1 / 18

Status of the Science Collaboration

Status of the Science Collaboration. What the heck is the “Science Collaboration?”. R.Svoboda, 2/27/2009. Science Collaboration. Composed of scientists from universities and laboratories. Main goal : SCIENCE

dougal
Download Presentation

Status of the Science Collaboration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Status of the Science Collaboration What the heck is the “Science Collaboration?” R.Svoboda, 2/27/2009

  2. Science Collaboration • Composed of scientists from universities and laboratories. • Main goal: SCIENCE • Major force in setting scientific agenda: goals, priorities, recommendations to agencies • Develop technical specifications; evaluate impact on science of engineering and technical options • Organize efforts and support of university groups through direct agency and project office requests • Organize scientific analysis …don’t we first need detectors and a beam?

  3. Interim Informal Organization Science Collaboration (DOE and NSF*) BNL Detector Project Office (DOE) informal Joint Oversight Group CCC committee SC/S3 Liaison: (R.Kadel) DUSEL S3 at LBL (NSF) (incl. SDSTA) FNAL Project Office (DOE) informal ….yet? * via S4 requests, no request to DOE yet

  4. Science Collaboration Interim Science Coordinator Bob Svoboda Interim Project Coordinator Milind Diwan Institutional Board Chair: Marvin Marshak Vice-Chair: Maury Goodman Interim Executive Board Chair: Ed Blucher WC WG Milind Diwan LAr WG Bonnie Fleming Beam WG Gina Rameika Other WG … Please….no more boxes….

  5. What’s Going On Now • Coordinators: project plan, working groups, funding, agency contact, collaboration • IEB: Depth Document, Mission Statement, (this IEB will be replaced by an EB very soon) • IB: Governance Document, election of EB, collaboration name • WG’s: now forming Will be ever get to the part about how I get funded to participate?

  6. What’s the time scale? Now! Now! Now! …right. I’ve heard that before. What makes this project different?

  7. T.Chan, HEPAP, Feb. 2009

  8. Again with the boxes. What is he talking about? T.Chan, HEPAP, Feb. 2009

  9. Yikes! J.Dehmer, HEPAP Feb. 2009

  10. “S4” proposals • S4: Water Cherenkov detector(s) in 300 kton range • S4: Liquid Argon detector in 5 kton range in preparation for 50-100 kton range • These S4 proposals have different philosophy, management scheme, and schedule • CD0: process underway now – Project Offices being established at FNAL and BNL • Kovar has indicated in talks he would like to have CD1 (similar to NSF CD) about one year after CD0. …that’s fast!

  11. DOE • plan for megaton scale WC on time scale requested by DOE and NSF. This is, in effect, already happening. Needs significant effort of DOE labs to complete CD in one year, CD-2 in three years. • develop LAr detector technology with a significant size detector to go into DUSEL modular lab. What is plan for presentation to NSB? ….do I send in a proposal or what?

  12. Sequence of Events • March 16: Request by DOE for list of tasks and associated costs for “CD1” level planning. We will work with Project Team through working groups to help with this. • “CD0” granted by DOE. We are told “soon”. • June: S4 review: committees are formed. 17 physics proposals. Finish review by June. Money this summer. • post CD0 – funding of Project Offices at FNAL/BNL. It is likely that university/lab proposals to DOE will be coordinated through the Project Offices. We are working to coordinate S4 work with Project Office. • ~early summer 2010: CD1 review of whole project by DOE • ~mid to late summer: CD review of S4 work by NSF

  13. This Meeting • Yesterday: face-to-face meetings between DUSEL and DOE lab organizations. • DUSEL Lab • DOE Project Organization • NSF and DOE plans • IB will meet to consider new collaboration organization plan – including procedure for electing EB and Spokesperson

  14. Project Phases • Phase 1: IRRATIONAL EXHUBERANCE • Phase 2: PROBLEMS, WORK, AND SETBACKS to OVERCOME • Phase 3: SUCCESS

  15. Let’s get ourselves into PHASE 2!

  16. The Interim Executive Board • E. Blucher, Chicago (Chair) • A. Bernstein, LLNL • B. Fleming, Yale • E. Kearns, Boston • J. Klein, Penn • K. Lande, Penn • R. KcKeown, Caltech • R. Rameika, FNAL • K. Scholberg, Duke • J. Siegrist, LBL • H. Sobel, UC Irvine • G. Sullivan, Maryland • R. Svoboda, UC Davis and M. Diwan, BNL (ex-officio) This Interim Board will eventually be replaced by an Executive Board formed by the more representative Institutional Board. R.Svoboda

  17. Institutional Board • ANL: M. Goodman • Boston: E. Kearns • BNL: M.Diwan • Caltech: R. McKeown • UC Davis: R.Svoboda • UC Irvine: H.Sobel • UCLA: H.Wang • Chicago: E.Blucher • Colorado State: N.Buchanan • Columbia: L.Camilieri • Drexel: C.Lane • Duke: K.Scholberg, C.Walter • FNAL: R.Rameika • Indiana: M.Messier • INFN(Catania): R.Potenza • Kansas State: T.Bolton • LANL: C.Mauger • LLNL: A.Bernstein • LBL: R.Kadel • LSU: T.Kutter • Maryland: G.Sullivan • MIT: J.Conrad • Minnesota: M.Marshak, W.Miller • Minnesota(Duluth): A.Habig • Penn: K.Lande • Princeton: K.McDonald • RPI: J.Napolitano • S.Carolina: C.Rosenfeld • Tennessee: T.Handler • Texas: K.Lang • Tufts: H.Gallagher • Wisconsin: K.Heeger • Yale: B.Fleming Current Issues: White Paper Collaboration Governance R.Svoboda

More Related