[1046] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Postol alleges fraud at Lincoln Lab, MIT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David A McIlroy)
Mon Feb 11 13:07:20 2002
Message-ID: <200202111806.NAA27904@macaroni-and-cheese.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 13:06:34 -0500
From: David A McIlroy <davidmac@MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/040/metro/MIT_professor_alleges_fraud_within_research+.shtml
MIT professor alleges fraud within research
By Patrick Healy, Globe Staff, 2/9/2002
A Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor has accused two MIT
colleagues of falsifying the results of a 1997 ballistic missile test to please
their funders at the Pentagon - and has formally complained that MIT president
Charles M. Vest knew about the alleged misconduct but has failed to police it.
Earlier allegations by MIT physicist Theodore Postol and another engineer, Nira
Schwartz, triggered two congressional investigations into the missile test that
will be completed in two weeks.
Postol's new complaints about Vest and his fellow scientists, which he
presented to the MIT Corporation last month, are roiling the university's
administration, as officials and scientists argue over how to handle the
explosive charge of scientific fraud.
At issue is the success of an infrared sensor that the Pentagon tested in the
Pacific Ocean in 1997 as part of a planned national missile defense system. In
1998, the tests were evaluated by two scientists from MIT's Lincoln Laboratory
and three others. The scientists pronounced the test ''basically sound,'' and
the Pentagon used their report - which won respect in some Washington missile
defense circles as the ''MIT study'' - to champion US spending on missile
defense.
But Postol says research he later conducted, along with that of another
engineer, so discredits the 1998 report that there is no way that the two
Lincoln Lab testers could have reached their conclusions honestly.
Postol, a longtime critic of missile defense, contends his findings raise
questions not only about the effectiveness of President Bush's proposed
national missile defense system, but also about MIT's close relationship with
the Defense Department. Lincoln Lab has a five-year contract to perform
research and development for the Pentagon worth an estimated $1.6 billion; the
contract was renewed about two years after the disputed missile study was
finished.
The two Lincoln Lab researchers who worked on the 1998 report, M.J. Tsai and
Charles Meins, did not return phone calls and e-mail requests for interviews
last week. Attempts to reach the three other researchers involved - two from
the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and one from the private, nonprofit Aerospace Corporation - were unsuccessful.
MIT is one of the largest recipients of US research spending among
universities: It received $251.2 million last year, including $60.9 million
from the Pentagon, on top of the Lincoln Lab funding. The 1,200 scientists at
the Lexington-based lab are MIT employees, but the lab itself is a government-
owned, contractor-operated facility, and all of its equipment is property of
the US government.
The scientific issues disputed by Postol are complex questions of physics and
mathematics. But the issues facing MIT and the government are more clear-cut:
MIT's reputation as a leading science institution flows from the integrity and
impartiality of its research, and the White House has sought to build a firm
body of science to support the billion-dollar investment in a missile defense
system.
Postol, a missile expert who consulted for the Defense Department in the 1980s,
said he has become embroiled in the issue because he thinks the ''MIT study''
impugns the institute's name.
''The Pentagon wanted to hide the fact that its missile test failed, so they
went to Lincoln Lab to get them to produce a fraudulent study that said
otherwise,'' said Postol. ''MIT is aware of this, but has done next to nothing.
MIT's academic integrity is at risk.''
Postol provided letters to the Globe showing Vest received Postol's fraud
complaints as early as last April. In November, Vest told Postol that MIT was
weighing how to review the complaints ''within the framework of MIT policies.''
MIT officials yesterday would not say whether an investigation has begun.
Postol did not, however, supply evidence that MIT scientists deliberately
falsified data to curry favor with the Pentagon. That allegation, he says, may
be addressed in the congressional investigation.
MIT officials strongly reject the fraud charge. ''There's always the
possibility that a scientific study can turn out to be wrong, but not
fraudulent,'' said an MIT official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because
the administration is not publicly discussing the issue. ''Fraudulent means
intent to deceive, and we don't believe that was occurring here.''
The US General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, has
received two requests - from Representative Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts
Democrat, and from two other members of Congress - to investigate the 1997
missile test, the 1998 study involving Lincoln Lab, and Postol's accusations.
The reports are slated to be given to the members in two weeks.
The GAO review has found problems with the missile test data, a GAO official
said, but he and other officials declined to reveal if those problems reflected
errors or outright fraud.
According to Postol and MIT and government officials, the GAO is studying
problems with an infrared sensor that was designed to identify objects that
simulated the presence of enemy warheads. But the sensor did not produce usable
data, Postol alleges, because it failed to cool to its designed operating
temperature. The 1998 study by the Lincoln Lab researchers pointed out some
flaws in the test, but judged it to be ''basically sound.''
Science magazine reported this month that the GAO has uncovered ''a problem
with the sensors that was never mentioned'' in the 1998 study or other Pentagon
reports on the missile test, which the test program manager initially termed
''highly successful.''
Roger Sudbury, a spokesman for Lincoln Lab, said yesterday that the Pentagon
had asked the two MIT researchers to conduct ''a fairly quick study'' of
whether the missile test had been successful or flawed. ''It was a task that
was carried out and completed to the satisfaction of all the parties on the
study,'' Sudbury said. ''There is no evidence of fraud.''
Asked if Lincoln Lab was conducting an investigation, Sudbury referred the
question to officials at the MIT campus.
Vest has told Postol and MIT officials that he supports an internal review of
the allegations. But Vest's promises have failed to satisfy Postol, a senior
member of the MIT faculty who is a longstanding critic of the MIT president.
Postol took the unusual step last month of lodging a formal complaint against
Vest with MIT's governing board for ''failing to investigate a serious case of
scientific fraud that has taken place under his oversight of the MIT
administration.''
Last Wednesday evening, Postol and another colleague, political scientist
Harvey Sapolsky, met with MIT board chairman Alexander V. D'Arbeloff to discuss
the fraud allegations. According to the two professors, D'Arbeloff assured them
that he would ''expedite'' an investigation at Lincoln Lab and MIT.
D'Arbeloff said in an interview he was dismayed that the fraud charges had been
made public, and refused to comment about his meeting with Postol and Sapolsky.
''This is a highly discreet matter, and it's appalling that it's being
discussed publicly,'' said D'Arbeloff, an MIT graduate and former chairman and
chief executive officer of Teradyne, a maker of semiconductor testing
equipment.
An MIT spokesman declined to discuss, or even confirm, details about an
internal review.
Michael Levi, a strategic security expert at the Federation of American
Scientists, said Postol's allegations about the missile test were important.
''The fundamental question raised here is, what kind of accountability is there
in the missile defense program and defense programs at large?'' Levi said.
''If this one instance of misleading the public is exposed as accurate, you
have to ask what other ones have not been exposed.''
Lieutenant Colonel Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the Pentagon ballistic missile
program, noted that no investigations have turned up evidence of fraud related
to the 1997 test or the 1998 report.
He also said that the Pentagon has since decided not to use the missile design
tested in 1997, instead selecting a design with two sophisticated sensors.
Patrick Healy can be reached by e-mail at phealy@globe.com.
This story ran on page B1 of the Boston Globe on 2/9/2002.
) Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation on the use of the mailing lists mit-talk, all-talk,
mit-news, housing-talk, and the mit-talk Zephyr class is available at:
http://web.mit.edu/institvte/talk/
