There’s a session I’m leading in Bremerton next week on Thursday, called “DM Update for Scientists”. There are several goals:
(Re)introduce what LSST DM goals and what data products we’re going to produce (including pointers to where they can find out more)
Introduce the (new) DM team members to the science collaboration community, especially those who will be interacting with them the most (e.g., @jsick, @nidever, Colin Slater, etc.)
Give an update about new developments since last year, and plans for the following few years
Leave some time for discussion, Q&A
Given that, here’s what I roughly have in mind:
[10 min?] Introduce new people
(maybe also mention new organization?)
[20 min?] DM Overview + dev plan (MJ)
For planning, I’d re-use much of the planning talk KTL will give on Tuesday
[10 min]? DM software/algorithm highlights in new release (rhl? @jbosch?)
[10 min?] Data we plan to process (DavidN?)
[10 min?] SUI plans (gpdf? xiuxin?)
[10 min?] New communication tools (jsick?)
Questions for all of you: this is our opportunity to tell the scientific community what we feel they should know, and also for them to ask us questions and/or provide feedback. Is there anything else we really want to tell them? Or is any of the topics above not yet ready to be discussed?
PS: This is just a 0th draft (that I’ll be updating tomorrow). But comments welcome!
@mjuric We talked about this with Beth last week, we’re happy to help but can you liaise with her to make sure there’s no duplication/overlap/mixed-messaging. She’s spearheading scence communications issues for LSST it seems.
@jbosch : yes, that would be great. I’d stick to astronomically obvious functionality as much as possible (i.e., multi-band coadds == go, refactoring of module X == pass)
@ktl : OK, I can prepare a brief summary (I’ll go over it with you).
@jsick, @frossie : I think we can use this to summarize where the project is going (if a clear direction crystalizes from Beth’s meetings over the past three days), as it pertains to DM. To be honest, I was initially thinking to use this to solicit feedback and/or further testing by the community for things like Discourse. Any other plans SQuaRE may have that impact the community, this may be a good forum to ask about it (e.g., software distribution plans, etc.)
@timj, @nidever : No worries, we’ve got resuscitation crews on hand :). On a more serious note, yes, we should meet before to discuss benchmark dataset plans. I’ll set something up for Mon, Tue, or Wed (may have to be over lunch or dinner)
@xiuqin: If we’re ready, it would be good to give the community a flavor of what our data access website may look like or what kind of functionality it may support (and invite feedback). Note the “if we’re ready” qualifier! If it’s better to hold off on doing this for a few more months until the plans for “version 1” crystalize, we should do that. We can chat offline.
PS: I’m worried the list of things we wanted to present is too ambitious for the time allotted (1.5 hrs) – we may need to cut something .
Just to confirm to everyone we’re sticking with the structure laid out in the opening post of this topic. The times listed there do not include the time for discussion. Also, if there’s any time left in the end, we’ll use it for an open Q&A session.
PS: @davidciardi will try to deliver the talk via videocon; if that doesn’t work out, @xiuqin, could you do it (or nominate someone someone from the SUI team to take over)?
PPS: If you want to dry-run (or have me look at) your slides, happy to do that tomorrow evening.
[10 min]? DM software/algorithm highlights in new release
One suggestion from a new-to-DM, science perspective is that it would be nice to have a sort of “checklist” of features that an astronomer might expect from a photometry package (not just a survey pipeline) that have or have not yet been implemented. E.g.,
Overall I’m thinking if-this-was-sextractor, what would your feature list be right now, what is semi-complete, and what is the near term planned feature list. It’s definitely something that would help me understand the current capabilities of DM better.
@ctslater: “Done” is a somewhat problematic term. I prefer to think of things as getting to a minimally functional state, then a scientifically useful (state of the art) state, then a meets-the-SRD state. I’d like to eventually get to a color-coded chart that shows our progress on each component; I started working on that but got bogged down in tool issues.
Here are my slides; sorry I didn’t send them earlier. I’ll mention a number of changes we’re bringing over from the HSC side, then focus in on the new multi-band processing, which is both the biggest change (IMO) and the one for which I have the best slides.
I think this would be very useful, and I’d be happy to put some effort into it myself - but it won’t happen by tomorrow, and probably not this week. Remind if I forget (unless @ktl or @mjuric want to take the lead on it).