20. Jean, N., Burke, M., Xie, M., Davis, W.M., Lobell, D. B.,
and Ermon, S. Combining satellite imagery and
machine learning to predict poverty. Science 353, 6301
21. Kelling, S. et al. Can observation skills of citizen
scientists be estimated using species accumulation
curves? PloS one 10, 10 (2015).
22. Khazaei, J. and Powell, W. B. SMART-Invest:
A stochastic, dynamic planning for optimizing
investments in wind, solar, and storage in the presence
of fossil fuels. The case of the PJM electricity market.
Energy Systems 9, 2 (2018), 277–303.
23. Kraus, S. Automated negotiation and decision-making
in multiagent environments. ECCAI Advanced Course
on Artificial Intelligence. Springer, 2001,150–172.
24. Lässig, J., Kersting, K., and Morik, K (Eds.).
Computational Sustainability. Studies in
Computational Intelligence 645 (2016). Springer.
25. Phillips, S.J., Anderson, R.P., and Schapire, R.E.
Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic
distributions. Ecological Modeling 190, 3-4 (2006),
26. Powell, W. A unified framework for stochastic
optimization. European J. Operational Research 275, 3
27. Reynolds, M.D. et al. Dynamic conservation for migratory
species. Science Advances 3, 8 (2017), e1700707.
28. Rockström, J. et al. Planetary boundaries: Exploring
the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and
Society 14, 2 (2009).
29. Rudin, C. and Wagstaff, K. Machine learning for science
and society. Machine Learning 95, 1 (2014), 1–9;
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994- 013- 5425- 9
30. Ruiz-Muñoz, J.F., You, Z., Raich, R., and Fern, X.Z.
Dictionary learning for bioacoustics monitoring
with applications to species classification. Signal
Processing Systems 90, 2 (2018), 233–247.
31. Russell, S.J. et al. Letter to the editor: Research
priorities for robust and beneficial artificial
intelligence: An open letter. AI Magazine 36, 4 (2015).
32. Sheldon, D.R. and Dietterich, T.G. Collective graphical
models. Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems, 2011, 1161–1169.
33. Sheldon, D.R. et al. Approximate Bayesian inference
for reconstructing velocities of migrating birds from
weather radar. In Proceedings of the 27th AAAI
Conf. Artificial Intelligence. (Bellevue, WA, USA,
July 14-18, 2013).
34. Sullivan, B.L. et al. The eBird enterprise: An integrated
approach to development and application of citizen
science. Biological Conservation 169 (2014), 31–40.
35. Tambe, M. and Rice, E (eds.). Artificial Intelligence and
Social Work. Cambridge University Press, 2018.
36. Giesen, N., Hut, R., and Selker, J. The Trans-African
Hydro-Meteorological Observatory (TAHMO). Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water 1, 4 (2014), 341–348.
37. Wahabzada, M., Mahlein, A. K., Bauckhage, C., Steiner,
U., Oerke, E.C., and Kersting, K. Plant phenotyping using
probabilistic topic models: Uncovering the hyperspectral
language of plants. Scientific Reports 6 (2016).
38. Wu, X. et al. Efficiently approximating the Pareto
frontier: Hydropower dam placement in the Amazon
basin. In AAAI (2018).
39. Xue, Y., Davies, I., Fink, D., Wood, C., and Gomes, C.P.
Avicaching: A two stage game for bias reduction
in citizen science. In Proceedings of the 2016
Intl. Conf. on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent
40. Yadav, A. et al. Influence maximization in the field: The
arduous journey from emerging to deployed application.
In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous
Agents and MultiAgent Systems, 2017, 150–158.
For questions regarding this article, contact Carla
Gomes ( email@example.com), a professor of computer
science and director of the Institute for Computational
Sustainability at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Copyright held by authors/owners.
include many other exciting research
contributions and computational challenges raised by sustainability questions, as identified in computer science,
engineering, and social and natural
sciences. Examples include the role of
large-scale distributed systems and sensor networks, the Internet of Things,
cyber-physical systems, cyber security,
privacy, fairness, accountability, transparency for advanced computational
systems, and also fundamental computational concepts such as reliability,
modeling the hierarchical structure of
socio-technical systems, and human-in-the-loop systems and intuitive,
user-friendly interfaces. We also only
touched on some of the 17 U.N. sustainable development goals. We point the
reader to the increasing number of conferences and journals that are now starting to include tracks, workshops, and
special issues focusing on tackling sustainability and societal issues, bringing
together different computing and information science areas (HCI, systems, AI,
and algorithms, among others).
Planning for a sustainable future en-
compasses complex interdisciplinary
decisions for balancing environmental,
economic, and societal needs, which
involve significant computational
challenges, requiring expertise and re-
search efforts in computing and infor-
mation science and related disciplines.
Computational sustainability aims to
develop new computational methodol-
ogies to help address such environmen-
tal, economic, and societal challenges.
The continued dramatic advances in
digital platforms, computer software
and hardware, sensor networks and the
Internet of Things continue to provide
significant new opportunities for accel-
erating the pace of discovery to address
societal and sustainability issues. Com-
putational sustainability is a two-way
street: it injects computational ideas,
thinking, and methodologies into ad-
dressing sustainability questions but
it also leads to foundational contribu-
tions to computing and information
science by exposing computer scien-
tists to new challenging problems,
formalisms, and concepts from other
disciplines. Just as sustainability issues
intersect an ever-increasing cross-sec-
tion of emerging scientific application
domains, computational sustainabil-
ity broadens the scope and diversity of
computing and information science
while having profound societal impact.
Acknowledgments. We thank the
CompSustNet members for their many
contributions to computational sustainability and the support of two NSF
Expeditions in Computing awards
(CNS-0832782 and CCF-1522054). We
thank the anonymous reviewers for
their suggestions to improve the manuscript. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes
only and does not imply endorsement
by the U.S. government.
1. Abdelrahman, H., Berkenkamp, F., Poland, J., and
Krause, A. Bayesian optimization for maximum
power point tracking in photovoltaic power plants.
In Proceedings of the 2016 European Control Con.
(Aalborg, Denmark, June 29–July 1, 2016), 2078–
2. Albers, J.H., Dietterich, T., Hall, K., Katherine, L., and
Taleghan, M. Simulator-defined Markov decision
processes: A case study in managing bio-invasions.
Artificial Intelligence and Conservation (2nd. ed.). F.
Fang, M. Tambe, B. Dilkina, and A. Plumptre, (Eds.).
Cambridge Univ. Press, 2018
3. Azimi, J., Fern, X., and Fern, A. Budgeted optimization
with constrained experiments. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 56
4. Bai, J. et al. Phase mapper: Accelerating materials
discovery with AI. AI Mag. 39, 1 (2018), 15–26.
5. Barrett, C., Garg, T., and McBride, L. Well-being
dynamics and poverty traps. Annual Review of
Resource Economics 8 (2016), 303–327.
6. Bernstein, G., McKenna, R., Sun, T., Sheldon, D., Hay,
M., and Miklau, G. Differentially private learning of
undirected graphical models using collective graphical
models. In Proceedings of the 34th International
Conference on Machine Learning, 2017, 478–487.
7. Chen, D., Xue, Y., and Gomes, C. End-to-end learning
for the deep multivariate probit model. ICML (2018).
8. Coble, K., Mishra, A., Ferrell, S., and Griffin, T. Big data
in agriculture: A challenge for the future. Applied
Economic Perspectives and Policy 40, 1 (2018), 79–96.
9. Dilkina, B. et al. Trade-offs and efficiencies in optimal
budget-constrained multi-species corridor networks.
Conservation Biology 31, 1 (2017), 192–202.
10. Donti, P., Kolter, J. Z., and Amos, B. Task-based end-to-end model learning in stochastic optimization.
In Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information
Processing Systemsg Systems (Long Beach, CA, USA,
Dec. 4–9, 2017), 5490–5500.
11. Ermon, S. et al. Learning large-scale dynamic discrete
choice models of spatio-temporal preferences with
application to migratory pastoralism in East Africa. In
AAAI, 2015, 644–650.
12. Faghmous, J. and Kumar, V. A big data guide to
understanding climate change: The case for theory-guided data science. Big Data 2, 3 (2014), 155–163.
13. Fang, F. et al. PAWS—A deployed game-theoretic
application to combat poaching. AI Magazine 38, 1
14. Fang, F., Tambe, M., Dilkina, B., and Plumptre, A (eds.).
Artificial Intelligence and Conservation. Cambridge
University Press, 2018.
15. Fink, D. et al. Spatiotemporal exploratory models for
broad-scale survey data. Ecological Applications 20, 8
16. Fisher, D.H. Recent advances in AI for computational
sustainability. IEEE Intelligent Systems 31, 4 (2016),
17. Freund, D., Henderson, S. G., and Shmoys, D.B. Sharing
Economy: Making Supply Meet Demand. Springer, 2018.
18. Gomes, C.P. Computational sustainability:
Computational methods for a sustainable environment,
economy, and society. The Bridge 39, 4 (2009), 5–13.
19. Grover, A. et al. Best arm identification in multi-armed
bandits with delayed feedback. In Proceedings of the
Inter. Conf. Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (Playa
Blanca, Lanzarote, Canary Islands, Spain, April 9–11,
Watch the authors discuss
this work in the exclusive