The KENS Science Advisory Committee (November 2022)
Ken Andersen and Sungil Park, November 2022

Executive Summary

From its inception in late 1970’s, KENS has played its role of promoting
academic research by using neutron scattering instruments in an exemplarymanner. Since moving its operational base to J-PARC MLF from its former
Tsukuba site, KENS has constructed world-class instruments with a cleverstrategy specializing in cross-correlations in material science. It is facing
unprecedented challenges, however, due to the large size of the operation, suchas providing full-time user service while conducting in-house research at one of
the world’s flagship neutron research facilities. As pointed out in previous
advisory meetings, the number of personnel at such a facility required to operate
at full capacity is much higher (up to 6~8 per instrument) than the intermediate
neutron flux facility KENS which used to operate in Tsukuba. However, thenumber of staff is not increasing over the past few years even though theinstruments are nearing completion and the neutron source is now close to its
promised peak performance. We urge all stakeholders to work together in drafting
a long-term plan and acquiring funding to staff the instruments at an adequatelevel with all means necessary including international cooperation and increased
collaboration with domestic universities. Also, we encourage policies to berefined to give stability to S-type projects, which are essential in fulfilling theprimary mission of promoting academic development of neutron science.

1. How does the KENS-SAC evaluate the validity of the philosophy of the choiceof the KENS instruments?

The philosophy of pushing the limits of neutron scattering to the extreme isperfectly in line with the mandate given to KENS, i.e., promoting academic
research at universities. While the neutron flux is on-par with the best instruments
at other flagship facilities, KENS instruments are specialized so as to provide
unique measurement capabilities to their users. Meanwhile the instrumentscomplement each other in a reasonable way covering most of what neutronscattering can provide to material science.

While the number of KENS instruments is too small to allow a complete coverageof all instrument methods, we believe that the choices made to complement theJAEA and CROSS instruments results in an excellent overall instrument suite thatprovides users with the full set of neutron capabilities to be expected at a worldclass facility such as the J-PARC MLF. Especially because KENS is pursuingacademic excellence, giving priority on one set of science – cross-correlations inmaterial science – and aligning instruments to that science is highly commendable.

2. How does the KENS-SAC evaluate the uniqueness of the performance of theKENS instruments in the MLF and in the world?

Thanks to the philosophy behind the choice of the instruments as mentioned
previously, the eight KENS instruments at J-PARC MLF have uniquemeasurement capabilities with great performances which are generally on-parwith the best instruments in the world, and occasionally world-leading.

However, some aspects of the instruments still need to be completed. For example,
POLANO has yet to complete development of its polarization techniques.
Projects are being pursued in several flagship neutron facilities to implement
similar capabilities on existing or new instruments. This is an area in which KENS
can take international leadership in the field if acted on with sufficient urgency.
There also remain opportunities to complete detector coverage on someinstruments, as well as providing a broader range of sample environment
equipment to support the widest possible range of science applications.

3. Is KENS moving in the right direction? Are the future development items
adequate?

KENS has done a great job so far in constructing carefully chosen instrumentswith great potential, and is already one of the world’s most prominent neutron
scattering groups in the world as of now. Traditionally KENS excelled ininstrumentation, and the current plans to develop neutron devices and update
instruments will make sure the instruments remain competitive for theforeseeable future.

Because of its small group size, however, maintaining its reputation might
become challenging in the future. With rising technical complexity in big neutron
facilities, the critical mass of a group to remain in leadership is much higher thanthe current number KENS possesses. To move forward, therefore, it requires more
staff and funding – we will elaborate on it in the next section.

4. Any other comments for KENS?

KENS needs to increase its staff to pursue world-class science with its worldclass instruments that are being perfected and to accommodate a lot more users
as the neutron flux nears its designed peak value. KENS is in a difficult position
because of the government’s drive to reduce the number of professors in Japanese
universities. Lack of human resources is the key bottleneck to reaching the
optimal level of scientific throughput from the very expensive neutron scattering
instruments. While staff deficit is evident at many levels, the lack of researchers
as shown by vacancies in the group structure table and the relatively small numberof engineering and technical staff are particularly pronounced. Therefore, westrongly urge all stakeholders working together to draft plans and acquire funding
if necessary to staff the instruments at least to the point where the number is on
par with other world-class instruments such as at SNS in USA or ISIS in UK.

While increasing KENS staff is the first priority, to further increase output fromKENS, along with increased collaboration with domestic universities,
international cooperation with regional partners should be pursued incoordination with other stakeholders such as JAEA. KENS is well-equipped toplay the role of one of the world’s flagship neutron scattering facilities with its
powerful neutron source and instruments and well-respected scientists in thescientific community. By attracting talents and resources from regional partners
and users from all over the world as well as from domestic universities, KENS
will surely be able to help J-PARC MLF to achieve its promised goal of becoming
a true world leader in neutron scattering. However, this type of international

cooperation that resembles the Japan-UK program cannot be burdened to KENS
staff alone, and coordinated efforts among stakeholders are necessary.

While many strategies adopted by KENS are commendable, the beamtime policy
could align better with the organization's primary goal. Currently, S-type projects
have to give up beamtime once the general user competition reaches two to one.
This policy will increase uncertainty about the beamtime of S-type projects,
which is the crux of KENS's academic research. Therefore, KENS should
consider awarding a fixed ratio of beamtime to S-type projects. We suggest thatinstead of imposing a fixed limit to competition, regular review of theeffectiveness of beamtime is a better tool to determine the proportion of beamtime
between S-type projects and the general users.