TTA Tools: Friday, 11 am MT, 1 pm ET, 27 July 2018


CV-331/SO-280/GB-bsm, 331 Hub Audio 434-817-6286


  • Action Items from 20 July 2018
    • Block diagram of the structure (Jeff, Lorant)
  • Discuss High Level Structure (All)
  • AOB


Attending: DanaBalser, JeffKern, AmyMioduszewski, MarkClaussen, LorantSjouwerman, RyanLynch, ToneyMinter

  • Action Items from 20 July 2018
    • Block diagram of the structure. JeffKern and LorantSjouwerman summarized the block diagram. The structure is Proposal->Project->Program. A Proposal contains a scientific objective which leads to one or more Allocation Requests. An Allocation Request has a request purpose, request type (e.g., VLA, VLBA, etc.), allocation type (e.g., open skies), allocation justification, and allocation flags (DDT, ToO. etc.). It was not clear if a request type and allocation flags should be one category. We should be able to flesh this out with some use cases. After time has been allocated, Projects are created which consist of one or more Programs. A Program is a set of observations that are combined to get an SRDP. An example was given that consisted of a proposal to produce an image with multi-configuration VLA data plus the GBT for the missing spacings. There are then two Projects that are created: VLA and GBT. JeffKern preferred a model where a Program is either created from a Project or another Program; that is, Programs can be recursive. In the example, there is one Program connected to the VLA Project which is to perform the combined imaging. Under this Program are the two separate Programs to perform the specific configuration observations. In contrast, LorantSjouwerman felt the top-level Program should be part of the Project. ALMA has a similar structure (with different names): Science Goal->Group Observing Unit Set->Member Observing Unit Set. MarkClaussen suggested that we should learn from ALMA's mistakes. JeffKern felt that ALMA's structure is not very flexible since one always has three layers; hence the suggestion to use recursive Programs. The rest of the committee did not have strong feelings. We then branched out into a broader discussion (see below).
  • Discuss High Level Structure. MarkClaussen, AmyMioduszewski, and ToneyMinter all made the following point in different ways: we need to consider how the review process maps to this structure. Currently "Sessions" are created in the PST (by the proposer) and these are used to prepare for the review process. These Sessions are often modified; that is, the allocations that are proposed are not always what is approved. AmyMioduszewski suggested we need another box: Allocation Award. We also need software to prepare for the TAC meeting which is similar to what is required under Program (e.g., input for the VLA Prioritizer, GBT PHT, etc.). In effect we need to create a stub Program. JeffKern suggested some block diagrams of the current process would be useful. MarkClaussen has been working on a document along these lines but with more details for the VLBA, but it will not be completed anytime soon (order of weeks). DanaBalser will pass around the documents that were produced during the brainstorming session as a starting point.
  • AOB
    • Meeting Schedule. MarkClaussen noted that next week is the proposal deadline (folks are busy) and then he is off on vacation. There is also the IAU meeting. We also need to change the time staring on 31 August when the Socorro colloquia will start. We agreed to cancel the meeting next week. DanaBalser will suggest a plan moving forward.

-- DanaBalser - 2018-07-26
Topic attachments
I Attachment Action Size Date Who Comment
PropStructure1.pdfpdf PropStructure1.pdf manage 152 K 2018-07-27 - 16:03 DanaBalser Proposal Structure (Jeff Kern and Lorant Sjouwerman)
Topic revision: r2 - 2018-07-27, DanaBalser
This site is powered by FoswikiCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding NRAO Public Wiki? Send feedback