IUPAP C11 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

IUPAP C11

Description:

Need to nominate C11 representative. ICFA. PANAGIC. Vera L th. IUPAP C11. 6 ... Assists in nomination of and approves Advisory Committees ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:50
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 21
Provided by: luth5
Category:
Tags: iupap | c11 | nominate

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: IUPAP C11


1
IUPAP C11
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Commission of Particles and Fields
  • Vera Lüth
  • Chair of C11

2
2
ICSU - International Council of Science
27 Unions 73 Nat. Scientific Members
IUPAP - International Union of Pure and Applied
Physics
20 Commissions
C11 - Commission On Particles and Fields
133 Members
55 contacts 35 via ICTP
NC National Contacts
3
IUPAP - C11
Commission on Particles and Field
Members Oct. 2002 Oct. 2005
V. G. Lüth A. Smith M. Turala C. Fosco R.
Godbole G. Herten T. Huang E. Iarocci A.
Sissakian S. Stapnes G. Wormser T. Yamanaka M.
Zeller
USA Chair U.K. Vice Chair Poland
Secretary Argentina India Germany China Italy
Russia Norway France Japan USA
Associate Members
E. Zas D.-O. Riska A. McDonald
C4 C12 C19
4
Future Membership of C11
  • Specific Guidelines on terms and regional
    distribution
  • Maximum term 2x three years for regular members -
  • Maximum term of three years for officers new
    crew!
  • Nomination of C11 members by national HEP
    organizations
  • US (2)
  • Russia (1)
  • Europe (6) France, Germany, Italy, UK, two
    others
  • Asia (3) China, Japan, other
  • Others (1)
  • Approval by IUPAP General Assembly in Oct. 2005,
    where candidates names are presented by C11
    chair
  • This will be a topic of discussion at our next
    meeting, but the nomination process needs to
    start in early 2005
  • Your input is most welcome! Who will stay on??

5
C11
  • Important Working Groups
  • International Committee For Future Accelerators
  • J. Dorfan (chair) http//www.fnal.gov/directorat
    e/icfa/
  • C11 approves nominations for ICFA members
  • Particle and Nuclear Astrophysics and
  • Gravitation Committee
  • Bettini (chair) http//www.lngs.infn.it/site/exp
    pro/panagic
  • Need to nominate C11 representative

ICFA PANAGIC
6
Current Panagic Membership
  • Alessandro Bettini (chair)
  • Barry Barish (C11 replace) ?
  • Hans Blümer
  • Massimo Cerdico (AC2)
  • Enrique Fernandez
  • Maria Victoria Fonseca
  • Joshua Friedman
  • Wick Haxton (C12 replace)
  • Takaaki Kajiita
  • Paolo Lipari (C4)
  • Victor Matveev
  • John Peoples (replace)
  • David Sinclair
  • Steven Ritz (C19)
  • Michel Spiro (replace)
  • Proposed replacements
  • Angela Olinto

7
Conference Oversight and IUPAP Sponsorship
  • IUPAP/C11 sponsors ICHEP and LP in alternate
    years
  • C11 selects among proposal for future venues to
    assure broad international participation and
    excellent scientific leadership
  • C11 provides general guidelines/advice on format
    and organization
  • General format and guidelines differences
    between ICHEP and LP
  • C11 Recommendations on ICHEP and LP
  • consult C11 wepage www.iupup.org/commissions

  • http//www.ifj.edu.pl/IUPAP/iupap-c11.html
  • Assist in international contacts and issues
  • Assists in nomination of and approves Advisory
    Committees
  • provides IUPAPs sponsorship and financial
    support
  • C11 does not formulate conference program
  • Conference Organizers are fully responsible and
    empowered to shape the events.
  • Conference Organizers are expected to follow
    IUPAP guidelines and report to C11/IUPAP!
  • consult IUPAP webpages for guidelines
    www.iupap.org/policies.shtml

8
C11
Tradition of more than 40 Years
Past Conferences
Future Conferences
Glasgow Beijing Warsaw Hamburg Vancouver Stanford
Osaka Rome Amsterdam Batavia
ICHEP - 94 LP - 95ICHEP-96 LP - 97 ICHEP -
98 LP - 99 ICHEP - 00 LP - 01 ICHEP - 02 LP - 03
ICHEP - 04 Beijing LP - 05 Uppsala ICHEP
- 06 Moscow LP - 07 Daegu ---------------
---------------- ICHEP - 08 Philadelphia LP0 -
09 Hamburg ICHEP 10 Paris
Beijing Uppsala Moscow
9
Continuing US Visa Problems
  • Procedures and policies for US visa approval have
    impacted many scientists, from students to
    laboratory directors.
  • Even though procedures at the consulates have
    been streamlined, they overall process remains
    inefficient, unnecessarily length and opaque.
  • There is growing recognition that this situation
    is severe and consequences might be irreparable!
  • Various proposals, including one by leaders of
    the major US science organizations are being
    evaluated by US government agencies. It is hoped
    that some of them will get implemented,
  • multi-entry multi-year visa for students and
    scientists with continuing
  • engagements
  • elimination of repetitive drawn-out
    security checks
  • return pass ports to applicants while
    application is being considered
  • special procedures for conferences and
    meetings with international
  • participation
  • addition of trained staff and other
    resources to improve processing of
  • applications
  • Consistent with its mandate IUPAP has advised
    that it will not sponsor any conference in the
    USA until free access of scientists can be
    guaranteed.

10
New Initiative Authorship of Publications
  • As Collaborations supporting major experiments
    grow, we need to rethink authorship of
    publications
  • Author lists cannot continue to grow, because
  • they do not appropriately credit those who have
    contributed
  • they do not allow others to identify those most
    knowledgeable about the results, thereby
    hampering scientific discourse
  • Lead to absurd publication and citation records
  • Proposal for formation of Working Group reporting
    to C11
  • Representing large collaborations, Laboratories,
    C11, plus individuals
  • Interacting with IUPAP WG on publications
  • Consultation with publishers
  • Outcome is uncertain most of us recognize the
    problem, but solutions are difficult. Consensus
    will be hard to achieve!
  • Can we formulate guidelines? Collaborations have
    their own way?
  • Is C11 prepared to formulate a charge and time
    line for the WG?

11
Proposed Agenda for Authorship Discussions
  • Representatives of the major collaborations have
    been invited to give a very brief overview of
    what their current practices are, or/and what
    they are planning for the future.
  • These presentation should be very brief, 5 min
    max.
  • Most of the time should be reserved for
    discussion
  • 1) 10 min Introduction Vera
    Luth, C11
  • 2) 45 min Reports on current
    practices/plans in large collaborations
  • H1 Max Klein
  • D0 Dimitri Denisov
  • CDF Daniel Withson
  • BABAR David MacFarlane
  • Belle Steve Olsen
  • ATLAS Rüdiger Voss
  • CMS Chunhua Jiang
  • 3) 50 min Open Discussion
  • 4) 15 min Conclusions
  • Should we form a working group to continue this
    evaluation?
  • What is the charge? what can we expect?
    membership?
  • Wednesday, Aug. 18, 2000 2200, Conference
    Room 7, 2nd Floor of BICC

12
Proposed WG on Authorship
  • Should C11 initiate the formation of a WG?
  • What is the charge? what can we expect?
  • Membership?
  • Representatives of large Collaborations
  • Atlas, CMS, LHC_B, ALICE?
  • CDF, DO, BTEV,MINOS
  • BELLE, BABAR, Super-K,.
  • Representatives of large HEP Labs?
  • C11 members
  • Representatives of universities, smaller labs
  • Chairperson(s)?, Secretary?
  • What is the time scale?
  • How to arrange meetings? Website??
  • First Discussions
  • Wednesday, Aug. 18, 2000 2200, Conference
    Room 7, 2nd Floor of BICC

13
World Conference on Physics and Sustainable
Development, Durban, S.A. Oct. 31st Nov, 2nd,
2005.
  • Sponsored by IUPAP, jointly with UNESCO and ICTP,
    as well as the S.A. Institute of Physics, as part
    of the celebration of 2005 as the Year of Physics
  • 400-500 participants from developed and
    developing nations
  • Goal
  • Examine contributions that physics has made to
    society in the past
  • Formulate and sharpen action-oriented plans for
    contributions it can and should make in the
    future
  • Engage organizations of physicists in the
    collective implementation
  • Four themes
  • Physics and Economic Development
  • Physics and Health
  • Energy and Environment
  • Physics Education
  • For additional information www.wcpsd.org

14
Other Activities and Events of Interest
  • Interactions- world-wide PR from 17 HEP
    institutions
  • Support for science education K-12
  • Encouragement of YPP Young Particle Physicists
  • World Year of Physics and HEP Involvement
  • Recommendation
  • Connect to Interactions
  • Activate and engage national societies
  • add 3 physicists in each major laboratory who
    are from another country
  • to enhance international coordination at
    the grass roots
  • Data Grid Developments
  • International LC Developments Recommendation
    on LC Technology, Report from ICFA
  • World Conference on Physics and Sustainable
    Development, Durban, South Africa Oct. 31st to
    Nov. 2, 2005

15
AGENDA for Meeting of IUPAP COMMISSION C11
  • 1. 1100 1105 Welcome to C11 members and
    guests.
  • 2. 1105 1110 Adoption of Agenda
  • 3. 1110 1115 Approval of Minutes of the C11
    Meeting at Fermilab
  • 4. 1115 1135 Chair Report V.
    Lüth
  • 5. 1135 1150 Report from ICFA
    J. Dorfan / R. Rubinstein
  • 6. 1150 - 1205 Report of the LP03 (Fermilab)
    C. Newman-Holmes
  • 7. 1205 1220 Report on present conference
    (ICHEP04) H.S. Chen
  • 1220 1250 Lunch break
  • 8. 1250 1305 Preparations for LP05
    (Uppsala) T. Ekelof
  • 9. 1305 1335 Proposals for future ICHEP and
    LP Conferences.
  • ICHEP06 Moscow
    A. Sissakian
  • ICHEP08
    (proposal) P. Langacker
  • 10. 1335 1410 Authorship in large
    collaborations V. Lüth
  • 11. 1410 1430 Any Other Business
  • (written reports from C4, C12 and
    C19 are expected)
  • 1430 Adjourn

16
Reserve
17
APS Guidelines on Authorship
  • Authorship should be limited to those who have
    made significant contributions to the concept,
    executions, or interpretations of the research
    study.
  • All those who have contributed in this way should
    be listed as authors.
  • Other individuals who have contributed and are
    not identified as authors should be acknowledged.
  • Sources of financial support should be disclosed.
  • All Collaborators share some degree of
    responsibility for any paper they co-author.
  • Some co-authors have responsibility for the
    entire paper as an accurate, verifiable report of
    research. They include those who are accountable
    for the integrity of the critical data, carry out
    the analysis, write the manuscript, present major
    findings at conferences, or provide scientific
    leadership for junior colleagues.
  • Coauthors who make specific, limited
    contributions to a paper are responsible for
    them, but may only have limited responsibility
    for other results.

18
APS Guidelines on Authorship (cont.)
  • While not all coauthors may be familiar with all
    aspects of the research presented, collaborations
    should have in place an appropriate process for
    reviewing and ensuring the accuracy and validity
    of the reported results,.
  • Every coauthor should have the opportunity to
    review the manuscript before its submission.
  • Collaborations should have a process to archive
    and verify the research record to facilitate
    communication and allow all authors to be fully
    aware of the entire work, critique it and pose
    questions concerning the work and be able to
    share the data prior to and after publication.
  • All members of a collaborations should be aware
    of and understand this process.

19
Current Problem Visa to USA
C11
  • Because of US role in International Conflicts
    enhanced security measures have been imposed to
    control the borders
  • Visa applicants are interviewed in person at US
    consulates
  • Consular officers are personally liable for any
    action that might lead to
  • Infiltration of members of terrorist
    organizations
  • Exchange of information on design of WMD or their
    import
  • Illegal immigration
  • The new enforced procedures take months, with the
    applicants passport held by the consulate.
  • As a result, several delegates to LP03 and other
    conferences have not received US Visa (others
    chose not to apply)
  • Either denied without reason specified
  • Not approved in time for conference
  • NAS and DOE as well as personal intervention
    helped only in a few cases.
  • In case of problems, please contact your
    countrys C11 conference contact or a C11 member
    and/or record your problems at special NAS
    website http//www7.nationalacademies.org/visas/V
    isa_Questionnaire.html
  • The current US procedures resulted in a violation
    of IUPAPs requirement of free access of bona
    fide scientists to its conferences!
  • The IUPAP Council will address this during its
    Meeting in October 2003!

20
C11
Improve Communication
  • Contracts with C11 or its Members
  • Michal Turala (Secretary)
    Michal.Turala_at_cern.ch
  • Vera Lüth (Chair)
    Luth_at_slac.stanford.edu
  • General Information
  • http//www.iupap.org and http//www.ifj.edu.pl/I
    UPAP/iupap-c11.html
  • http//www.icsu.org/
  • Problem with Contacts in smaller countries in
  • Eastern Europe/former SU
  • Western Europe
  • Africa, South America, Mideast (ITCP)
  • Americas (USLC)
  • Asia (Japan?)
  • Need Volunteers
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com