 All right, thank you, Steve. Yes, my pleasure to be the moderator for this discussion. And what we want to get at here, I think, is in keeping with the theme of materials by design, bring together some real industry experts who deal with materials on a day-to-day basis in various contexts, and sort of let us know how materials by design really plays out in that context. So we have, I think, a great group of people to help us do that, who represent companies from different parts of the technology and materials innovation ecosystem. So I'll begin by introducing, I'll go in order here, from your left to your right in the audience. Nag Patablanda of Applied Materials is Managing Director of Technology, External and Government Programs at AMAT. And he has very wide-ranging responsibilities over many different aspects of applied materials business. But I want to highlight, in particular, managing innovation partnerships, product strategy, and alignment with industry roadmaps. He also leads programs more specifically to develop tools for manufacturing things like gallium nitride LEDs and smart grid technologies, which are very interesting in the context of energy and the environment. Before coming to Applied, Nag was Director of the Center for Future Energy Systems at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in New York State. And he received his PhD in Material Science from Rutgers, has authored 40 publications and patents in various areas of material science. Welcome. Also, I'd like to introduce Homer Antoniatis, who's the Global Technology Director at DuPont's Photovoltaic Solutions. Homer joined DuPont in 2011 following its acquisition of Inovalite, a startup company where he was CTO and vice president of engineering. And Homer has a 20-year industrial career that includes positions at places like HP Labs and Xerox, in addition to his experience at smaller companies and now back again in a big one in DuPont. He has a PhD in physics from Syracuse University and 25-issued US patents and 60 scientific publications related to silicon-affordable tics. Welcome, Homer. And then, finally, Lorenza Moro leads a group at Samsung Chail working on barrier technology and encapsulation for display and flexible electronics technologies. Lorenza has held several different positions in industry with SRI International, for example, also Vitex Systems, which was a spin-off of the Battelle Memorial Institute, and also at public research centers in her native Italy, where she was involved in collaborative research projects with major European corporations. Lorenza has a PhD in physics from University of Parva and has published more than 80 research papers in referee journals and conference proceedings that holds a number of patents related to new materials, processes, and applications. Thank you for your attendance and your participation, Lorenza. So I think the format we would like to have for the panel discussion, we've asked each of the panelists to prepare some remarks, sort of six to eight minutes or so per panelist, and sort of give their vision as it's related to our conference here today. And then we'll have a question and answer period for the remaining 30 or so minutes, including questions from the audience, and try to keep things informal. So with that, let's see. I guess maybe we should just go in this order, if that's all right. If you'd like to go, Nogga. Yeah, I can. Do you have a pointer? Yeah, OK, great. Oh, OK. Do you have these teed up in a particular order, Richard? Easily changed. Do you want to stick with that? So you want to go first, Homer? OK. OK, let him go first. OK, here we go. All right. We'll go with Homer first. Yeah. OK. I'm very happy to be here. And Steve, thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to present here. I wanted to share with you a few words about affordable take materials within DuPont. But before I do that, I wanted to introduce you to DuPont. Some of you may not know what DuPont does. As you know, it's one of the biggest, the largest chemical companies around the world. And what you can see here in this picture, it captures the products that DuPont is making available, are capturing this very broad sector from the way from agriculture to food to bioscience. And of course, are the more traditional materials from automotive to mobile displays and large displays. Solar energy, of course, and I will be talking to you a little bit more about that today. And of course, protection. You know everything about Kevlar and Tyvek. But what I wanted to do today is to share a little bit more with you the materials that built the module, the crystal and silicon module that most of us are using for converting light to electricity. This is the untold story that we share with the rest of the world that actually the materials make the module. And what we show there is a cross section. Let me see how can I get the pointer to work. That's right. So this is the cross section of the crystal and silicon traditional wafer that it sandwiched between a piece of glass and a material in the back that is made by DuPont. This is the Taylor film that you see there. But also you need conductors to collect the electricity. And this is done usually with silver paste that we call solomette. This is the metallization paste. And finally, you need to encapsulate the cells in a way of protecting them from humidity, et cetera. And these are the encapsulants, right? Films that you use to pretty much sandwich the crystal and silicon cells between two different encapsulants. So what I would like to do today is talk to you a little bit more about the fundamentals of the solar cell technology and I will focus more into the metallization. So to judge a material system, when you design the material system for solar cells and to judge it if it is good or bad for photovoltaics, you need to ask three questions. How reliable the material is over the course of many years of operation? How efficient is the module that you are making with this type of material? And finally, the cost of application. So when we design materials, pretty much we want to make sure that all these three pillars of photovoltaics are met, right? So the most important of course is the lifetime. You want to make sure that the panels last for 30 years up in your roof. I will talk a little bit more about the roadmap of what do we do to improve the efficiency, what we have done in the past and where we're going in the future. And of course we have materials that deliver affordability and ease of installation. But I would like to focus more on the efficiency today and talk about the metallization. Talk about the silver paste that goes on the front and the back of the cells as a way of collecting the electricity but also the intricate properties of these materials in contacting the very front surface. So what you see here is the roadmap all the way from 2005 until now where we're plotting the efficiency of the crystal and silicon cell as a function of the time of development with referencing different products, metallization products that basically enable efficiencies to go all the way from, if I go a little bit earlier, from 15% now to 19%. And we're developing metallization materials that will extract even more electricity. And of course this metal paste that we have developed over the years is an affordable material that you screen print. And it has a lot of interesting properties that allow you to extract the maximum possible current out. We have been quite successful in the industry. As a matter of fact the majority of the manufacturers are using materials of that sort. In the past two years we have managed to improve the efficiency for the same manufacturing line. We have managed to improve the efficiency by 10% or 20% which is huge in terms of profitability and in terms of making the manufacturing of the cells affordable to the rest of the world. What we have managed to do is to come up with a series of formulations that allow you to build very good contacts from the metal to the emitter on the PN junction. Five years ago this junction was very resistive. So by developing the right materials we have managed to make this juncture less resistive thus extracting more current out for the same illumination. And we have done this very successfully in a way that the industry prefers to stay in this type of architecture because the extracting from the same investment pretty much more power. But as I said before there are more architectures that are coming in the future that will enable us to deliver even more power. And with that I would like to conclude as we discuss here I would like to delve a little bit more into the details of how we have done this and how we have been able with materials designed to get the maximum power output out of a given investment manufacturing line. Okay, thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you Homer. So we'll proceed now with a presentation by Lorenzo and then we'll have a Q&A for all three panelists after the presentations. Okay, again thank you for inviting us to present our company. And the name of the company is actually Chill Industry and we are part of the Samsung Group. And actually more in particularly we are the mother of the Samsung Group that was funded actually out of the money of 94. So as a month ago there were four divisions inside this specific part of Samsung that deal with material. But companies are a reality that keep evolving and so by the end of the year the textile, the original part will become an independent company. The effort of Chill Industry that possibly will also change the name will be on chemical and electronic material and that will be reinforced by the acquisition of a few weeks ago of Novaled that is a German company that has developed an excellent electronic material for OLED. So the company is a Korean company but does R&D mainly in Korea but also outside the Korean Peninsula and there are at this moment four, three at this moment Yokohama, San Jose and Frankfurt Research Center and there is the Dresden that with the acquisition of Novaled but the company is a 7 billion dollars company in revenue, 50 to 100 employees as 2012 and a large number employed in R&D with 700 units. The major product in chemicals are polycarbonates and sterenic plastics and together with the traditional application the new thrust where a lot of R&D is involved is in modified the functionality of the existing resins to become applied in new fields that are efficient in the energy world. A specific field is the polycarbonates in application in automotive to make the cars lights more efficient. Another line of strong R&D is to make the material eco-friendly. Another large part is what is of jail is the production of electronic material and those range from the traditional semiconductor to the material for traditional display and a big effort that will become even bigger to make a flexible display and that is where my group and I actually focus on some activity. There is another branch that is on energy environment and the production there is the production and R&D is for photovoltaic cell, secondary battery, LED for illumination, efficient illumination and membrane for water treatments. So we were asked to put out some ideas on how inside the company the innovation is done and there is a lot, as I said, a jail invest very notable in R&D typically around the 4% of the revenue. Most of the R&D as I mentioned before is done in Korea, both internal R&D as well as external R&D collaboration with university and institution. In Korea and more so abroad there is a very strong effort and this is not just the jail but of the Samsung group in open innovation and so the open innovation acquire two aspects. One is engagement with university and R&D center that are top level. I was told today that there are 18 active contract collaboration with Stanford University. This is not jail is the Samsung group. And also with other company where there is engagement on specific topic and for R&D startup there is many time there is investment acquisition. I am in jail as a consequence of that. And the important aspect is that the open innovation group in the Bay Area has some coordination at the group level, not just on the company level. So the topic of today was the out modeling and material by design are relevant in the industry. And so in jail definitely the modeling and the simulation effort are basic to the introduction of any new material and new project. And this involved both the bulk material, the resins as well as the most specific electronic material. Here I put just two example from the OLED and from the bulk material and I put a reference and mainly the reason why I put the reference was that the level of modeling is not just utilitarianistic but it is done at a relevant scientific level. I want to conclude this commenting on how modeling impact the real life when you work in development of material and I choose to do it to avoid any problem with material taken by past experience in the old published material. And so this is an example of why I invite us we study adhesion of this multi-layer barrier and here the idea is actually something related to what Ryan was talking this morning, the adhesion loss that you might have during the function of the barrier itself and how you needed to model. And in this particular example that we did in the context of a European contract what happened was that we actually failed. We used much modeling and we failed to get the property that we want and why because what was missing and sometimes is missing in many fields of application of modeling it was the knowledge of the basic property of the material. If Reinold at the time this is a work of 2003 had already had his tool to measure the elastic property of very soft material this wouldn't be a successful example of modeling. The other example that I want to give is coming from Honeywell electronic materials and again ironically is related to something that Reinold presented and this is again his published work is at the time with Brian Bedwell that is here also we were developing low-key dielectric for spin-on dielectrics and the bigger problem was how to reduce decay as well as maintaining the mechanical property of the materials and so you can't go in the lab and try all the formulation. And so with Nancy Yawamoto that was the model at Honeywell, one of the model at Honeywell she did for us all the simulation to using molecular dynamics and changing both the porosity as well as the functional group in the molecules and we were successful and we were successful to identify the area where we had to play in porosity and in chemistry. I'm a physicist so I am completely outside the chemistry the limit so this was a sexual example but then the effort to carry on this to model the adhesion and other property again fail and in this case the limitation was actually on the computational power that at the time maybe now is more you have but I talk with Nancy I call Nancy actually in preparation still the computational power that in the industry you have is not often enough to carry on meaningful simulation. Especially when from a molecular level you want to go to a larger scale that you need to go to adhesion or other properties and here I close and I just wanted to to give my opinion aware. One other addition before I close is that the key point to have material by design be successful is the collaboration between the experimental people in the lab and the modelers because many times the small details that the experimental people do in the lab have actually a very fundamental importance that if they are not feedback to the modeling we really make the two words incommunicado. Thank you very much Lorenzo. Nag please. Okay again my name is Nag Pettimentler from Applied Materials even though the title says semi-solar and display so you heard quite a bit about solar and a little bit about display with two LEDs from the other two panelists so I won't cover much of that so this is part of a much bigger presentation I just took a few slides off. You need to read that. One question that a lot of you asked me today but I can't comment about is Applied Spending Merger which I won't touch on. Applied is a semiconductor equipment company where you supply wafer fab equipment to companies like Intel, IBM, Samsung and TSMC and so on so we are about 9 billion dollar company our revenues do fluctuate quite a bit anywhere between 8 to 12 depending on the year because the capacity add in the semi-fab is very cyclical. We are a global company, 86 locations we have 13,000 employees and highly innovative oriented and we look for a lot of patterns and stuff so the three areas that Applied offers manufacturing tools in is semiconductor, display and solar and in the space of semiconductors with our commitment to Moore's Law there was a lot to talk about Moore this morning so with our commitment to Moore's Law we were able to reduce the cost for transistor by 20 million X so I don't know how many of you have more than four smart phones in your home can I see hands or so all of you would have been ranked above any of the Waltons in 1976 so we had around 16 billion dollars net worth for just your cell phones so that's kind of a tongue in cheek kind of a comment but nevertheless it's amazing what Applied has done in killing the wealth of people so we took the same learnings and knowledge applied it to display and we were able to reduce the cost per area which is the metric there in a period of a decade and a half by about 24 and similarly the cost per watt in solar by about 5 fold so a lot of the driver for semiconductor space and frankly in the other two spaces comes from wanting to do higher functionality and lower cost so in addition to that off late in semiconductors we have additional drivers so the today's semiconductors are driven by mobility applications everybody wants a mobile device and they want more and more functionality in their mobile device two things that come with it is when you drive towards lower cost in those mobility devices in addition to that a slim form factor so there is a significant need for a form factor to get thinner and thinner and lower power usage so from having two drivers in our approach for our manufacturing we now have doubled it and we have four different drivers and not always aligned so that drives a lot of what we do and this is a chart that we took we modified slightly from John Kelly IBM presenter from one of our one of our annual conferences so if you look at what the materials that were used in semiconductors or ICs in 1990s was simply four elements there were other elements that were used in the processing but nevertheless the key elements that remained in the semiconductor devices were those six for example fluorine was used in most of the etching or plasma H of the oxides and so on but it wasn't left in the device if we move a decade further through 90s and mid 2000s so there were several other elements that were added so that was complex enough and that was one of the cost drivers reductions for our cost reduction more manufacturing complexity and so on if we go past one more decade so we are now beginning to fill up the periodic table so this adds significant complexity to what we do and day in and day out and we don't use, we rarely use many of them as elements you know these are all compounds, mixtures and non-stackometric mixtures of various kinds and so on so it's very important for us to start thinking about how do we actually address various properties of these materials as we start to mix them and this is not even futuristic I mean if you notice carefully we didn't label carbon we didn't color carbon we didn't cover gallium or arsenide and so on these are all 3-5 compounds that people want to put into these devices so if we start looking at the future this is going to get more and more complicated so we have a lot of materials innovation driving what we do day in and day out in addition to that the devices are getting complex so in the transistors with the advent of 3D devices there is an acceleration in the introduction of new and new materials and mixtures so that is adding significant issue to us so people want to put in carbon, germanium and various other things into the active regions of the device a lot more dopants coming into the gate regions so that is adding a lot more complexity to what we do in the interconnect as device features are getting thinner and thinner the copper lines are getting much smaller and thinner you have significant issues with the resistance and capacitance going up we have to address that so a lot of people are proposing to use graphene as an interconnect material but the issue with it is being able to deposit graphene at very low temperatures for graphene and be able to deposit graphene on top of graphene it's not just good enough to deposit one layer of graphene on copper so you need multiple layers of it so you add more complexity so keeping up with the Moore's law more than more we are seeing a trend that more and more packaging is getting onto the wafer level so that is a trend that we are beginning to address and that adds a lot more complexity to the kind of materials we deal with both in processing as well as the materials that we can leave behind right under the chip so similarly patterning you know the EUV introduction getting delayed and delayed there is more and innovative ways for the mask materials and the tolerances that we need to maintain there so that's adding complexity to it so just to show you the kind of inflections the industry went through the semiconductor industry went through these were the inflections over the last 15 years and if those were not bad enough in the next five years we expect significantly more number of inflections so we have to deal with every one of these inflections with new materials complexity in the design and keeping the cost low keeping the form factor thin and reducing the power usage and increasing the functionality so that's making our life a little more complicated so with that I just want to close by saying you know there is trends in the semiconductor industry as more and more new materials are added many challenges on the ITRS roadmap to the 10 nanometers with the 3D devices and materials device and you know these architectures getting blurred there is increasing pressure on our cost of R&D we spend a significant amount of our money our revenue on R&D but because of the compressed cycles and the number of inflections that we are seeing so there is a significant pressure on our R&D dollars and in addition to all that people are beginning to talk about 415 nanometer transition so that will make it even more complicated in our life so the opportunity is really precise materials engineering so we want to be able to do selective deposition selective not just selective materials selective area, selective locations deposition removal and doping you know faster and better cheaper materials CombiCam is an area of interest to us and more and more simulation and modeling including you know what we want to know is when we actually put the material down in the device what would it behave like you know so pression materials engineering is key as we move forward so thank you thank you Nod so I thought we could start I have a couple of questions and maybe get things kicked off and then we can go to audience questions and see where we end up I was struck by the discussions by all three speakers that you know the different ways in which innovation can be done in different companies that address materials so I wanted to start with a question sort of going back to maybe the early post-war period and the era of big industrial champions the model for industrial materials innovations often involved work in a central research laboratory where you had dedicated scientists who were kind of doing free-wheeling research which often led to big discoveries I mean for example the discovery of the point contact transistor emerged from about ten years of basic materials research on materials that exhibited rectification and it's not clear that it would have ever ended up that way but it did it seems like that model for doing materials innovation and industry if it's not dead is at least maybe not as prevalent as it once was and there are other ways of doing things so I just wondered from your own perspectives of having extensive careers in this area and working at important companies how does this play out how does it work in your company what are the ways in which innovation is really done in a way that can impact industry so maybe we'll just start alphabetically with Homer sure so I can address that as far as the point is concerned we develop materials based on the input of our customers so we're doing market-driven research so it's extremely important to understand the product to understand the needs of the customers and work with them in an innovative way in a collaborative way to help them continue to be in business together with us in a win-win scenario so it's important to understand that system so in the case of the metallization it was very important for the point early on to understand what it takes to to extract more power out of a given cell so we had to go into learning how the cell works so we had to have the discipline to understand how to make the cells to communicate with the customer to design the materials in a way that we know where we're going so serendipity in this way was somewhat controlled however within the central research we do less of that and more discovery and the chance of discovering a new material or a new process is a lot higher than the R&D that you do in the division so we do some of that too but it's more in the corporate research than the R&D in the division and there's good communication there is always a good communication and actually the teams are always communicated starting with a discovery to development of the manufacturing so I will talk a little more about the electronic material because we are in that sense privileged because actually many of our customers are actually part of some and so the integration between what is the innovation in material in the driver from the market is somehow internally is so both but definitely compared to when I started to be a scientist etc if we were talking with somebody else so between the research push and the market pull the market pull won the battle so that is what it is in the industry right now however I think from my point of view and here I express my own opinion in the Bay Area we are in a kind of special situation where it's like to be in an enormous research campus and in that sense the role of Stanford or other university and institution is very important because that is what brought to make this area what it is and so a lot of basic research but fundamental research is done also maybe in startups that are the direct product from university or institutions and I guess in your case and also in homers you are at the in the jobs you are in now because of that process so just as a sidebar to that is there did you notice a big difference in your own experience going from a small company that was acquired by a big one so there is a big difference between a small company and a bigger company and I saw that I mean going from Honeywell to Bytex so I did the reverse now going back to a bigger company there is that in my case I guess there is the additional complication that I'm dealing now with a company that is a Korean company as opposed as an American company so from my point of view in a startup environment you're dealing with a single talent you're trying to develop a single idea single product where in a large corporate environment you are faced with many different challenges you have the responsibility to your customers not only with an answer to a single talent but multiple challenges so we find ourselves working in multiple activities and of course we have a lot more resources to execute that so startups are a lot more focused and a lot faster is the result of that where large corporations tend to process things in a parallel process with many more topics and products so Nagy you just notice how challenging the job is that you've got to make this equipment that makes these exquisite nanometer scale structures while integrating all of these new materials every generation so how do you do innovation around materials that can make this happen in applied materials so yeah materials is in our name but for a long time we saw equipment not materials we are changing it we have a pretty open business model we practice open innovation with true and true every day so that's what each of us remind our colleagues remind each other so we are not very proud people we see something out there that we like we think of it going and adopting it bringing it in and you know scaling it up so we truly believe that it's the innovation not invention that creates the interruption so in the sense that when we had so few materials to deal with for a semiconductor device a lot of it could be done in interface with our customers in interface with our suppliers we can't do that anymore so there is no single entity in the world that can actually handle the complexity of a 3D transistor anymore the kind of materials and processes and applications and cost drivers that we have to deal with so we have to practice open innovation here to work with people and really go out and adopt it out of us and invest in invention any questions from the audience any questions from the audience we have some runners with mics if there are any while you are thinking of questions I wanted to I wanted to also ask a question based on some of what was discussed here in your presentations Nagyu especially talked about road maps and Moore's law of course being this great example of a collective decision to develop technology in a certain way in an industry and there are certain aspects of the semiconductor industry that maybe make that easier than it is in some other industries I wanted to ask both Homer and Lorenza for energy materials and for display technologies is that concept of road mapping that we see manifest in Moore's law as applicable is there the kind of consensus that has to be there among manufacturers to make it a reality and what's been your experience with that so in the photovoltaic industry solar cells and modules of course road map is an extremely important function of our job and something analogous that we have in photovoltaics is how the dollars per watt manufacturing cost or purchasing price is reducing with time for instance 10 years ago you had to spend thousands and thousands of dollars to buy a single panel where now you can buy that very attractive price and we believe that prices will continue to go down and become a lot more affordable now it's important to understand what the determining powers that push the manufacturing cost down as well as what it takes to install the panels so we are going now from a mode where we have brought the manufacturing cost of the panels at a very nice level but we need to work on the installation cost so we need to come up with material solutions that will help us to make the installation a lot easier for instance or to come up with materials that will deliver a lot higher power so we have to use much higher density that convert the electricity a lot more efficiently so it's important to understand the road map what is the potential of the technology how high we can go in terms of power output how low we can go in terms of dollars per meter square but in the case of PV in particular though you have quite different technologies on the marketplace simultaneously that's right so presumably there's some do they have their own road maps or is there enough commonality in how these relationships between efficiency and cost work that they give if you recall we're using the three fundamental pillars in affordable takes the manufacturing cost materials cost the lifetime as well as the output right so for each one of these materials we need to make sure that these parameters these pillars are satisfied so if we're talking about back sheets or if we're talking about encapsulants or the cell technology that goes into the let's talk about crystal and silicon we have individual road maps indeed so for the cell itself the power output is the number one criteria but also you want to deliver this maximum power output at the lowest possible manufacturing cost so all of a sudden now you have two different road maps you need to reduce the manufacturing steps which is the challenge for applied so it's important that we collaborate with our customers with the equipment suppliers to deliver the best possible solution to the customers and we always share within the road map in all these building blocks I think that and I actually kind of disagree a little bit with I think that in semiconductor in silicon semiconductor the road map was a document where all companies all competitors I mean there were different evolution but I mean agree on what was the road map and gave to the different part of the chain the ability to have a target that was in a sense internal what in display and I think in part in photovoltaics there is not such a such things like a solid semiconductor road map there are general trends that are a little different so inside the company inside Samsung and again in that sense that is a privileged position there are road maps and then the different Samsung the Samsung chain knows what Samsung electronic does and Samsung display knows what Samsung electronic so there is a road map and everybody try to get to the product in consistent way but at the level of the industry I don't think there is right now in display and I don't know I would agree it's not as unified it has been in the case of the transistors how many transistors you can put the unit there again there's a very specific target there so for apply the to work in the display is much tougher because they don't really know what the road map of Samsung is as opposed to the road map of Sony or somebody else so I mean if I could add so the way we think about these road maps is the reason semiconductor industry had a very good road map to work with there are two of them like Mohr's law and the ITRS road map the reason Mohr's law was as effective as it is is everyone in the industry could actually think through and understand it you don't have to have any semiconductor IC chip design background to understand what the Mohr's law is calling for so that simplicity was important second that Mohr's law worked more as a stick not as a carrot so people knew that if they failed off of that to keep up with that Mohr's law they lose their shirts they lose their business whereas most industry road maps tend to make it look like a carrot in the sense that wouldn't it be nice to have this many lumens for what wouldn't it be nice to have this kind of a dust pennies for what peak power so the very fact that it's more of a carrot kind of makes it not so effective we need a stick we need a stick differently there are multiple road maps there's not an agreement of a single road map questions from the audience yes so just to comment the issue of carrot versus stick is an interesting one but I think the reason why the stick approach worked for the semiconductor industry was because lithography was a driver for performance and you knew how to get from one note to the other on a regular basis but now everything has changed even for the semiconductor industry it's no longer lithography it's materials and structures and moment you rely on innovation of new materials for anything you cannot have a timeline you cannot innovate on a timeline so now the semiconductor industry is the same boat as photovoltaics same boat as displays and every other industry we are limited by the need for new materials that's a good point very good point questions so I see that you focus the discussion on the semiconductor but I know that there's been a lot of talk out there about optical, computer communication, quantum computers and communications two questions is there any intent to do a road map to see what are commonalities and what are differences between these industries and where do you see yourself in this overall picture tough question I don't know if I'm the right person to answer that spike you have an answer for that sorry so something about optical computing quantum computing so sorry one hour lecture so I I don't think I can answer but yes all other forms of non one-knowing computing I think will be the next generation of computing and they're limited by number of different camps having completely different perspective of what the so-called cognitive computing might be there's only one camp that I think is trying to imitate what the brain is trying to do in terms of hierarchical interconnect and there actually I want to come back to this maker's forum or market what is the word that was used it's interesting because if you look at where we are today from a technology perspective if you look at interconnect capability in our systems we are highly constrained by our Manhattan coordinate thought process right so if you look at let's say we don't have the situation yet but you would need structure where you have three-dimensionally distributed devices we don't know what the device is going to be at some kind of a device or a storage element but distributed in three dimensions and if you look at the ability to interconnect them today you're limited to maybe four or six depending on how you count right but if you look at what the brain does it's three orders of magnitude higher you got to go from four to four thousand so this notion of this maker's commons or maker's market is something absolutely critical to go from four to four thousand there are no known techniques to get there today to get to that level of interconnectivity right so that is at the heart of new sets of technologies so it's not so much optical that's still a continuation of existing stuff you got to think way beyond optical you got to think about non-war environment technologies where you completely change the paradigm of what the devices and what the interconnect technologies are to get to the next level of computing any further responses on the quantum computers and other methods of doing computation I think that a roadmap emerged the need or the lack of it emerged when there is there are actually device device for better use lack of another word that are in the market I think that for some of the optical computing and other application we are not yet there so there is not a roadmap because it's more a research that is that was certainly the origin of Moore's law I was looking back at the last few years of what it happened I had a question about we're at a university and as an academic I'm interested in this and a few of my colleagues here too might be interested in it but if you thought about your own career and also openings at your respective companies how can we better educate students so that they can be effective and ultimately rise to be leaders in materials related innovations in industry so maybe I'll start with Homer one way to do this there is a big institution between universities and companies big companies and small companies large organizations large corporations have the ability to collaborate with institutions like yours a lot easier than smaller companies in the start-up environment you move very rapidly your laser focus and you have three years to turn things around for educational institutions to tap into these different parallel processes so we need to work closer with academic institutions and change information more openly so basically one of the reasons that we have this institution here is to tap into the talent that comes from the institutions in the area and we need to work towards supporting institutions like DuPont from universities supporting GSEC for multiple reasons to understand what will be happening let's say 10 years from now as well as seeing the talent that comes from the university as we build our future resources thank you for your support of GSEC we have a very strong close relationship with CIS so we have quite a few of those that come to a point so that's a strong collaboration so we had our solar and display businesses are relatively new and not as innovation driven as semiconductors was over the period of a few years it's more tool and equipment driven and so we haven't had as close a relationship with any of the centres and not just at Stanford but any of the university centres so we are beginning to evolve as we look at you know the solar industry is in a nuclear winter so still so I mean we are still for the equipment side we are still in the darkest part I mean I think the materials is doing a little bit better and it's coming back display came back roaring this year we think it's going to grow so there's a lot more innovation happening in the display industry so especially related to OLED and lighting so there's a lot more innovations happening there and so we have a lot of interest to collaborate and be open so off late we've been doing a lot of we are participating in a lot of hub proposals international labs led we are part of other consortia that are developed both in the northeast as well as on the west coast so we are collaborating so we have a lot more interest to what can we do at the universities to provide better educated students so what you do for Samsung for sure now you provide the students every year each actually company of Samsung has recruiting events that are mainly directed to Korean students that get educated in US in top institutions like Stanford but they are not necessarily close to them the recruiting effort is also for in a large part for everybody so that is something that is recognized that you already did I think that create students that have a solid background the most important part because the student when he will go in the industry will not be doing the same that he did at the university so the two characteristics that are very important is one that the person the student has learned the basic and then that he has learned to do critical thinking in good experimental code I think if you can do that that is a matter of success and that is why you try I mean Samsung and other try to fish in good institutions very good alright so I think we've reached the end of our time and let's thank our panelists again Lorenza, Homer and Nag insights and sharing them with us today thank you