In Response to: What Is a Grid?

In a recent letter to the editor,1 Dr. Peter Szolovits called for “distinct names for distinct ideas” when discussing grid. His suggestion for better “precision of language” arose from listening to numerous talks at the 2006 American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) Symposium “where speakers describe grids that have little in common.”1At this early stage in the maturation of grid, as with any emerging technology, lack of clarity is natural and, in fact, stimulates an ever-improving “precision of thought.”1 Specifically, this ambiguity has already begun to generate discussion, as demonstrated by Dr. Szolovits' asking “What Is a Grid?” Most would agree that ambiguity is part of the normal lifecycle of adoption of new ideas, concepts, and technologies. Our reading and interpretation of the 2006 Gartner Hype Curve2 illustrates this point quite graphically; it articulates the ambiguity with regard to “grid computing” by placing it midway between the “peak of inflated expectations” and the “trough of disillusionment,” on its way towards the “slope of enlightenment” and within 2–5 years of mainstream adoption.2 What could be more ambiguous than living somewhere in-between “expectations” and “disillusionment?”Another aspect of ambiguity is the role of perspective. The spectrum of ambiguity ranges from the least (for those actively working with grid) to the most (for those peripherally involved or newly learning about the field). To borrow from a well-known metaphor to help explain the ambiguity around the grid-focused presentations at the 2006 AMIA Symposium, the speakers unintentionally actualized the American poet John Godfrey Saxe's poem, “The Blind Men and the Elephant.”3 In the poem, each blind man described the elephant differently from his own perspective—the elephant's side felt like a wall, his tusk like a spear, his trunk like a snake, his knee …