firstname.lastname@example.org Agenda Feedback from TWEPP-12 TWEPP-12 Proceedings: status Scientific Committee Schedule for the Scientific Committee TWEPP-13 preparation AOB TWEPP SC Nov. 2012 2
email@example.com Feedback from TWEPP-12 TWEPP SC Nov. 2012 3 Report sent some time ago Globally positive at the exception of the “finger food” and the lack of space for posters The things we tried to correct with respect to last year Timing of the session very good this year Working Groups very good feedback this year Invited talks quality improved Posters The idea of splitting the poster session in two well received We should keep it even though it complicates the organisation of the working groups If possible keep the posters in place for the full week
firstname.lastname@example.org The local organization did a very good job and managed efficiently the limited space. I find some remarks about the food and the accommodation a bit exaggerated. There have been a number of remarks related to the badges. We should keep them in mind for the next TWEPP’s. The fees have been maintained at a reasonable level, taking into account that the tutorial was included. We should try and continue in the direction of maintaining them in the same range. However, we should keep in mind that the ACEOLE contribution is now gone; the sponsoring of students will disappear but a fraction of the ACEOLE money was also used to pay invited talks and the tutorial. These last topics will have to be covered by other means. The timing of the sessions has been very well respected. We should keep the 5-mn slack introduced this year for all the talks. The invited talks have been better received than last year and we should continue our effort to find good subjects and good speakers. The request for company talks is valid but avoiding marketing talks is often very difficult. The posters remain a difficult topic. The split into two poster sessions has been appreciated and we could maintain it. The remark saying that each session should contain posters of every type is valid I think. If there is enough space, we could still keep the two sessions but let the posters in place for the all duration of TWEPP. In case we keep two poster sessions, we have to have the working groups convened in parallel. First we have to decide which of these working groups are to be maintained; then, in order to have the working groups after the related orals or posters have been presented, we could have the two poster sessions on Tuesday and Wednesday and the WG meetings on Thursday. In terms of program, the amount of non-LHC topics is increasing which is good. The amount of presentations from the machine side is still very low. The few suggestions received can certainly be implemented (for most of them). I do like the idea of orals and posters ranking as well as the possibility of having the pictures of registered people (and Indico allows loading files, e.g. pictures, in the registration process). TWEPP SC Nov. 2012 4
email@example.com Proceedings Status TWEPP SC Nov. 2012 5 So far 90 submissions out of 120 possible 36 the last 3 days... Still a few to come 108 published out of 131 in 2011 113 published out of 131 in 2010 69 still being reviewed or back for revision Comments on quality?
firstname.lastname@example.org Scientific Committee TWEPP SC Nov. 2012 6 Chairman Co-chair for 2013: Jorgen and Philippe Proposal for a new member No feedback from our German representative this year I propose we replace him Lutz Feld Perugia member of the committee
email@example.com Schedule for the SC TWEPP SC Nov. 2012 7 End of January Topical session to be defined First list of invited talks Subjects and some possible speakers Draft text for the call for abstracts Coarse of February Finalisation of the poster and the “call for abstracts” For the poster a nice picture needed as soon as possible Expedition end of February April–May Tutorial selection Invited talks defined Beginning of June Abstracts selection Detailed program Registration opening