the bigger
picture so policy makers can see the impact of an intervention is an increasingly real problem, brought
into stark relief by the current pandemic. The UK public and policy makers are now uniquely occupied
with 'following the science'. The limitations of current data visualisation techniques are clear; we must
now act to give policy makers the tools they need.
Commercially, the ever-increasing mountain of data and increased automated data synthesis is
demanding new methodologies to both process and comprehend. Renewed interest and private
investment in advanced models and digital twins to aid decision making demonstrates the need for better
interfaces between decision makers and data. Investing in new techniques to allow evidence to be more
accessible will capitalise on our current ISCF investments in new digital technologies, enhanced
experiential and AI-enabled autonomy.
32 BIG 20-09
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20
opportunity
The UK has international standing in fundamental graphics technologies including rendering, geometric
modelling, animation, virtual and augmented reality. However the data visualisation community is
relatively small, with stronger and larger activities currently underway in Europe.
The interface between artificial intelligence and decision making has been significantly enhanced through
the Alan Turing Institute and the UK investment in AI. This includes multidisciplinary workstreams
devoted to analysing uncertainty and data created by AI and significant investments to enhance research
capacity of researchers and PhD training.
Sustained EPSRC investment in the Digital Economy has created capacity across the interface between
ICT and social science techniques, including next generation immersive experiences and capacity
building in human data interaction through a Network Plus.
Multiple UK investments have components that address visualisation of datasets for decision making,
including the National Infrastructure database funded under UKCRIC, the What Works network of
centres, (seen as key partners and collaborators for this programme), GCRF programs including the
RECAP network and Energy investments including Supergen, UKCREDS and Mistral. In the creative
industries, the UK has already invested in achieving next generation experiential techniques for
consumption of culture and content through the Audiences of the Future challenge.
opportunity
industry)?
A network of cross-disciplinary critical mass investments centred around a central strategy and co-
ordinating hub would bring together computer science, statistics, psychology, neuroscience, human-
computer interaction, computer graphics, haptics, operational research, data management and software
engineering. A multidisciplinary approach is needed, with a unified program to ensure co-creation,
targeted strategy and a centralised UK offering on data presentation.
This investment would span EPSRC, ESRC, AHRC and MRC remits with relevance across the whole of
UKRI as well as other key stakeholders such as the Alan Turing Institute and the ‘What Works’ centres. A
priority will be visualising data for policy makers and government departments, who can and must be
active stakeholders and early adopters (key departments include DCMS, Home Office, MoD, BEIS).
The key challenges that have been identified include:
33 BIG 20-09
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

Turning data to evidence
• How to extract and synthesise AI outputs into useable and relevant data sets for decision making
• Visualising and making sense of uncertainty and possibilities, and presenting outcomes of
possible decisions
Experiential data technologies

• Design of appropriate novel interfaces including data visualisation, virtual reality, augmented
reality, haptic, audio and other experiential techniques.
• AI-enabled interpretation and adaption of data visualisations
• Developing standards of good practice to assist with the interaction of data sets, appropriate for a
broad range of data inputs and methodological techniques.
• Exploratory fundamental research in future generations of data interpretation and consumption,
including brain-computer interfaces and neuroscience for enhanced understanding and learning.
Decision making at pace

• How to work with real time data to make fast decisions and communicate the effects these will
have for future decision making
• How to represent possibilities and uncertainties in a live environment and provide live, easy to
understand feedback on impacts of decisions and their effect on future decisions.
• How people make decisions from data and interact with data visualisations
• The interaction of the experiential aspects of data interpretation and decision making, and
cognition in decision making.
While research will be at the core of the national program, other strands will be vital to maximising the
impacts and ensuring trust in the outputs. These would include: Responsible research and Innovation and
ethical aspects of data and decision making; upskilling of researchers, innovators, decision makers and
the public in data visualisation; validation and certification of techniques; and commercialisation and user
engagement.

Multidisciplinary
This investment would span EPSRC, ESRC, AHRC and MRC remits with relevance across the whole of
UKRI. Disciplines would include computer science, statistics, psychology, neuroscience, human-
computer interaction, computer graphics, haptics, operational research, data management and software
engineering.
This big idea was developed as part of scoping for a centre of excellence and was originally investigated
by Jo Holbourn and Jessica Bonham in the ICT theme. Input was obtained from Professor John Aston
(Home office), Professor Tom Rodden (DCMS), Professor Danae Stanton-Fraser (University of Bath),
Professor Steve Benford ( University of Nottingham), Professor Nick Holliman (University of Newcastle),
Professor Min Chen (University of Oxford), Professor Jonathan Roberts (University of Bangor), Professor
34 BIG 20-09
OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

Peter Rodgers and Dr Gem Stapleton (University of Kent), and Dr Jason Alexander (University of
Lancaster).
Name James Dracott & Jessica Bonham

Department Head of ICT and Senior Portfolio Manager ICT
Organisation UKRI EPSRC
Email Address James.Dracott2@epsrc.ukri.org & Jessica.Bonham@epsrc.ukri.org
words)
This big idea was originally developed as a centre of excellence bid for a potential spending review.
However given the timeliness of the idea and the cross disciplinary nature of the proposed program, we
wanted to raise it with SETB to obtain feedback whether this is the best avenue for this program, what
other opportunities are that this bid may not include, and whether there is any additional feedback on the
breadth and the focus of the proposed approach.
35 BIG 20-09

SETB 04-20 Big Ideas - Assessment of New Submissions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SETB 04-20 Big Ideas - Assessment of New Submissions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OFFICIAL SETB 04-20

21st May 2020 Strategic Business – Discussion

ENGINEERING AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL

SCIENCE, ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD

BIG IDEAS – ASSESSMENT OF NEW IDEAS

BIG IDEAS – ASSESSMENT OF NEW IDEAS

a) Sift – please provide narrative feedback

a) An updated version of the Big Idea

3. Summary of Big Ideas to be assessed at this meeting

Continuously verified Leigh

Living with Data - James Jonathan Susan

• Any further development of this idea would need a clearer

• The Office for National Statistics (ONS) and DEFRA are

• It was thought that this idea had the potential to

• This submission was thought to be enabling (rather than

Living with Data -

4.1. The SETB are invited to:

ANNEX 1: BIG IDEAS ASSESSMENT FORM

Big Ideas Speaker

Principal Investigator: Organisation:

1 The Big Idea Vision

• Has the salience of the idea been explained?

• Does the UK have the capacity/infrastructure needed to address this opportunity?

d) Sift – please provide narrative feedback

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

Ideas Reference: BIG 19-19

Submitted by: Iain Todd

1. Big Idea Title (maximum 10 words) *

2. Summary Pitch (maximum 30 words) *

3. VISION - WHAT is the ‘Big Idea’? (maximum 300 words)

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

5. TIMELINESS - WHY is the idea timely now? (maximum 200 words)

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

The broad areas of activity we propose are:

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

10. Lead contact details

Name Iain Todd

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

Ideas Reference: BIG 19-20

Submitted by: Robert Smith

1. Big Idea Title (maximum 10 words) *

2. Summary Pitch (maximum 30 words) *

3. VISION - WHAT is the ‘Big Idea’? (maximum 300 words)

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

5. TIMELINESS - WHY is the idea timely now? (maximum 200 words)

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

Significant leverage is expected from stakeholders as follows:

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund

10. Lead contact details

Name Robert Smith

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

Ideas Reference: BIG 20-03

Submitted by: Stacie Tibos

1. Big Idea Title (maximum 10 words) *

2. Summary Pitch (maximum 30 words) *

3. VISION - WHAT is the ‘Big Idea’? (maximum 300 words)

ANNEX 2: BIG IDEAS APPLICATIONS

• Reduce expensive development cycles in industry through better predictive modelling