The National Science Foundation (NSF) will soon begin processing several large databases to see if any scientists failed to disclose their affiliation with foreign institutions in their grant applications. This is because federal research institutions comply with new laws aimed at promoting innovation in the United States and preventing China and other foreign governments from stealing federally funded research. This is perhaps the most daring of the several steps we are taking.

The CHIPS and Science Act, signed by President Joe Biden on August 9, allocates $52 billion over five years to promote microelectronics research, training, and manufacturing, with additional funding for basic research in many fields. We promise tens of billions of dollars. In addition to these investments, we have an obligation to strengthen the security of our research (see sidebar below).

In recent years, lawmakers and others have accused federal investigative agencies of being less alert to potential security issues. This list does not include situations where a grantee accepts foreign funding, which entails restrictions on publication, or situations in which a scientist employed by a U.S.-funded entity has a “commitment conflict.” is included. China’s aggressive recruitment of US scientists, many of them of Chinese descent, is of particular concern.

In June 2018, the National Institutes of Health began more aggressively enforcing existing rules requiring grant recipients to disclose foreign affiliations, resulting in sanctions and sanctions against some scientists. Some grants have been returned. Five months later, the US Department of Justice launched the China Initiative, a law enforcement campaign to stop economic espionage by the Chinese government. As a result, about 20 academic researchers with ties to Chinese institutions have been indicted. In recent years, the research divisions of the Energy and Defense Divisions have created what they call “risk matrices” to help identify potential security threats to the research they fund.

The CHIPS Act enshrines some of these practices, provides institutions with more training to assess the types of research most vulnerable to theft, provides more training to scientists on how to mitigate security risks, It mandates that we collect more information from subsidized institutions. It also prohibits scientists employed by the U.S. government from participating in recruitment programs run by other countries, and prevents federal grant recipients from working with government agencies in China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. is prohibited from participating in talent programs funded by

NSF officials have decided to turn to big data to protect the agency’s $7 billion research portfolio. The institution has already reviewed the biosketches that accompany each grant proposal, providing basic information about each applicant and key members of their team. This includes affiliations, collaborations, areas of study, and geographic locations. Going forward, NSF will compare the information disclosed by the applicant to information contained in his two commercial databases of scientific publications (Web of Science and Scopus) and US patent applications.

The NSF says its goal is to find potential red flags, such as omissions or inconsistencies that could violate its policy. Of particular concern is his NSF grantee who describes his participation in the foreign recruitment program in his published paper but fails to disclose his affiliation with NSF.

Rebecca Keiser, Director of NSF’s Office of Research Security, said: “Now we will be able to find it through data analysis.”

NSF will take a closer look at any discrepancies it finds and then contact the researcher’s institution for more information, Kaiser said. (Up to this point, NSF program staff refer individual cases to the agency’s Independent Inspector General to determine whether to investigate.)

University administrators first learned of NSF’s plans in November 2021 when the NSF announced its intention to create a new “system of record.” However, NSF has yet to explain exactly what information it collects and how it manages that data.

This has caused some anxiety among academic researchers. The Council on Government Relations (COGR), which tracks the impact of federal regulations on academic research at more than 200 member institutions, has questions about who has access to data files and how NSF verifies the accuracy of data files. We are expressing concern about whether COGR’s Kristin West said:

COGR wants to give agencies an opportunity to review any discrepancies NSF finds before they begin asking questions. But NSF’s Kaiser says that’s not possible because the information it collects from grant applications is confidential.

NSF plans to make data mining algorithms available to institutions. This allows agencies to conduct their own analysis and resolve potential disclosure issues before they come to NSF’s attention. “It’s a research tool and we want to make it accessible to everyone,” says Kaiser.

The tool could also be a boon for scientists, as it helps identify other groups doing similar research and open the door to potential collaborations, Kaiser said. As Kaiser envisions it, “We called the university and said, ‘Analytics have discovered this very influential project that you might not know about. Isn’t that great?’

Kaiser estimates that four people are needed to run the analysis, do “human validation” and interact with the academic community, but her office’s current budget is limited by CHIPS mandates. It points out that it is not enough to meet the level of staffing that exists. Still, Keizer says that “creative use” of existing resources could allow her data mining project to begin later this year.