1 / 6

FUTURE MEETINGS

FUTURE MEETINGS. For Spring 2007, several possibilities were proposed. To avoid clashes and maintain meeting rotation among parties, optimum choice would seem to be CRPP CRPP, May 7-10, 2007, Lausanne, Switzerland Agreed by CDBM and TP groups

janus
Download Presentation

FUTURE MEETINGS

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. FUTURE MEETINGS • For Spring 2007, several possibilities were proposed. To avoid clashes and maintain meeting rotation among parties, optimum choice would seem to be CRPP • CRPP, May 7-10, 2007, Lausanne, Switzerland • Agreed by CDBM and TP groups • Fall 2007 meeting will follow IAEA TCM on H-mode and ITB physics, which will be held in September (?), at Tsukuba, Japan

  2. DISCUSSION OF FUTURE DIRECTIONS OF ITPA • Starting point was assumption that ITPA will continue in somewhat similar form to present • What suggestions do we have to improve the structure and activities? • Reviewed current charge to Topical Groups, role, history, etc. • Four areas for possible improvement discussed explicitly: −Meeting organization −Community participation −Identifying High Priority issues −Responsibilities of TG Chairs

  3. Meeting organization • Unanimous expressed view was that we should break the current link between one meeting each year and a major international conference • Also support for the idea that meeting should be held in ITER center(s), with facilities to host TGs • But concern for cost implications for some parties, depending on where site(s) are located, i.e preference is for meetings in each parties ITER center, so as to maintain travel parity

  4. TG STRUCTURE AND PARTICIPATION • Restructure TGs to reduce multiple existing overlaps? • Adopt Task Force or combined Physics area/Task Force structure within ITPA? • Current trend is towards creation of additional Working Groups • “Official” membership list gives some a (false) impression of a “closed-shop” • Need to improve link/communication with community • Continuity: if TG are to be real working group, continuity of participation is essential. Tends to be somewhat random. Give greater responsibility for attendance to TGs?

  5. Identification of High Priority Research Items/Communication Channels • Need new set of definitions for high, medium, low priority physics research issues in the new context of ITER construction. Also, revise identification mechanism: • Balance of base research to ITER team has shifted, etc. • How will home teams, responsible for particular components or diagnostics, solicit physics input from across parties?, i.e. do they get international input just via ITER, or from other parties via ITPA? • This last point generated discussion on role/purpose of ITPA, which is probably beyond our ability to impact

  6. RESPONSIBILITIES OF TG CHAIRS • Load on chairs has been increasing, e.g move from 4 to 7 member parties, PIPB generation, IEA/ITPA experimental coordination and reporting, etc. • With ramp-up of ITER project, load will probably increase • Possibilities: • Nominate official lead representative to each TG from each party. • Share/rotate leadership • Coordinate ITPA activities in parties, etc

More Related