Aug 22, 2002 from: Carilli (ccarilli@nrao.edu) to: ISAC re: ISAC report to the ISSC in Groningen, August 2002 cc: J. Tarter, H.Butcher, R.Ekers Following are a few notes from the ISSC meeting in Dwingeloo relevant to the ISAC. Following these is the written report of the ISAC to the ISSC in Groningen. The powerpoint presentations given by the ISAC and EMT in Groningen can be found at: http://www.lofar.org/ska2002/programme.html These include the intro and summary science talks, plus the summary of the ISAC review of the WP designs. ****TO THE FACILITATORS OF THE ISAC-DEFINED 'BREAKOUT' SESSIONS: We needs your notes on the discussions by end of Sept. or so, in order to incorporate them into the WP design review report. Comments on these discussions from other ISAC members are also welcome. Thanks, Chris Carilli Socorro NM USA --------------------------- Notes from ISSC meeting I. ISAC membership: A report was made on the recent changes to the ISAC membership involving 4 working group chairs. A general discussion was held on ISAC membership. The ISSC plans to set two year renewable term limits. Renewing a term will be by agreement of the individual, the ISSC, and the ISAC chairs. The ISSC encouraged ISAC members to solicit participation of a broader community in the scientific working groups, but official appointment to the ISAC is under the jurisdiction of the ISSC. AI: Note from CC to all ISAC members asking if they want to participate. II. Funds: The issue of travel funds for ISAC and EMT members was discussed. The ISSC proposes to allow the new project director a discretionary budget which would include a limited amount of said funds. III. WP review: It was agreed that the ISAC would provide a written report on the WP designs by October 2002. This report will be based on the current compliance matrix, revised according to discussions in Groningen and more detailed review by the WGs. It was also made clear to the ISSC that this review is very preliminary. AI: WG review of current compliance matrix for errors. CC/SR written report to ISSC. IV. Management structure: The management structure of the project was discussed in the context of the appointment of a new project director. CC expressed his opinion that, since the ISAC is an advisory committee, it would be most appropriate for the ISAC to report directly to the ISSC, not the project director. V. Future meetings: The next ISSC meeting is in Arecibo in January. The EMT may meet there as well, but the ISAC will not be meeting there. The ISSC requested an ISAC presence in Puerto Rico. The next full ISAC meeting will be in Geraldton. VI. Conflict of interest: CC asked whether membership on both the ISAC and a WP design proposal represented a conflict of interest? The ISSC did not think this was an issue. VII. Timeline: The timeline for selection of an SKA design was discussed. The issue was not settled, but the ISSC requested that, if possible, some indication of scientific priorities prior to the Arecibo ISSC meeting would be very useful for their deliberations. CC pointed out the very rough outline of the ISAC timeline for revision of the science case. The final priorization was to have been done in Geraldton (defining 'level 0' science), but he thought it should be possible to have an initial indication of the priorities by January 2003. AI: Attempt first-pass at determining level 0 science before January 2003. VIII. Wilkinson requested some viewgraphs for his generic SKA talk. AI: Send Peter VGs from talks in Groningen. IX. The MPI rep pointed out that a large science meeting will be held in Berlin in October, 2003, to highlight scientific capabilities and complementarity of future instrumentation including SKA, NGST, ALMA. X. An SKA simulations working group was discussed. The relative responsibilities of the various advisory committees (EMT, ISAC, Site) with respect to the WP design proposers was unclear. ========================================================================= August 16, 2002 from: C. Carilli (NRAO) and S. Rawlings (Oxford) to: International SKA Steering Committee re: Report on ISAC activities: 5/02 - 8/02 Following is a report of the ISAC activities over the last 3 months. A. New working group chairs: we had to find new chairs for 5 out of 9 working groups. The new list is as follows: Working Group Chair ------------- ----- Intergalactic medium L.Feretti lferetti@ira.bo.cnr.it Life cycle of stars S.Dougherty Sean.Dougherty@hia.nrc.ca Early universe and LSS F.Briggs fbriggs@astro.rug.nl Transient phenomena J.Lazio lazio@rsd.nrl.navy.mil Spacecraft tracking/telemetry NEW D.Jones dj@sgra.jpl.nasa.gov Galactic and nearby galaxies NEW J.Dickey john@astro.umn.edu old: psackett@astro.rug.nl AGN and supermassive BHs NEW H.Falcke hfalcke@mpifr-bonn.mpg.de old: dj@sgra.jpl.nasa.gov Galaxy formation NEW T.vd Hulst vdhulst@astro.rug.nl old: ccarilli@nrao.edu Solar system science NEW Gurwell or Redman (proposed) B. White paper reviews for Groningen: Once the new WG chairs were in place, each WG went through an intensive process of evaluating the SKA WP designs in the context of the level 1 science goals as delineated in Berkeley and Bologna. The results are tabulated at: http://www-astro.physics.ox.ac.uk/~sr/ska/ska_matrix.html These have been communicated to the ISSC, EMT, WP proposers, and Groningen attendees. C. Telecons: part of the white paper review process involved ISAC telecons during the month of July. Minutes of these telecons have been distributed, and will also appear on the SKA web page (and on Carilli's home page). D. Planned activities in Groningen a. Participate in WP review: discuss ISAC-defined critical issues, advise ISSC on trade-offs, possible compromises, and begin the prioritization process b. Discuss internal ISAC issues i. main issues: 1. role and timeline for ISAC in context of SKA design selection 2. process and timeline for revision of science case document (emphasizing `missing science' and making all areas much more quantitative, including an SKA simulator, graphics, ...) The current goal is to have a new Taylor-Braun document by the end of the tenure of CC/SR, including concrete proposals for key science based on DRM specs for the SKA. ii. other issues 1. future SKA science meetings: Oxford/UK (11/02), Bonn/AGN?, Geraldton/SKA, general science meeting in 2004? 2. How to involve wider community (theorists, etc...)? 3. science memo series, web forum, speaker list, formal telecons? 4. ISAC membership: term limits, size/scope of ISAC, WG definitions? 5. critical question: funding for ISAC/other travel? E. Near future activities a. Written reports on design concept WPs to ISSC based on preliminary reviews and subsequent discussions in Groningen (by Sept 02). b. Formalize telecons for discussion of progress on science case revision, and open web forum and science memo series. Again, the initial emphasis will be on completeness. c. Perform simulations and calculations required to clarify outstanding issues and quantify level 1 science goals. -------- Brief summary of ISAC action items resulting from discussions in Groningen: 1. SR/CC will generate timeline with specific milestones for the revision of science case documents. 2. WG leaders will identify key calculations required to resolve outstanding issues. These must be done (at the very least) before Geraldton. Some examples: HI survey volume required? configuration: 30 vs. 100's of stations? PP-disks: how low can you go? Pulsars: can surveys be done with only 1sq.deg? 3. CC/SR will distill discussions in Groningen, and incorporate into the preliminary WP review document by October 2002 (the emphasis here is preliminary). Session scribes and WG chairs will communicate notes to CC/SR by end August. 4. Rough outline of what is needed to revise science case: a. find missing science (4-6 Months) b. prioritize across WGs (4-6 Months) c. quantify final level 0,1 goals in detailed 'proposals' (1yr) 5. Telecon series will be as-required. No need was seen for ISAC meeting until Geraldton. -------------------