Ⅳ. User Program and Statistics | SPring-8/SACLA Research Frontiers

100 %

1 / 1

100 %

1 / 1

141 IV. User Program and Statistics SPring-8 calls for public use proposals twice a year. The submitted proposals are reviewed by the SPring-8 Proposal Review Committee (SPring-8 PRC). Since 1997, SPring-8 has accepted a variety of proposals. The historical change in the proposal categories is summarized in Fig. 3. For the promotion of Industrial Application at SPring-8, the Industrial Application Division was established in 2005. With consultation support for industrial users given by the division's coordinators, currently, Industrial Application Proposals account for approximately 20% of the total number of proposals conducted at the public beamlines. In addition, the Measurement Service was introduced in 2007B, in which the personnel of the Industrial Application Division carry out XAFS measurements on behalf of users at BL14B2. SPring-8 also launched the Mail-in Protein Crystallography Data Collection Service at BL38B1 and the Powder X-ray Diffraction Measurement Service at BL19B2 in 2009B, and Hard X-ray Photoemission Spectroscopy (HAXPES) Measurement Service, Thin Film Analysis (GIXD/XRR) Measurement Service at BL46XU in 2012B. Proposal statistics from 1997B to 2013B are shown in Table IV. SPring-8 consistently provides ~4000 hours of user beamtime per year. Since beginning operation in 1997, SPring-8 has provided users with a total beamtime of 62,704 hours. The beamtime available to users, the number of experiments conducted, and the number of user visits at the public and contract beamlines are summarized in Table V and in Fig. 4. Part of the proposals is for proprietary use, in which refereed reports may not be required. Figure 5 shows the number of the proprietary use for each research term. The number is increasing for the public beamlines. Figure 6 shows the number of unique users for each fiscal year; there are approximately 1500 new users annually. The number of submitted and approved proposals by research term, the approved rate, the total shift of the beamtime for the public beamlines are summarized in Fig. 7. The approved rate is about 70% since the inception of SPring-8. The breakdowns of approved proposals sorted by user affiliation at the public and contract beamlines are shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9, respectively. The numbers of the approved proposals sorted by research area at the public and contract beamlines are shown in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11, respectively. Fig. 3. Categories of proposals for the public beamlines. 1997 1998 97B 98A 99A 99B 00A 00B 01A 01B 02A 02B 03A 03B 04A 04B 05A 05B 06A 06B 07A 07B 08A 08B 09A 09B 10A 10B 11A 11B 12A 12B 13A 13B 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 General Proposal, Urgent Proposal Proprietary Proposals (General Proposal, Time-designated Proposal):Beamtime Fee Charged Measurement Service Also Available Long-term Proposal Budding Researchers Support Proposal (One-year Proposal Also Available) Non-Proprietary Grant-Aided Proposal:Program Fee Charged One-year Proposal(1 Public BL) Nanotechnology Support (4 Public BLs) (7 Public BLs) Medical Bio EX Proposal Medical Bio Trial Use Proposal Industrial Application Proposal (Trial Use Proposal) Trial-Use Trial-Use for Industry Strategic Use Proposal Nanotechnology Support Proposal Protain 3000 Green/Life Innovation Proposals Protain 500 Proposal Strategy Proposal Industrial Application Proposal JASRI Proposal Industry Creation Proposal Beamtime Reserved for Structual Biology Public BLs Priority Field Power User Proposal 142 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 Half-year Research Term Number of Proposals Number of User Visits 1997B 1998A 1999A 1999B 2000A 2000B 2001A 2001B 2002A 2002B 2003A 2003B 2004A 2004B 2005A 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B Conducted Proposals (Contract Beamline) Conducted Proposals (Public Beamline) Users Table IV. Numbers of submitted proposals and approved proposals by research term Table V. Numbers of experiments and users at public and contract beamlines by research term Research Term Deadline Submitted proposals Approved proposals Notes: 1997B-2006B: The number of proposals are indicated as of submission deadline. After 2007A: The total number of proposals are indicated. The number of longterm proposals are counted by beamline, that is, if the project leader uses two beamlines, it is counted as two proposals. 198 305 392 431 424 582 502 619 643 751 733 938 772 886 878 973 916 867 1099 1007 1009 1163 979 1076 919 1022 1024 1077 816 965 880 905 134 229 258 246 326 380 409 457 520 472 563 621 595 562 547 624 699 555 761 721 749 659 654 709 665 728 731 724 621 757 609 594 1997.1.10 1998.1.6 1998.7.12 1999.6.19 1999.10.16 2000.6.17 2000.10.21 2001.5.26 2001.10.27 2002.6.3 2002.10.28 2003.6.16 2003.11.4 2004.6.9 2005.1.5 2005.6.7 2005.11.15 2006.5.25 2006.11.16 2007.6.7 2007.12.13 2008.6.26 2008.12.11 2009.6.25 2009.12.17 2010.7.1 2010.12.9 2011.6.30 2011.12.8 2012.6.28 2012.12.13 2013.6.20 1997B: 1997.10 - 1998.03 1998A: 1998.04 - 1998.10 1999A: 1998.11 - 1999.06 1999B: 1999.09 - 1999.12 2000A: 2000.02 - 2000.06 2000B: 2000.10 - 2001.01 2001A: 2001.02 - 2001.06 2001B: 2001.09 - 2002.02 2002A: 2002.02 - 2002.07 2002B: 2002.09 - 2003.02 2003A: 2003.02 - 2003.07 2003B: 2003.09 - 2004.02 2004A: 2004.02 - 2004.07 2004B: 2004.09 - 2004.12 2005A: 2005.04 - 2005.08 2005B: 2005.09 - 2005.12 2006A: 2006.03 - 2006.07 2006B: 2006.09 - 2006.12 2007A: 2007.03 - 2007.07 2007B: 2007.09 - 2008.02 2008A: 2008.04 - 2008.07 2008B: 2008.10 - 2009.03 2009A: 2009.04 - 2009.07 2009B: 2009.10 - 2010.02 2010A: 2010.04 - 2010.07 2010B: 2010.10 - 2011.02 2011A: 2011.04 - 2011.07 2011B: 2011.10 - 2012.02 2012A: 2012.04 - 2012.07 2012B: 2012.10 - 2013.02 2013A: 2013.04 - 2012.07 2013B: 2013.10 - 2013.12 Experiments Experiments Users Users User time (hours) Public BL Contract BL Research Term Note: The number of longterm proposals are counted by beamline, that is, if two beamlines were used for one experiment, those are counted as two experiments. 1997B: 1997.10 - 1998.03 1998A: 1998.04 - 1998.10 1999A: 1998.11 - 1999.06 1999B: 1999.09 - 1999.12 2000A: 2000.02 - 2000.06 2000B: 2000.10 - 2001.01 2001A: 2001.02 - 2001.06 2001B: 2001.09 - 2002.02 2002A: 2002.02 - 2002.07 2002B: 2002.09 - 2003.02 2003A: 2003.02 - 2003.07 2003B: 2003.09 - 2004.02 2004A: 2004.02 - 2004.07 2004B: 2004.09 - 2004.12 2005A: 2005.04 - 2005.08 2005B: 2005.09 - 2005.12 2006A: 2006.03 - 2006.07 2006B: 2006.09 - 2006.12 2007A: 2007.03 - 2007.07 2007B: 2007.09 - 2008.02 2008A: 2008.04 - 2008.07 2008B: 2008.10 - 2009.03 2009A: 2009.04 - 2009.07 2009B: 2009.10 - 2010.02 2010A: 2010.04 - 2010.07 2010B: 2010.10 - 2011.02 2011A: 2011.04 - 2011.07 2011B: 2011.10 - 2012.02 2012A: 2012.04 - 2012.07 2012B: 2012.10 - 2013.02 2013A: 2013.04 - 2013.07 2013B: 2013.10 - 2013.12 1,286 1,702 2,585 1,371 2,051 1,522 2,313 1,867 2,093 1,867 2,246 1,844 2,095 1,971 1,880 1,818 2,202 1,587 2,448 2,140 2,231 1,879 1,927 2,087 1,977 2,094 2,131 1,927 1,972 2,184 1,837 1,570 62,704 94 234 274 242 365 383 474 488 545 540 634 549 569 555 560 620 724 550 781 739 769 672 669 722 685 744 740 730 637 771 633 610 18,302 681 1,252 1,542 1,631 2,486 2,370 2,915 3,277 3,246 3,508 3,777 3,428 3,756 3,546 3,741 4,032 4,809 3,513 4,999 4,814 4,840 4,325 4,240 4,793 4,329 4,872 4,640 4,576 4,304 5,072 4,053 3,770 117,137 – 7 33 65 100 88 102 114 110 142 164 154 161 146 146 187 226 199 260 226 232 217 238 275 293 325 309 319 285 314 275 286 5,997 – – 467 427 794 620 766 977 1,043 1,046 1,347 1,264 1,269 1,154 1,185 1,379 1,831 1,487 2,282 1,938 1,891 1,630 1,761 2,144 2,483 2,812 2,773 2,769 2,692 3,181 2,835 2,723 50,970 Fig. 4. Numbers of user visits and conducted experiments. Fig. 5. Number of shifts for proprietary proposals. One shift is 8 hours at SPring-8 beamlines. 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 Proprietary General Proposals (Public Beamline) Proprietary Use (Contract Beamline) Time-Designated Proposals (Public Beamline) Measurement Service (Public Beamline) Number of Shifts Research Term 1999B 2000A 2000B 2001A 2001B 2002A 2002B 2003A 2003B 2004A 2004B 2005A 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B 143 Fig. 7. Numbers of submitted proposals and approved proposals by research term (public beamlines). 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 20 40 60 80 100 1997B 1998A 1999A 1999B 2000A 2000B 2001A 2001B 2002A 2002B 2003A 2003B 2004A 2004B 2005A 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B Submitted Proposals Adoption Rate (%) Approved Proposals Total Shifts (10 shift-unit) Number of Proposals • Total Shifts Adoption Rate (%) Research Term 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1997B 1998A 1999A 1999B 2000A 2000B 2001A 2001B 2002A 2002B 2003A 2003B 2004A 2004B 2005A 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B Foreign Industry National or Public Research Institute University or Other Educational Institute Number of Conducted Proposals Research Term 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B Number of Conducted Proposals Research Term Foreign Industry National or Public Research Institute University or Other Educational Institute 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Life Science Chemical Science Medical Application Materials Science and Engineering Earth and Planetary Science Other Environmental Science Industrial Application 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B Number of Conducted Proposal s Research Term 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2005B 2006A 2006B 2007A 2007B 2009B 2010A 2012A 2011B 2008A 2008B 2009A 2011A 2010B 2013B 2013A 2012B Number of Conducted Proposal s Research Term Life Science Chemical Science Medical Application Materials Science and Engineering Earth and Planetary Science Other Environmental Science Industrial Application Fig. 6. Numbers of user visits and conducted experiments. Fig. 8. Number of conducted proposals by project leaders (public beamlines). Fig. 9. Number of conducted proposals by affiliation categories (contract beamlines). Fig. 10. Number of conducted proposals by research area (public beamlines). Fig. 11. Number of conducted proposals by research area (contract beamlines). 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2013 2012 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 First time users Repeated users Number of Users Fiscal Year