|
|
Drew Purves
|
|
Courtesy of Microsoft Research
|
Drew Purves had been a postdoc at Princeton University for almost five years
when he saw a weird job advertisement in August 2006. He and his companions in
Stephen Pacala's lab were the techies of the ecology world, building mathematical
models of forest ecosystems. Weaned on a Commodore-64 computer and the BASIC
programming language in the 1980s, Purves spent his PhD nurturing virtual
Arabidopsis plants and encouraging them to battle for sunlight on
his computer hard drive. So it was with much amusement that he and his colleagues
passed around this advertisement calling for an ecologist at the office of Microsoft
Research in Cambridge, England. As Purves remembers it, they remarked, "How weird is
that?" Then it got even weirder: Purves took the job.
Microsoft is an unlikely host of life science research, but it's a productive
one: Since arriving at the company, Purves has already produced two Science papers.
Purves joined about 20 biological researchers in the four-year old
Computational Science group at Microsoft Research, part of 100 researchers across
all fields at the Cambridge lab. The group, led by neuroscientist Stephen Emmott, an
Oxford University professor, whose 20-year career includes a stint at AT&T Bell
Laboratories and a directorship at NCR's advanced research lab, is designed for
blue-sky thinking, some of which will ultimately boost corporate development.
Microsoft holds a yearly "TechFest" in Seattle, Wash., where company representatives
can learn what Purves and other researchers at Microsoft's five labs around the
world are up to.
In Cambridge, staff scientists and postdoctoral researchers pursue basic
research programs, including creating models of ancient ecological food webs or
tracking the spread of invasive species. But Emmott is also an inspired futurist who
spearheaded the "Towards 2020 Science" initiative to develop a roadmap for the
future of computing in scientific research (see Nature, 440:383, 2006),
and has a grander scheme in mind for his biologists. "We're looking at building a
new generation of tools for modeling complex dynamic systems," he says. These
technological tools will "open up the possibility of radically rethinking biological
sciences."
Take the carbon cap and trade market, which has been adopted in Europe and is
rapidly gaining acceptance around the world. Remarkably, the technological and
scientific framework for calculating and monitoring carbon stores is still in its
infancy. For instance, there is no rigorous system in place that lets brokers prove
the worth of their carbon credits in an international market. Just as Moody's makes
money ranking the credit-worthiness of corporations and government entities for
investors, Microsoft could one day rank the validity of various carbon credits.
"Environmental technologies are going to underpin the green revolution," says
Purves, 31. "Most people think about alternative energy, but information science is
also part of the solution. If cap and trade doesn't work, then alternative energy
doesn't take off."
Purves says it's still far too early to know how Microsoft will make money
from the science he's producing. No patents or products have come from the biology
group, and company representatives say they do not measure research progress based
on product development but on published papers—some 3,700 of which have come from
Microsoft Research since 1991. The company's total R&D budget in the European
Union is $600 million, but the company would not provide a breakdown of research
spending.
On a day-to-day basis, Purves is extending the Arabidopsis work
he began as a PhD student, scaling up competition between individual plants and
other aspects of forest dynamics to a global scale. He recently found that the tree
species dispersed by animals, rather than wind, were better able to persist in
deforested regions (Science, 320:1502-4, 2008).
Purves has also been patching together a global database of millions of tree
measurements from private and government forest inventory data that he wants to make
available in a "coherent, user-friendly database." But don't even think about
comparing Microsoft to its California-based rival: "We're not capitalizing on
pre-existing science and packaging it up—the kind of thing that Google would do,"
Purves says. "What we are doing is making fundamental improvements to the science."