Butler
Glendenning
Lucas
Mangum
Raffi
Schwarz
Scott
Tatematsu
Wilson
Minutes
Subsystem Scientist Activities (all)
Jeff Mangum -- Control ATF monitor and control commissioning. Good experience relevant to
the final ALMA Monitor and Control.
John Richer -- Telescope Calibration [I am unable to attend the SSR meeting tomorrow as I will be on my way to
Munich for the ESAC meeting - my apologies]. My Subsystem project
Scientist report is empty again!
Peter Schilke -- Data Reduction User Interface
Steve Scott -- Correlator Discussed correlator test plan elements with Jim Pisano.
Debra Shepherd -- Off-Line Analysis
Leonardo Testi -- Observing Program Preparation I have been discussing the test plan with Debra, particularly for the needs of
the ObsPrep subsystem. We need a set of detailed UseCases for all supported
observing setups, in order to make sure that we can serve every customer with
the current ObsPrep design. Ideally one may want to use the Design Reference
Mission, but that will arrive too late, I think.
Somewhat related to this topic:
We need to specify the requirements on how the user is expected to
interact with the tool to enter each parameter (more or less), now
is the time of "area to be mapped" for each source (the TargetArea,
in the OT jargon), this is the contiguous area that will be mapped around a
given source. Unless some of you disagrees, I am going to give the following
recommendation:
The user shall be able to define the following forms:
Circle (typing text: typing ra,dec of center and radius
interactively: center on mouse click, radius dragging the mouse
from a source list: ra,dec of center and radius)
Ellipse (typing text: typing ra,dec of center and semi-maj, semi-min, pa-maj
interactively: center on mouse click, axes/pa dragging the mouse
from a source list: ra,dec of center and semi-maj, semi-min, pa-maj)
Rectangle (typing text: typing ra,dec of center and long,short-side, pa-long
interactively: center on mouse click, drag for the rest
from a source list: as typed text)
Polygon (typing text: number and ra,dec of vertices or name of a file
interactively: click each vertex
from a source list: name of a file containing the vertices)
Another interesting issue that came along in some discussion we had is
whether multiple TargetAreas, that is non-contiguous mapped areas,
should be allowed to reside within the same SB. I am not in favour
of this, as it complicates several things, but it may be useful in
some cases (assuming that the rest of the system can survive it).
Francois Viallefond -- Archive
Chris Wilson -- Pipeline I read the revised documents from PDR (which I hadn't read at the time
of PDR) and the PDR report and Brian and Gianni's response to it. I
will need to review the documents again for CDR1, though. I've also
been participating more in the datared and protopipeline telecons.
Mel Wright -- Scheduling I ran some tests for ALMA dynamic scheduling using Chajnantor
weather data for 2002 Oct with a simple algorithm which
schedules the highest priority project for which conditions
are suitable. Scheduling blocks were a fixed length of 2 hours.
The goal of these test was to check that dynamic scheduling of
SBs gave good completion of the highest priority projects.
The trial runs were for 5 days using different seeing
thesholds. The long term behaviour was good. In all cases,
the highest priority projects were sheduled and completed
as and when conditions permitted. Further trials are planned
with different mixes of projects, thesholds and weather.
Note: Can you reply to Leonardo's questions by email as he could not
attend?
ALMA Week (R. Lucas / J. Schwarz)
ALMA Week was last week in Victoria. A comprehensive summary of
the Science issues was given yesterday at the Science IPT meeting.
The Operations Group met twice during the week. Joe and Robert
represent the Science IPT in this group. The group is led by Stephane
Guilloteau and David Silva from ESO. The base of the work will be the
Project Plan (chapter 6). It is clear that a number of changes will
have to be made in this plan.
On Science operations the group intends to propose plans e.g. for
proposal reviewing process, user interaction with programs, quality
control ... The group discusses all aspects of operations, including
array availability and maintenance issues.
Action List (R. Lucas)
CDR1 comments (due 2003-06-15): do not forget to send in your
comments (required from the subsystem scientists on their own
subsystems).
From Gianni/Brian list:
Design reference mission for interim operation
Define first standard modes for interim operations
Define Pipeline audit and performance
Define and participate in AIPS++ performance tests
1, and 2 need input from the Science IPT. Point 4 is well
started. We discussed point 3. More detailed, derived requirements
are probably needed, somewhat like had been done by Steve Scott and
Jim Pisano for the Correlator. This issue will probably be
addressed at the CDR1 review at the end of this month. Christine
Wilson will make sure this happens through her CDR1
comments. Science-based performance requirements are also needed.
Staging Plan for Observing Modes (with Science IPT through the
Design Reference Plan)
On input
from software subsystems: redefine requirement priorities. Here also
input is expected through the CDR1 review process.
AIPS++ news (B. Glendenning)
Tim Cornwell has resigned from his management duties. Consequence for
ALMA Computing IPT:
Lindsey Davis takes the lead of the Pipeline Subsystem (as
originally intended)
Brian Glendenning is managing the Prototype Pipeline Project.
Face to Face meeting (date and venue) It is proposed to have our face-to-face meeting in Socorro
around the end of October. A two day meeting Friday/Saturday is preferred.
Possible dates:
Oct 17/18
Oct 24/25
Oct 31/Nov 01
Nov 07/08
Nov 14/15
Nov 21/22
Nov 28/29
Can you mention your availabilty to R. Lucas?
Date of next phone meeting
According to the schedule the following one will be on:
2003, July 09th 15:00 UT.
$Id: 2003-06-11.html,v 1.5 2003/07/02 07:13:11 lucas Exp lucas $
