410 likes | 423 Views
NAPAC’19 SPCC1 Telecom. Tor Raubenheimer and Steve Lidia. Outline. Issues NAPAC goals NAPAC’19 Venue MC definitions agreement SPC membership status, role of the SPC Program layout, parallel sessions, talk durations, closing session PAC’11 synoptic table NAPAC’13 synoptic table
E N D
NAPAC’19 SPCC1 Telecom Tor Raubenheimer and Steve Lidia
Outline • Issues • NAPAC goals • NAPAC’19 Venue • MC definitions agreement • SPC membership status, role of the SPC • Program layout, parallel sessions, talk durations, closing session • PAC’11 synoptic table • NAPAC’13 synoptic table • NAPAC’16 synoptic table • IPAC’18 synoptic table • Proposal for NAPAC’19 layout discussion • MC allocations and synoptic table suggestions – iterate by email • Future meetings
NAPAC’19 SPCC Membership • MC1 – Colliders • W. Fischer (BNL) / M. Bai (GSI) • MC2 – Photon sources and Electron acc • D. Ratner (SLAC) / Y-H Chin (KEK) • MC3 – Advanced Acc • C. Schroeder (LBNL) / P. Muggli (MPI) • MC4 – Hadron Acc. • S. Cousineau (ORNL) / S. Nagaitsev (FNAL) • MC5 – Beam Dynamics • P. Piot (NIU) / K. Ohmi (KEK) • MC6 – Accelerator Systems • J. Byrd (ANL) / P. Musumeci (UCLA) • MC7 – Acc Technology • P. Ostroumov (FRIB) / B. Laxdal (TRIUMF) • MC8 – Industrial Acc. And Applications • M. Spata (JLAB) / A. Faus-Golfe(LAL) • Short Courses and Tutorials • S. Lund (MSU) / A. Gold (SLAC)
NAPAC’19 SPCC Tasks • Meeting #1 – Telcom • Review NAPAC’19 goals; approve MC; approve synoptic table • Meeting #2 – TBD at MSU • Select invited oral parallel program • Suggest plenary talks • Review tutorial and short course suggestions • Meeting #3 – TBD at MSU • Select contributed program IPAC’18 SPC1 Tor Raubenheimer, January, 2017
NAPAC Goals • NAPAC is a US domestic conference aimed at students, postdocs, technicians, engineers, and early career scientists who may have limited approval for foreign travel. The character of the meeting is different from IPAC with attendance of ~500 people and ~100 students. • Goals: • Provide a broad view of AS&T with updates current advances • Provide opportunity for early career members of the field to discuss their work and engage with more senior researchers • Provide educational opportunities new members of the field • Provide an opportunity to develop new contacts and strengthen existing collaborations
NAPAC2019 Organizers • Conference Chair: Yoshishige Yamazaki, MSU • Program Chair: Tor Raubenheimer, SLAC • Local Organizing Committee Chair: Steven Lidia, MSU • Scientific Secretariat/Proceedings Editor: Amy McCausey, MSU NAPAC’19 website: https://www.frib.msu.edu/napac19 MSU successfully hosted LINAC2016 (9/25-9/30): Over 400 participants, 31 exhibitors, Over 40 student award competitors S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Welcome to Lansing, MI L. Superior L. Huron L. Michigan L. Ontario L. Erie S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Venue Choice: Lansing, MI Lansing Center / Radisson Hotel • Lansing Center • Over 120,000 square feet of complimentary meeting and exhibit space • State-of-the-art AV services • Radisson Hotel • 230 sleeping rooms at federal per diem rate ($96/night in 2016) • Connected to Lansing Center via covered walkway S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Lansing, MI Lansing Center / Radisson Hotel Dates August 28-September 8, 2019 • Advantages • Overnight rate = federal per diem • Complimentary airport shuttle • Complimentary conference space (provided by convention & visitors bureau) • Proximity to MSU/FRIB • Along public transportation route • Many restaurants within walking distance of conference center • Disadvantages • Hotel only has 230 rooms, additional lodging about 2.5 miles away (Very convenient bus system provides frequent commuting every 5 or 10 minutes along the main avenue between the lodging area and the conference center. The bus system is used for commuting and shopping by most of 45,000 MSU students) S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Lansing Center [1] • From Radisson • Main Concourse • Exhibition S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Lansing Center [2] • Plenary S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Lansing Center [3] • Social Events S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Adjacent Hotel S. Lidia - NA-PAC19 SPCC Meeting
Main Classifications • PAC’11 and NAPAC’13 had different sets of MC’s • NAPAC’16 closely modeled the IPAC Main Classifications • https://napac2016.aps.anl.gov/Author-Information/Scope-of-Classifications • IPAC’17 and IPAC’18 changed the MC’s slightly • https://ipac18.org/main-and-sub-classifications/ • IPAC’19 did not make any further changes: https://ipac19.org/authors/main-and-sub-classifications/ • Suggestion: adopt the IPAC’19 MC list without changes
SPC Approximate Demographics About 80 accepted thus far
Goals for the Program (NAPAC’19) • The goal is too reflect: • The R&D on accelerators (desirable to focus on new developments) • The projects under planning/construction • The operating facilities in the field • The program must be balanced and include: • Want to provide opportunities for early career members to present • Balance the selection of speakers: senior people and young scientists; originality of work; previous speaking opportunities; representation of regions, countries, labs, gender • Need to think about ways to engage the attendees and provide opportunities for discussion and connections
NAPAC’13 and NAPAC’16 Issues • NAPAC’13 (Alex Chao): • What we did not anticipate fully is an apparent lukewarm enthusiasm of the community to this particular conference. Symptoms: • Low turn out; Partial attendances to save travel costs • Large fraction of attendants are speakers • Much-more-than-usual difficulty in finding session chairs • More-than-usual last-minute emergency changes on speakers & session chairs • NAPAC’16 (Vladimir Shiltsev): • Went well, except for last-minute cancellations. • We took a risk inviting some people, e.g., China. Invited 5-6, 3 dropped out. • Should start ~ a month earlier than we did, especially for countries that require a U.S. visa. • Oral presentations: 19% overseas; 13% women; 18% early career
PAC’11 Characteristics – New York Marriott • Four oral periods per day with two parallel sessions from 9 am till 5:30 pm • Maximum two parallel sessions of talks; posters overlap parallel talks • Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday after lunch • 1.5 hour lunch breaks • 49 hours of parallel session • Talks 30 min invited or 15 min contributed • Four 1-hour tutorial sessions • Posters during parallel session talks • Awards session 1.5 hours • 961 Registrants – large for NAPAC
NAPAC’13 Characteristics – Pasadena • 4 periods per day from 9 am till 6 pm; 3 oral and posters from 4:30 – 6pm • Maximum two parallel sessions of talks; no overlap with posters • Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday after lunch • 1.5 hour lunch breaks • 2.5 long post-lunch oral session • 44 hours of parallel session • Talks 30 min invited or 15 min contributed • Four 1hour tutorial sessions • Awards session 2 hours • MC8 / MC9 were separated into Medical and Industrial accelerators • 535 Registrants (60 students) – typical for NAPAC – with 467 papers
NAPAC’16 Characteristics – Chicago • 4 oral periods per day from 8:30 am till 5:30 pm • Maximum two parallel sessions of talks; posters overlap parallel talks • Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday after lunch • 1.5 hour lunch breaks • 46 hours of parallel session • Talks 30 min invited or 15 min contributed • Four 1.5-hour tutorial sessions plus 3 short course on Sunday • Awards session 1.5 hours • Student poster session on Sunday with 60 posters • ~520 Registrants (~100 students) – typical for NAPAC – with 467 papers
IPAC’18 Characteristics – Vancouver • 4 periods per day from 9 am till 6 pm; 3 for oral and one for posters • Maximum three parallel sessions of talks; posters overlap parallel talks • Short opening and closing sessions; close Friday before lunch • 1.5 hour lunch breaks • 43.5 hours of parallel session • Talks 30 min invited or 20 min contributed • Separate tutorial on Saturday/Sunday • Awards session 2 hours • Student poster session on Sunday with 60 posters • ~1250 Registrants (~200 students) – typical for IPAC – with 1581 papers
Short Course and Tutorials • PAC’11, NAPAC’13, and NAPAC‘16 included 4 short morning tutorials to introduce topics for new members • NAPAC’16 included three 4-hour IEEE short courses on Sunday for people coming to the conference. The short courses ended in time for the student poster session Sunday afternoon. • IPAC’18 also arranged a tutorial session on Saturday and Sunday before the conference.
Tutorials • NAPAC’13 (1 hour talks): • Progress Toward High-energy, High-current ERLs, Christopher Mayes (Cornell) • Physics of Polarized Protons in Accelerators, Mei Bai (GSI) • Genetic Algorithms and their Applications in Accelerator Physics, Alicia Hofler (Jlab) • Femtosecond Timing and Synchronization of Laser Systems for Accelerators, Josef Frisch (SLAC) • NAPAC’16 (1.5 hour talks): • Risk Management of Complex Systems, John Thomas (MIT) • Superconducting Accelerator Magnets, Soren Prestemon (LBNL) • RF Superconductivity, Jean Delayen (ODU) • A Discussion on Phase Space and Beam Emittance, Rui Li (JLab)
IEEE Short Courses • NAPAC’16 (8:30 am – noon, Sunday before conference): • Short Course 1: High-power proton beams and applicationsInstructors: Prof. Michael Syphers (NIU) and Dr. Stuart Henderson (ANL) • Short Course 2: Third-and-a-half and fourth generation light sourcesInstructors: Prof. Kwang-Je Kim (U. Chicago) and Dr. Fernando Sannibale (LBNL) • Short Course 3: Manipulation of electron beam phase spaceInstructors: Dr. Yine Sun (ANL) and Dr. Gennady Stupakov (SLAC) • https://napac2016.aps.anl.gov/Events/Short-Courses • IPAC’18 (all day Saturday and Sunday morning before conference): • Eight ~2hr lectures broadly covering the field of AS&T • https://student-tutorials.ipac18.org/program.html
Decisions • Duration: 9 hrs (e.g. 9 am – 6 pm) ; 9.5 hours (e.g. 8:30 – 6 pm) • Finish: before / after lunch on Friday? • Layout: 2 versus 3 parallel? • separate versus combined poster (4.5 - 6 hrs from oral)? • Tutorials: none; 4 x 1hr; 4 x 1.5 hr? • Talk times: 30 / 15 or 30 / 20?
Examples of Possible Layouts (1/2) 34 hrs parallel versus 44 – 46 hrs at NAPAC’13 & 16 Move closing to pm; start at 8:30; combine poster w/ oral
Examples of Possible Layouts (2/2) 39-40 hrs parallel versus 44 – 46 hrs at NAPAC’13 & 16; More time by moving closing to pm; shorten plenary; shorten awards; start at 8:30; ….
Industrial Exhibitors and Receptions • Industrial exhibits would be set up Monday AM and stay through Wednesday evening coming down Wednesday or Thursday AM • Need more thought about how to encourage people to flow through exhibits; refreshments co-located or similar approach will help • IPAC’16 had a fun reception in the exhibits – not sure who hosted • Three scheduled receptions and the banquet: • Sunday – Welcome reception • Monday – Chairman’s reception • Wednesday – Women in Science & Engineering (WISE) reception • Thursday – Banquet