Present: Raphael, Nathan, Stepan, Maurik, Tim, John.

Please send comments/corrections to the EC email list.

 

1. Status Update for Management

Stepan explained that JLAB management has noticed we have not yet published despite our optimistic projections in the springtime, and asked for an update on our progress toward doing so. An update will be useful for management at SLAC and DOE HEP as well, and may serve to organize our progress toward publications too.

 

John distributed the draft Update on HPS Progress toward Physics Publications Stepan.docx which was intended to address managements' concerns. Stepan's comments are incorporated in the attachment. Many of Stepan's comments pointed out that the evidence for one statement or another in the draft has not been widely distributed or is not widely accepted.  John agreed and will try to rectify this by sending along what he feels is the substantiating evidence. Stepan and others generally felt that conclusions should be considerably softened, especially when strong evidence is lacking, and that there be no mention of the upgrade. John agree, modulo seeing additional evidence. We decided to exchange and expand upon the evidence for the various claims made over the next week or two, and then revisit the text. Please help.

 

2. What areas in HPS need more leadership? Who should we enlist? New collaborators?

We went around the table to get ideas. Stepan mentioned the need for simulation and tracking czars; Maurik agreed, and added the need of an "analysis coordinator" who would keep up to date records of the results of studies and their conclusions available to all; Tim suggested that Nathan and Matt consider what sort of help they need in the analysis group to provide better documentation and organization; Raphael underscored the need for solid analysis documentation, something beyond just slides with no clear conclusions; Nathan agreed that simulation and tracking czars would be useful additions to HPS.

 

We concluded that we should establish new tracking and simulation czars, and asked Nathan and Matt to propose how to bolster analysis group efforts to provide a more coherent summary of interim results and conclusions and eventually documentation that everyone can follow. We will re-visit this topic next week and try to name names.

 

3. Out of time, we adjourned until next week, when we will also consider a staffing plan for the 2018 run and discuss how and where to present HPS' first conference results, and what stands between us and doing so.

 

Respectfully,

John

 

 

  • No labels