[G12] Fwd: g12 review

[Johann Goetz]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Marco Battaglieri <battaglieri at ge.infn.it>
Date: Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: g12 review
To: Eugene Pasyuk <pasyuk at jlab.org>, Keith Griffioen <griff at physics.wm.edu>,
Dave Ireland <david.ireland at glasgow.ac.uk>, Gerald Gilfoyle <
gilfoyle at jlab.org>
Cc: Raffaella De Vita <raffaella.devita at ge.infn.it>, Michael Dugger <
dugger at jlab.org>, Yordanka Ilieva <jordanka at jlab.org>, Lei Guo <
lguo at jlab.org>, Silvia Niccolai <niccolai at ipno.in2p3.fr>, Johann Goetz <
theodore.goetz at gmail.com>


Dear Eugene
I was not aware of the g12 analysis review in the DPWG. I received a
request to review the g12 cascade analysis but  I'm holding till the g12
review committee (yours) will establish the status of the general g12
review.
I totally agree with you: its a big waist of time and duplication of
efforts. Analysis review is a sensible issue that we are keeping
discussing at each collaboration meeting and we need to better
coordinate any actions in this direction. It's strange that g12 group
did not pointed it out during the discussion we had at the last
collaboration meeting.
Cheers
Marco

Eugene Pasyuk wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> It was brought to my attention that while we are working on the g12
> run group review there is another g12 analysis review ongoing in the
> deep process working group. This is time-like Compton
> scattering.
https://www.jlab.org/Hall-B/shifts/index.php?display=admin&task=paper_review&rid=6996371&operation=view
> This review has started in April of 2015 while the group review has
> started in October 2014.
> Interestingly enough this analysis note has twice as many pages as the
> group one.
>
> To me it looks like a lack of coordination and communication between
> the physics working groups and even within g12 group.
> The whole point of the group review was to avoid duplication of
> efforts in reviewing the same things over and over.
>
> Can anyone comment why did this happen and what are we going to do
> about it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Eugene
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/g12/attachments/20150630/df019c5f/attachment.html>