Foundations of Computer Science are not redundant

It is a real pity that periodically foundational studies in Leicester are under siege. Bureaucrats should stop thinking that there could be applied informatics without theoretical computer science.

This is really shocking news, and I hope that the University of Leicester reverses this decision, which will destroy its reputation and discourage academics from wanting to apply to positions there in the future.

This is a short-sighted decision that would have a very negative effect on the quality of the research environment at the University of Leicester. In fact, it would reduce its chances to "shape for excellence"! Research on FoCo has proved its worth over decades and it will continue to do so in the future.

I work on both theoretical and practical aspects of data science, data management, the Web, and related areas. In the two decades that I've been doing this, I have learned that there is no way to predict which theoretical foundation you are going to need for the next practical breakthrough. The beauty of mathematical foundations is that (1) they are universally applicable and (2) they remain true forever. Furthermore, the researchers who develop these are typically not driven by financial reasons or a political agenda. They want to find out what is true and what is not, independently of whether politics wants 2+2 to be 5. Cutting down so severely in foundations of computer science or in mathematics is very short-sighted.

It's crazy to make productive staff redundant just because they haven't jumped onto the latest bandwagon. Leicester is well known and respected for its work in CS theory; it is shortsighted to tarnish this respect. And if you do treat staff so shabbily, the community will remember, and you will have a hard time recruiting in a few years when the current bandwagon has left and your research strategy changes direction (as it inevitably will).

Université du Québec en Outaouais, Canada Department of Computer Science Professor

Theoretical computer science has continuously delivered tangible benefits for applications, although often with some delay. This move is short-sighted in terms of research focus, unfair to established staff, and comes at the worst possible timing. I sincerely hope it will reconsidered.

I consider this a very unfair treatment of academic staff. The staff should be given a substantial period of time to make their research aligned with the new priorities. This is essential in particular for those working on theoretical subjects.

Disgraceful

As Don Braben put it, supporting applied science/mathematics without supporting the foundational theoretical underpinnings is "eating the seedcorn". It is worth reading Oded Goldreich and Avi Wigderson's essay "The Theory of Computing: A Scientific Perspective" (http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~oded/PDF/toc-sp2.pdf) which gives examples of the impact of Theoretical Computer Science on other disciplines. Focussing on applications without regard to the underlying theory is a good way to be mediocre.

University of Oxford This would be a big hit for Leicester's research excellence in computer science.

Changing a department to fit the latest research fashion is very short-sighted.

Removing the foundations of a subject means that eventually (not tomorrow, but perhaps in a few decades) the whole house will fall down.

I am Professor of Computer Science at University of Salerno, Itraly. I strongly support the request that the Executive Board step back from the plans to largely eliminate research in foundations of computer science at the University of Leicester

The University management should retract immediately their short-sighted strategy. Otherwise, they would not only damage the reputation of the University but, more seriously, also harm the fundamental work of science. It is extremely worrying what a distorted message such a baseless strategy would convey to university undergraduates and postgraduates pursuing these areas. It would make them think that their work would not be appreciated or valued, or even worse, not enable them to build a career.

As Don Braben put it, supporting applied science/mathematics without supporting the foundational theoretical underpinnings is "eating the seedcorn". It is worth reading Oded Goldreich and Avi Wigderson's essay "The Theory of Computing: A Scientific Perspective" (http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~oded/PDF/toc-sp2.pdf) which gives examples of the impact of Theoretical Computer Science on other disciplines. Focussing on applications without regard to the underlying theory is a good way to be mediocre.

I've been an AI researcher for three decades, so this is the third hype-cycle I've seen. I could point out the ways in which theory has been critical to my most applied research on drug design. I'm sure many others here have similar experiences.

Without strong foundations of computer science computer programming will remain costly for society and withhold many important fundamental breakthroughs in all sciences.

As a Professor of Biorobotics and having worked in AI and emerging areas for the last 25 years, I know this work CANNOT be done without knowledge of computational foundations

Professor of Foundations of Data Management, University of Edinburgh and Scientific Advisor, Neo4j Inc And what will you do when the next buzzword arrives at the door in a few years' time?