[Rgc] ERR

[Eugene Pasyuk]

>From the past ERR experience each agenda item should include discussion time. Something like this:

  RG C Overview: Configuration, Experiments, Plans (30+15') (Item 1)
  Longitudinally polarized target (40+20') (Item 3)
  Beamline: Raster, Moller shield (20+10') (Item 2)
  Experiments: Simulations, Analysis andPublication Plans (45+15') (Item 4)

Show the draft to Patrizia. She usualy makes some adjustments to agenda and timing. Also need to include breaks, coffee, lunch.

-Eugene


-----Original Message-----
From: Rgc <rgc-bounces at jlab.org> on behalf of Sebastian Kuhn <kuhn at jlab.org>
Date: Friday, April 26, 2019 at 9:54
To: "rgc at jlab.org" <rgc at jlab.org>
Subject: [Rgc] ERR

    Dear members of RG C,

    as you have (hopefully) seen, we are all set for the ERR on MONDAY, JUNE 17. As requested by Patrizia, I have set up an official ERR page at
    https://clasweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/RGC_ERR
    which we will have to populate with more documents, information etc. as we get closer. Please let me know if you are o.k. with me forwarding this link to her and the review committee.

    To avoid confusion, I have renamed our old “ERR page” as
    https://clasweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/RGC_ERR_internal
    so we can continue to collect preliminary material, relevant information and tasks. As you can see, much work remains to be done!

    Here are our high-priority items that ALL SPOKESPERSONS and collaborators are kindly but urgently asked to work on:

    - Raster studies to determine the optimal configuration of raster size, target length/diameter/setup (1 cells vs. 2) and Møller shield for the two configurations we would like to run with: FTon and FTout
    - Send me feedback on the Strawman proposal for a preliminary run plan and estimate the expected rates, statistics, and physics impact for YOUR channel. NOTE: Patrizia made it very clear that if we “waffle” on the precise running conditions we will go down in flames!
    - As you can see in the charge, we MUST make clear statements on which detectors we NEED (LTCC? RICH? FMT? FTon?) with JUSTIFICATION based on the physics reach (or, respectively, loss) with/without those detectors.
    - We need to convince the committee that we know how to analyze our data expeditiously and PUBLISH! I talked with Patrizia about that and she said that, yes, EG1-DVCS is a good example but we ALSO have to explain why other experiments (EG1b, EG4) took so much longer and how we are going to avoid those pitfalls. Note: She agrees that it would be reasonable to expect that at least the standard CLAS12 calibration and analysis software (coatjava etc.) will be in good shape by the time we run (there’s hope!). However, we need to assess our simulation needs and have realistic plans for those!

    Let me know if you have any concerns, ideas, contributions… our next meeting is this Thursday, May 2, at 9:30 (we decided to combine polarized target and RGC meetings for now to get a more frequent meeting schedule every 2 weeks!)

    - Sebastian

    _______________________________________________
    Rgc mailing list
    Rgc at jlab.org
    https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/rgc