AMT F2F Jan 28-30, 2015
AUI offices, Washington, DC
Contact: Melan Hebert-Terleckyj
Courtyard Marriott Embassy Row
| Phil Jewell
|| Courtyard Marriott Embassy Row
| Satoru Iguchi
|| Courtyard Marriott Embassy Row
| Pierre Cox
| Stuartt Corder
|| 1/28 10:30
|| 2/2 17:30
|| Courtyard Marriott Embassy Row
|| Change to JW on 30th
| Wolfgang Wild
|| 1/27 15:35 at IAD
|| 1/30 14:00
|| Courtyard Marriott Embassy Row
|| KL562 departing 18:05 from IAD
Wednesday, Jan 28, 11am-5pm
Initial discussions regarding potential issues to add to the agenda was held. Concerns over the purchase of spare parts/who does what was raised.
Decision: The current Observatory Activities Report should be deployed. In addition, the person who has been named to be Subsystem Scientist to the PI View of the Project Tracker should also take on the task of getting comments for a PI view of the (Web) Shift Log Tool (or some equivalent). In addition to the reports generally generated from that tool, a restricted set of items/filters for external view should be implemented to allow for external people to display activities at the array for a given night subject to specific limitations/desires which are (somewhat) tunable to allow more or less information to be displayed. It is understood that this implementation will potentially take some time and will have to be prioritized against other activities of developers in the same area. It was also noted that "Configuration Reporting" should be done monthly on the science portal and should reflect within small deltas the nominal configuration plan for a cycle. It was also noted that the optimal reporting cycle for executive balance should be ~2 cycles/years and that annual reports will be generated. It was also discussed that the monthly highlights, or a distilled version, could be readily posted to the web.
b) Decision on QA2 semi-pass counting towards Executive Balance
Request for further information: What is the executive balance of current QA2 semi-pass? The general consensus is that if the QA2 semi-pass remains small and (as intended) decays, then this is an issue of limited importance, however, depending on the current balance, we expect to propose that we not count these executions but track annually the balance and quantity of QA2 semi-pass. Deadline for final decision is mid-March to allow for accounting to be adjusted (if need be) once PI science is in focus again in April. Also, some more details are required in the quality of QA2 semi pass vs QA2 pass. It is understood that QA2 semipass is not obviously useful data but we would like more details on the differences.
c) ALMA Paper Authorship: SC to distribute proposed higher tier suggestions and JAO participants before the meeting
AI: Operations Managers will discuss with their managers and staff which papers individuals feel compelled to be on. Now that the more detailed outline has been distributed, OMs should gather information and report soon (~1 week) who needs to be on which papers. It is expected that more people (including some research professional staff, i.e., engineers and developers that require publication as part of their jobs) may be on the summary/overview paper. Specific science comment/interest should be relevant for object specific papers.
AI: JAO will meet regarding the papers Tuesday upon return to Chile and define the JAO list. It is likely that all JAO scientists will be in "Tier 3" of the overview paper. Fewer will be on the object specific papers.
Decision: The "Main ALMA Technical Paper" (title to be decided) should kick off very soon and should be the intended main avenue for credit to the construction project. This will be "THE ALMA Reference".
AI: PC will kick off the technical paper
Decision: We should establish a general framework for such programs in the future, e.g., development commissioning, long baseline+high frequency, so that if such papers are desired there is a predetermined framework for them.
d) Internal Data Use Policy (approve, modify or reject)
Decision: The proposed solution to the "wait period" for paper submission will be made 5 days for letters and 10 days for full papers.
Decision: A proposal for the definition of test data was made by the JAO. Approval pending.
Test data: Test data is data collected for the explicit purpose of measuring, validating or demonstrating a system or calibration performance specification. This data should have little to no significance astronomically except by secondary effect, e.g., amplitude calibration specification demonstration may include repeated measurements of solar system bodies. Such data can be released by authority of the ALMA Director after some consultation with the Integrated Science Operations Team with potential further consultation with the ALMA Management Team. The data will be subject to the same 2 week preannouncement as the science verification data but is not subject to the same requirement to seek feedback on the potential sources. Technical papers can be submitted on this data within 5 days of release. If the data does potentially contain scientifically interesting results, publication submission should not occur until after 10 days.
Decision: The internal data use policy should be modified to reflect steady state expectations (no EOC in steady state except as part of science operations)
e) User Policy (approve, modify or reject)
Discussion/Request for feedback: The User Policy documentation appears to be rather broad in application. We wondered if instead of putting all this into one document it made sense to expose to the public the Principles of the Proposal Review and DDT Definition rather than including it here. However, if the nominal discussion in those basic documents is already boiled down to relatively minimal information, it is okay. The desire is to avoid having a situation where we must update several documents each time we change one basic portion of the policy. More specifically, what is the timescale for this document? For example, it includes a discussion of large programs but also mentioned ARC initiated Ph2 products. This is a mix of long and short term situations, one which does not yet exist and the other will soon change. I assume the discussion of internal data use policies, SV etc, is included to avoid releasing both documents, but again, this will require we update several documents if we change the definition. The discussion of calibration data release may need to be tied to some specific event rather than the vague in the future. Also, the language in that section may be interpreted as the calibration data would be available through a means other than the ALMA Archive whereas the intention is to specify that the calibration data is available distinctly from the PI data but all through the ALMA Archive. We suggest some refinement of this.
AI: SC to follow up with Lars regarding these points.
AI: iSOpT and the AMT shall discuss a potential mechanism by which to acknowledge calibration data papers from the archive.
1230 -1315 - Lunch
Operations Review Agenda and Attendance
Decision: The concerns about restricting potential attendance at the review will be discussed with the Operations Review Working Group
Decision: The agenda as presented is a reasonable start although the chair may have additions. There was discussion of grouping presentation by area rather than by document, but it was decided that offsite will draw heavily on IXT documentation and therefore it is desirable to have these separate discussing the overall offsite specific structure.
Some discussion of overall risk areas/goals for the review was held. Items include either approval or advice on ALMA-wide structures/management, budget overhauls/protection against fuel and exchange risk, antenna maintenance rationalization.
AI: PC will add Sakamoto to the list of attendees. (IET lead for EA)
a) Operational Performance/Status/Issues
A quick review was given. IFP and ACD situations are in recovery mode. Things other than those that are driving down AE availability are blossoming problem with LO2s (MRB held this week), hvac, chiller, and cartridge repair work. The JAO is eagerly awaiting the presence of subarrays which should allow faster engineering verification and more science time during the day. Execution efficiency neglecting weather is still high although we have now entered the period of very heavy weather problems driving us to, at times, nearly completely lost nights. We continue to press on robustness enhancements and look forward to the delivery of 2014.6 which is expected to increase stability while giving access to subarrays (tbc).
b) Operational Outlook: 2015-2016
The ASAC will receive presentations next week regarding input for priorities for Cycle 4. It is expected that timesaving/execution efficiency enhancing items will be nearly the top of the list with initial comments received already in October. Cycle 4 ObsMode
will be held in May (Socorro, NM). It is highly expected that we will have a few capabilities nearly ready to approve at that time (FDM polarization, spectral scan), and a few that should be on the cusp. Science subarrays are not intended to be offered to the community for Cycle 4 but 90-deg switching and things to support the efficiency enhancements have been given high development priority. Moving beyond May, major observatory operations activities include:
a) fine tuning of subarray observations with science and engineering.
b) combining EOC and DSO
c) assessing ADC/ICT testing/simulation capabilities and determining if recent additions/improvements are sufficient
d) 2 element interferometer will remain active at the OSF until September to be used as a test platform. AE quality may be low but the intention is to maintain these as long as 36 or more are available at the AOS
e) AOS2+ACA will remain valid as a testing platform throughout Cycle 3 as we fine tune simulation. Starting in Cycle 4 the ACA will be available in standalone and we will likely no longer experience the undersubscription.
f) It is intended that for Cycle 5 observing modes and beyond, we will rotate the meeting throughout the world to allow broader attendance.
1400-1500: Definition of Steady State Operations, Full Operations, and Semi-annual Planning
While not discussed at the meeting, the JAO intends to maintain a hard allocation of invasive time and priorities with a 6 month look ahead and a soft 6 months following. If invasive activities by the executives are required, it is unlikely that these will be fit into the schedule inside 6 months, depending on overall priority and degree of assistance needed.
We discussed in detail the definition of steady state with goals of Observing Efficiency (calibration and PI executions over total allocated time minus weather downtime) in the area of 80-85% and AE availability (discounting e.g. the two we decided to keep at the OSF for another 6 months) in the same range. Long term, steady state will be reached when we arrive at values of 90-95% for these values. A detailed breakdown of the values driving the calculation of available observing time was given and nominal discussions about how these values breakdown and how they are assessed, improved, etc was drawn on the board.
1500-1520: PM break
1520-1645: Organizational Structure of ALMA-wide groups (org chart distributed as basis) Invite Pat Donahoe
The AMT discussed this topic at some level and agreed that the IXT membership (i.e., those groups within the remit of the AMT) shall create no new reporting lines and that a member of the quadrilateral IXT reports managerial to the relevant member of the AMT. As bodies these groups report to the AMT. The AMT as a body does not report to the director's council but instead reports to the ALMA Director with informal communication to relevant executive directors. The ALMA Director then decides if issues raised from or by the AMT go to the Director's Council.
1645-1715: Setting the stage for Day 2:
a) Access to IET, ICT, ISOPT, IST Documents
b) Specific items to be discussed in ASC relationships and documentation discussion?
Dinner - 6pm
(Spanish-tapas place south of Dupont circle)
1837 M Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20036
Thursday, Jan 29, 8:30am-5pm
0800-0900 - Change Control Board: Discussion of RFW-270
270 was not approved.
0900-1100 - Document Writing/Updating/Reading [Wolfgang calls to ESAC]
1100-1200 - ICT and IST document discussion
Discussion: The IST document requests access to budget line OFF-2. This is not necessarily consistent with actual implementation and needs to be reviewed carefully.
1200-1300 - Lunch
1300-1400 - ISOPT Document Discussion
1400-1500 - IET Document Discussion including CIRM (budget portion probably not available, need to make assignments/plan)
Only discussed as a result of having some odd structural issues within the CIRM. Namely that the antenna maintenance assignments follows regional preference and is highly distinct. Also, resolution of what is implied by offsite maintenance and tier 3 needs to be addressed with some level of reality check. Much remains to be done.
1500-1520 - Afternoon Break
1520-1620 - ASC Relationships and Document Content Consistency
ASC documents were distributed and discussed but detailed comparison was not possible on the fly. Comments required later.
1620-1715 - High Level, ASC, and JAO Document Review
Principles document was discussed regarding the scope of the document. It is difficult to define exactly to what level the principles document should reach.
AI: PC will distribute a draft by late next week.
AI: SC will distribute a copy of the operations management plan by late next week.
Dinner - 6pm
Bistrot du Coin
1738 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20009
Friday, Jan 30, 8:30am-2pm
8:30 am - coffee available
Done 9:00 - 1030 - Development Items:
a) Update to workflow to coordinate activities, inject additional feedback
A refined flow chart allowing IXT injection of priorities both from the initial phases (potentially) and at evaluation (not just implementation) was drawn. The principles will be updated for this purpose. It was discussed that a call for coordinated studies to generate the next big improvement should be announced in 2016. This should be led by the IST.
b) Generate proposal for maintenance of new development projects
For the maintenance of development projects, an estimate of maintenance/operational cost will be presented to the director and to the board when the projects are presented for approval. It may be that substantial steady state operations cannot easily absorb the funding or that the estimated costs are high moving forward. A proposal for handling this cost may also be presented as part of the project for approval and may include an increase to operational funding depending on the nature of the project.
c) Approach to integration/validation: hardware vs software projects
The IXTs, in consultation with the specific teams for a given development project, will draft a plan covering the effective implementation and commissioning (or at least the effort required). This will be considered in evaluation of the development projects. Specifically the degree of operational impact should be assessed.
d) Intellectual property
It should be clear that intellectual properties rights should be included as part of the discussion of any third party delivery of hardware or software.
1030 AM Break
1045 - 1200: Major policy level items that have been contentious before or haven't been addressed (Dev. Maint discussed earlier is a major one, board action)
a) Setting of strategic vision for use of operations funds (e.g. energy strategy)
The gas pipeline was discussed and the AMT will issue a statement to the DC regarding their assessment/discussion following presentations by the ALMA Director.
b) Vague statement in vD about political/organization risks for executives but not exercised unless there is extreme need.
Not discussed. Deferred to tri lateral management agreement.
c) Other items where the review is likely to probe and potentially expose differences
1300 - 1400 Close out. Summary of Actions. Assignments. Next meeting proposal.
A face to face was scheduled in advance of the ALMA Board meeting March 9th, 1400-1800. A practice of presentations will be held April 26-27th. A face to face will nominally be held in Garching June 29-30.
Comments from the Trilateral Management Agreement:
The principles of ALMA operations should include a statement as to the core activities of offsite; IST team (core ACTIVITIES/CONTRIBUTIONS...not balanced)
Can JAO people access data from