General Comments
** Single laptop for all presentations
** Are we going to provide the code for the reviewers
George:
- Welcome to the review
- introductions
Andy:
- Add a slide - what is opsim (an emulator of the gross telescope and site properties and a scheduler)
- slide 6: m2 vendor selected for the figuring will take 2 years
- slide 8: slew time is minimum not median (dont change)
- integration time needs checking as is 16+16+2+2
- Total number of exposures in 10 years
- slide 12: Replace org chart with slide 16
- note it is systems engineering and telescope and site (Scheduler is
- under telescope and site)
- slide 15: note just validate changes also validate that we meet the SRD
- slide 17: Total simulation resources
- In FTEs, all sims, highlight baseline resources for opsim (break this down
- into two for sys eng and T&S) have off project resources as bar with no color
- have numbers for opsim at bottom of chart (FTE)
- Make the data size the same in the slide
Abi:
- Add a slide saying who will address which charge
- Requirements
- slide 3: add numbers (eg calibration or number or visits)
- slide 4: determined -> determine
- slide 5: state clearly that your assumption and the design is assuming that opsim represents the telescope and site and you build the scheduler within opsim
- so are the api's correct (apis are not defined but the design will support it)
- slide 6: state that opsim is a tool to optimize the science it doesnt optimize science (others do)
- Talk is very verbal - quantify it (examples are easier including the successes)
- Identify who will talk about the different aspects in future talks (e.g. Srini will talk about SSTAR)
- Needs to be shorter (30% fewer slides) and tighter and talk more on the outputs with examples
- You mention requirements and SRD but don't discuss them
- Slide 21: will the reviewers understand the plan as it is fairly complicated
- note these will be discussed in a wrap up talk
- Slide 25 - what is the new scheduler - you said 3.0 was the redesign. Need to define what is delivered by 2016.5
- Reduce slides and move images (talk over the figures)
- Ran over time
Francisco:
** how does this relate to the SRD requirements
** Move slide 14 forward to the beginning and move the second half of the talk to the beginning for context
** Move Srini's talk ahead of this?
** Rework figures to make them easier to read and cleaner than a sysml output
- slide 5: need labels on the boxes that are readable
- slide 10: completely unreadable Labels need to be bigger (or provide a handout)
- slide 11: as above
- Requirement to minimize the slew time - should be an external constraint as depends on science requirement.
- slide 12: as above
- slide 13: what does this mean - put labels
- Zeljko - lots of boxes in the diagrams (put statements into bullets and then follow the sysml tool)
- George - need an overall flow diagram, how do we make a decision
- Slide 14 is part of this but need to be nicer
- Slide 15 fonts too small, change the names for the internal version (as the names
- are duplicated)
- Slide 21 - where do the parameters come from
- Describe the algorithm in the presentation (give the logic of the process)
- Flow chart of what opsim is doing - in Abi's talk (?). This exists in previous talks
- Start with this explanation
- slide 24 - Area distribution proposals (how is this algorithm set up)
- Explain what has freedom and what doesnt (eg selection of field does but model for telescope isnt arbitrary)
- Slide 29: make this an image then could easily explain program boost
- How does the SRD feed into opsim requirements. Opsim needs a fidelity that can distinguish between baseline and minimum specs (eg number of visits).
- For example, how do errors in the sky model impact the fidelity of opsim and your sensitivity to the results
- need SRD slides and what can opsim do = why should we pay $2.5M
Srini
- Are we making the code available?
- Put more words on the slides that cover the details of what you are saying
- Dont refer to opsim 2.0
- make mysqlworkbench available for the june dry run (or at least a schema browser)
- slide 11: modification to scheduler algorithm
- slide 13: How long does it take to run and how much memory
Kem
- Slide 3: single visit depth numbers are input to opsim (or remove line)
- Note what 3.61 means
- Slide 7: what does design-design mean in the table (very cryptic naming conventions)
- Write down what JC means on a slide
- Slide 9: identify which are old and new code in the figure
- Hard to see why we are comparing to 3.61 (need to explain that it is good and why)
- Lead with back of envelope comparison then go to 3.61
- Perturbation test - change a parameter and make sure that it makes sense
Steve
- SRD slide - give Steve's SRD to Abi for earlier in the presentation
- Slide 10 - mark desired numbers
- Slide 17: do aitoff plot for these points
- Slide 25: make axes text bigger
- drop last metric example as it is complicated to explain in a short amount of time
Lynne
- explain why we need enhancements and why we are implmenting maf, e.g. to support cadence studies by the science collaborations
- extensible - used by science and opsim
- note this is redesign of sstar
- note the use of python, git, public repo etc
- compare metrics across simulations
- slide 9 and 14 of steve and lynne's presentation (same slide and show what things MAF can do)
- check the power spectrum plots to ensure they are the same
- comparing multiple surveys examples
Abi
- slide 4: need to add api for OCS
- need to add OCS emulator
- what additional functionality is required to create a virtual OCS
- if virtual OCS is implemented does T&S need anything else