MU-CML

→ Europe/Berlin
SB1.4.101 - Seminarraum (ehemals WD-Zimmer) (GSI)

SB1.4.101 - Seminarraum (ehemals WD-Zimmer)

GSI
Frank Maas (GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH(GSI)), Tetyana Galatyuk (TU Darmstadt / GSI), Yvonne Leifels (GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH(GSI))
Beschreibung
  • in-person at GSI: 
    SB1.4.101 - Seminarraum (ehemals WD-Zimmer)

 

  • zoom connection details: 

    https://tu-darmstadt.zoom-x.de/j/65768367030?pwd=UzEyWJRrpPmzi5JIZKHCjebud155Gg.1

    Meeting ID: 657 6836 7030
    Passcode: mu-cml

 

https://gsi-fair.zoom.us/j/97412694940 <https://gsi-fair.zoom.us/j/97412694940>
Meeting ID: 974 1269 4940
Passcode: 2021

Ausblenden
Welcome & Updates
see Agenda point

 

Outcome Center Evaluation 2025
 
  • The evaluation results are very positive for MU-CML. Congratulations to everyone involved!
  • Specific comments given to MU-CML should be considered carefully when writing the POF V document. Keep in mind that we, MU-CML science, will be evaluated as one package together with beam availability, computing availability
  • We didn’t keep deadlines. Submitting comments after (not only after the internal, but event the external) deadline passed is not helpful. Comments which were send were all relevant, and it is unfortunate that they were not considered.
  • Texts were submitted (some NOT) late and in some case exceeded the communicated page limit by far.
  • Using Word for such a collaborative document is a mess. T. Nilsson communicated that discussion took place in MB and he will emphasise in the next MB our strong preference in favour of latex.
  • We had no clear numbers of all personel involved and numbers are confusing. Numbers in the report do NOT reflect the reality - neither GSI local no Third-Party funds. Clarification needed. It would be important to know what are the Helmholtz "counting rules", this should be clearly communicated. It is proposed to postpone this discussion to the meeting when Yvonne could be around, who has the best overview of the situation.
  • It seems that beam availability for users was not ideally communicated. A distinction between beam/machine availability and beam-on-target time for user may be needed. We should follow up on this with R. Assmann. We should also agree on the amount of beamtime for science so that our planned physics program in POF V we have clear numbers for 2027 - 2034. Parallel operation should be accounted in a favorable way, one could consider to e.g. count all the UNILAC experiments separately. Define who are the users of the GSI facilities? 700 beamtime users? 3000 users of IT? only colleagues with work contract @ GSI? Merge various databases and define colleagues coming regularly to GSI as USERS not guests.
  • Role of GSI at FAIR / FAIR at GSI should be clarified. T. Nilsson emphasised that GSI strategy for POF V is as presented in the Center Evaluation (rehearsal) presentation, see slide https://indico.gsi.de/event/22348/contributions/89776/attachments/51439/76624/GSI%20-%20Strategy%20for%20PoF%20V.png

 

News from SAB 29 Apr 2025

see Agenda point

 

POF-V

  • Based on the overall timeline, we should aim at having draft of our document by the first week of September. Timeline will be clarified with MU program speakers.
  • Next MU-CML meeting will be scheduled once info provided and templates are distributed.
  • Until than everybody is invited to look at our brainstorming document (edit link) and update text to include missing cases: https://www.overleaf.com/2111871748vxzqtkqxspxm#0b9b01
  • We must have proper numbers: personal department should provide all the numbers wrt FTE, documentation in repository is a must!
  • Select small group of people who reads the full document.
  • Identify (and ask soon) people who could act as external reviewers who could read the draft and comment/suggest. (Involve much stronger JSC?)
  • We will be asked to define milestones. They should be realistic. but still ambitious - we should have high-risk high-gain MSs.
  • GSI = German Hub for nuclear and hadron physics! ALICE is a part of Hub. Relation GSI-FAIR - our vision is clear, BMFTR decision is needed.  What are the plans to for a FAIR research division?  (TG - sorry i didn't make clear notes on this, somebody help ????)
  • PANDA timeline is not clear. Cost of the missing parts ~800M. Not realistic to have realised by 2034. Plan: follow up on positive statement of Center Evaluation Reviewers who appreciated a lot the move of the PANDA collaboration to participate in the "satellite" experiments and to enhance their physics outcome. The future strategy should be clearly discussed in the document. Just like in the MU-CML presentation we should emphasise that hadron physics at GSI/FAIR is represented by in-situ experiments at GSI and HIM already now and with CBM@FAIR in near future + strong theory support --> keep expertise in hadron physics on GSI and HIM campus. We should discuss uniqueness of PANDA physics, but we should avoid identifying milestones related to PANDA physics results in POF V-
  • Keep long-term vision but be realistic!

 

 

Forschungspolitischen Ziele (FoPoZis) as of 10 Mar 2025

    • on page 13: 

      Ziel: Erste Physikanalysen mit dem Experiment NUSTAR
      Ziel-Datum: 2032
      Für die Zielerreichung verantwortliches Zentrum: GSI

      Ziel: Aufbau und Inbetriebnahme von CBM am Beschleuniger SIS100
      Ziel-Datum: 2035
      Für die Zielerreichung verantwortliches Zentrum: GSI

      Dates are should be clarified. Thomas Nilsson will take care to bring is up in the next Helmholtz MB meeting

       

 

 

 

Es gibt eine zugehörige Notiz zu dieser Veranstaltung Anzeigen.