BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
# Presentation: 828228

- Schedule Review
- WBS 1.1, Vertex Magnet, Muon Toroids and Beam Pipes
- Chuck Brown
- May 27, 2004

## Schedule Review    WBS1.1

- WBS 1.1  -  Vertex Magnet, Toroids and Beam Pipes
- The Vertex Magnet and Toroid schedules are driven mostly by the scheduling of the 30-ton crane in the Assembly Hall; they need to be finished so that the RICH tank and EmCal structure can be assembled in the Assembly Hall
- The start of the beryllium beam pipe procurement can be comfortably delayed until FY07 -  to help with funding profile concerns
- The staging of the Vertex Magnet and Toroid construction, which follows from the space constraints in the Assembly Hall and the Installation sequence in the Collision Hall, has not changed since the CD-1 review.

## Assembly Hall Constraints   WBS1.1

## Flow Chart   WBS1.1

## Critical Path Analysis            WBS 1.1

- Vertex Magnet Ready  (Total Float = 149 days)
- The vertex magnet assembly needs to be finished so that the assembly of the 1st toroid can begin.
-  1st Toroid ready (Total Float = 145 days)
- The installation of the 1st toroid can be delayed to a short shutdown in FY07 if necessary with little overall schedule impact.
-  2nd Toroid ready (Total Float = 235 days)
- The installation of the second toroid can be delayed to a short shutdown in FY08 if necessary with little overall schedule impact.

## Critical Path Analysis, cont.            WBS 1.1

- RICH Beam Pipe ready (Total Float = 311 days)
- The funding for the beam pipes does not start until FY07. The RICH beam pipe will be installed in FY09.  It is not needed until the 3rd week of the FY09 shutdown (a temporary 2” Aluminum pipe will be installed in 2008)
- Forward Tracking B. P. ready (Total Float > 311 days)
- The funding for the beam pipes does not start until FY07. The F.T. beam pipe will be installed in FY09, after the RICH beam pipe.

## Labor Profile (FTE) vs FY    WBS1.1

## Cost (without contingency) vs FY    WBS1.1

## Total Cost (with contingency) vs FY    WBS1.1

## Installation    WBS1.1

- Installation:
- The installation plan for this subproject is captured in BTeV document #1207.  The plan is to roll the magnets into the C0 Collision Hall at the first available shutdown after they are declared ready for installation.  The Vertex Magnet or either Toroid assembly can be rolled into the C0 Collision Hall in any convenient 5 day Tevatron shutdown or maintenance period.
- The installation of the beryllium beam pipes will be delayed until the FY09 summer shutdown in order to protect these delicate components.

## Response to CD-1 recommendations  WBS1.1

- There were no CD-1 recommendations for the WBS1.1 subproject.
- Nevertheless, as a result of the general CD-1 recommendation to reevaluate the overall BTeV spectrometer installation schedule, a careful reexamination of the schedule for the installation of the WBS1.1 components has resulted in a much larger float in the WBS1.1 Open Plan schedule.
# Presentation: 168176

## Mission Statement: Turbomachinery and Heat Transfer-RTT 

- Perform experimental and computational research in compressor and turbine flow and heat transfer technology directed at advancing knowledge in gas turbine engine propulsion. The branch focuses on the Fundamental Aeronautics Program subsonic fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft, supersonic and hypersonic flight projects. Acquire research data from turbomachinery test facilities to further develop and validate computational flow codes and design tool models to enable design and analysis of compressors and turbines with high aerodynamic loading and efficiency, improved operability and reduced turbine cooling requirements. Interface with other NASA centers, government agencies, industry and academia. Transfer turbomachinery technology for commercial and military propulsion systems.
# Presentation: 529911

## Mobility: South Africa Margie Schneider

- 6th Meeting of the Washington Group
- Kampala, Uganda
- 10 – 13th October 2006

## Methodology 

- Quantitative analysis of questionnaires
- Focus groups comments
- Recommendations

## D1 – D3 vs ED1 – ED3

## WG3 Mobility X Inside home

|  |  | Inside Home |  |  |  | Total |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  |  | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  |
| WG3: Mobility | 1 | 116 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 118 |
|  | 2 | 24 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 27 |
|  | 3 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 19 |
|  | 4 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 14 |
| Total |  | 165 | 10 | 4 | 3 | 184 |

## WG3 Mobility X Outside home

|  |  | Outside Home |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  |  | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Total |
| WG3 | 1 | 116 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 118 |
|  | 2 | 17 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 27 |
|  | 3 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 19 |
|  | 4 | 10 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 14 |
| Total |   | 160 | 12 | 6 | 3 | 184 |

## WG3 Mobility X Walk long distance

|  |   | Walk long distance |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|   |  | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Total |
|  | 1 | 105 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 118 |
| WG3 | 2 | 10 | 12 | 2 | 3 | 27 |
|  | 3 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 19 |
|  | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 14 |
|  | Total | 130 | 27 | 11 | 12 | 183 |

## WG3 mobility X Use hands/fingers

|  |   | Use hands/fingers |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  |  | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Total |
|  | 1 | 114 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 118 |
| WG3 | 2 | 15 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 27 |
|  | 3 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 19 |
|  | 4 | 9 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 14 |
|  | Total | 150 | 18 | 12 | 3 | 184 |

## Slide 8

|  |  | ED1 Mobility 4Qs
Non-disabled               Disabled |  | Total |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| WG3 D1 | non-disabled | 100 | 12 | 112 |
|  | disabled | 15 | 41 | 56 |
|  | Total | 115 | 53 | 168 |
|   |   | ED2 4 Qs mobility |  |  |
|  |  | Non-disabled | Disabled | Total |
| WG3 D2 | non-disabled | 128 | 13 | 141 |
|  | disabled | 14 | 18 | 32 |
|  | Total | 142 | 31 | 173 |
|   |   | 
ED3 mobility 4 Qs |  | Total |
|  |  | non-disabled | disabled |  |
| WG3 D3 | non-disabled | 144 | 8 | 152 |
|  | disabled | 7 | 7 | 14 |
|  | Total | 151 | 15 | 166 |

## Qualitative comments

- Need for clear reference for distance
- Not only physical reasons for having difficulty with walking and climbing stairs
*The problem is, we did not realize that when we answered on that stairs question, it only struck me a couple of minutes later and I did think about it. There are numerous reasons [for having difficulty walking or climbing stairs].* (Non-disabled youth)
*Okay, the other thing here with no. 14 [difficulty walking and climbing stairs], if you think about walking and climbing steps... for us at night... if we put’ yes’ there then you might think that we are physically disabled - but we are not.  But at night time, if it’s in the dark and because we are deaf, we don’t have... we find ourselves imbalanced.  No, not imbalance.  We have a poor sense of balance.* (Deaf group)

## Recommendation 

- Add clear reference to distance
- For example:
**	****Do you / does [*****name*****] have difficulty ****Walking a kilometre or climbing a flight of steps?**
# Presentation: 821839

## qqH->WWjj->lljj 

**Mehmet Zeyrek**
**Middle East Technical Univ./Ankara**
**& Texas Tech Univ.**

## qqH->WW and ttj samples 

**CompHep ttj sample; 280k, 788pb**
**CompHep qqH sample; 137k events, 2104 fb**
** ****Hqq->WWqq->2l2******** + jets and**
**    ****ttj->WbWb+j->2l2******** + jets**
**    ****Forced to decay in Pythia interface.**
**    ****q/g jets are chosen as ********>2.5 (30% kept)**
**    ****in ttj sample.**
**20k from each sample is processed through ORCA. Ntuples ready. **

## Cuts

**Forward Jet tagging and lepton selection**
**Ptj > 20 GeV,   ********j < 5,   ********Rjj > 0.7**
**Ptl > 20 GeV,   ********l < 5,   ********Rjl > 0.7**
******min + 0.7 < ********l < ********max- 0.7,   ********j1. ********j2 < 0**
****** ****> 4.4**
**	****	****	****	****     ****b-veto**
**Ptb > 20 GeV,   ********min < ********b < ********max**
**                     ****Mjj, mll, angular cuts**
**Mjj > 650 GeV**
**mll < 60 GeV**
******ll < 140********,   cos********ll > 0.2,   ********Rll < 2.2**

## Jet selection

**Jet multiplicity is high.**
**Jets (cone size 0.5) are matched to satisfy a wide separation in ******** and to occupy opposite hemispheres.**
**multiple combinations are further selected by requiring the max. ******** separation.**
**Signal: 55% single, 15% multiple combination**
**Bkgd: 10% single,  8% multiple combination**

## S/B(ttj) ‘preliminary’

**5k signal events (77 fb)**
**10k bkgd events (28 pb) ****are analyzed**

| Cuts |    Signal |      ttj  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Forward Jet Tagging
b-veto |      3529 |    1777
   1295 |
| Lepton
Selection |      1159 |      376 |
|  Mjj, mll and angular cuts |        766      |        23 |

## S/B(ttj)   ‘preliminary’

**Signal 766/5000 = 0.153**
**Bkgd   23/10000 = 0.0023**
**All cuts applied : **
**12 fb signal / 64 fb ttj ~ 1/5  **
**This analysis : forward jet tagging + lepton selection**
** ****Signal : 18 fb         **
**        ****ttj  : 1485 fb    (S/B ~ 1/82) **
**R&Z analysis: forward jet tagging + lepton selection**
**Signal : 17 fb**
**      ****ttj  :  310 fb       (S/B ~ 1/18)**

## Leptons

**Signal**

**Background**

## Leptons

**Signal**

**Background**

## Forward Jets

**Signal**

**Background**
# Presentation: 200367

## Earth Simulator Center

## Earth Simulator Center 

-    Performance evaluation of multi-nodes by following test suite:
-     (1) LINPACK Benchmarks;    parallel          1) N = 331776,    in **February, 2002**
-               Number of PE’s : 1024
-               Performance : 6.69 TFLOPS (efficiency = 81.6%)
-           2) N = 1075200,    in May**, 2002**
-               Number of PE’s : 5120
-               Performance : 35.86 TFLOPS (efficiency = 87.5%).

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

## Earth Simulator Center

-      (2) Real application
-           **Afes : An atmospheric circulation model optimized for the ES **
-         ****** ****Dynamics**            - An atmospheric circulation model developed by referring CCSR/NIES                AGCM5.4            - Basic equation : Primitive equation            - Coordinate system : Sphere coordinate,  coordinate            - Horizontal discretization : Spectral method (FFT and Legendre transforms)            - Vertical discretization : *Arakawa and Suarez(1983)*            - Time integration : Semi-implicit, leap-frog, *Asselin(1972)* time filter        ****** Physics**            - Cumulus convection :  Kuo             - Large scale condensation : Le Treut & Li            - Radiation : DOM adding, K-distribution method            - Vertical diffusion : Mellor and Yamada (1974,1982) level 2            - Surface flux : Louis (1979), Mellor et al.(1992)            - Surface process :     - bucket model (Manabe, 1969)                                               - diffusion of soil moisture (Clapp & Hornberger, 1978)                                               - Ocean mixed layer (Wilson et al., 1987)            - Gravity wave drag : MacFarlane (1987)            - Dry convection adjustment

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

## Earth Simulator Center

- (2) Real application  Afes (cont.)

- Parallelization : intra-node by Microtasking or MPI,                          inter-node by MPI

- Result : a sustained performance more than 5 times larger than               the initial target.

- Target : a sustained performance more than 5TFLOPS on the full system

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

- For more information  http://www.sc-2002.org/

## Earth Simulator Center 

- Earth Simulator Center

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

- Resolution  300km

## Earth Simulator Center 

- Earth Simulator Center

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

- Resolution  120km

## Earth Simulator Center 

- Earth Simulator Center

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

- Resolution  20km

## Earth Simulator Center 

- Earth Simulator Center

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

- Resolution  10km

##  resolution : 0.1o× 0.1o (  10km)

-  resolution : 0.1o× 0.1o ( ****** **10km)
-  initial condition: Levitus  data (1982) computer resources:  number of nodes = 175,                                        elapsed time   8,100 hours

***First results from the Earth Simulator***

## First results from the Earth Simulator

***First results from the Earth Simulator***
# Presentation: 911735

## Networx

- NISN Quarterly Customer Videocon
- January 26, 2009
- Greg Oden

## Networx Update

- RFQ # 1
- Awarded 08/08
- Transition ECD 03/09
- Future OOBA requirements will be logical follow on to the Qwest contract
- Future Switch Voice requirements will be logical follow on to the Qwest Contract
- Future Tail Circuits will be quoted via GSA Vendors contracts and awarded to least cost provider.
- Some Tail Circuits affected by TIC are still under review.

| Networx Transition - Install Order Status as of : 01/12/2009 |  |  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Order Type |  | Number of orders | Number installed | Percentage complete |
| AT&T  | Tail Circuits Paper transfer |  | 25 | 25 | 100% |
| AT&T  | Tail Circuits |  | 6 | 6 | 100% |
| Qwest | Tail Circuits Paper transfer |  | 3 | 3 | 100% |
| Qwest | OOBA |  | 21 | 21 | 100% |
| Qwest | OOBA Port Upgrades |  | 19 | 14 | 74% |
| Qwest | Calling Cards |  | 1908 | 1908 | 100% |
| Qwest | Tail Circuits |  | 11 | 11 | 100% |
| Qwest | Toll Free |  | 135 | 135 | 100% |
| Qwest | Switched Voice |  | 52 | 35 | 67% |
| Networx Transition Disconnect Status as of : 01/12/2009 |  |  |  |  |  |
| Vendor | Order Type | Number of orders |  | Number disconnect orders submitted | Percentage complete |
| AT&T  | Paper transfer | N/A |  | N/A | N/A |
| AT&T  | Tail Circuits | 6 |  | 6 | 100% |
| Qwest | Paper transfer | N/A |  | N/A | N/A |
| Qwest | OOBA | 21 |  | 12 | 29% |
| Qwest | Calling Cards |             N/A |  |    De-activated Cards by 02/28/09 |   |
| Qwest | Tail Circuits | 11 |  | 6 | 27% |
| Qwest | Toll Free | N/A |  | N/A | N/A |
| Qwest | Switched Voice | 52 |  | 7 | 7% |

## Networx Update

- RFQ #2 Conferencing
- Awarded 01/09 Verizon Business
- Transition ECD 08/09
- RFQ #3 Core and Regional Circuits
- Estimated Award May 09
- Transition ECD December 09
- RFQ Mission Services
- Estimated Award August 09
- Transition ECD August 10

## Networx Update

- VOTS and ViTs charging. When will the customers start seeing billing?** **
- VoTS billing is core funded.
- Networx pricing is planned to be in place in March and NISN should see the change in the April billing cycle.
- However, based on current usage, charges may exceed funding allocated for VoTS for FY09 and FY10.  NISN is considering funding only Instant Meeting usage and have customers fund operator assisted conferences and any features requested in conference such as secure conference, recording, transcriptions, etc.  Once plans are finalized, customers will be notified on any billing changes and effective dates.
- ViTS billing will continue under FTS2001.
- As centers transition their conference rooms to the internal ViIP service, their FTS2001 billing will discontinue.
- NISN is requesting that all conference rooms be transitioned by December 2009.
- The internal ViIP service is expected to be in place by June 2009.
- Once transitioned to internal ViIP service, customers will receive a bill from NISN for their ViTS services.
# Presentation: 545687

## Results from '04 in:

- 426	Collectively Driven fast ion losses
- 427	NTM Threshold
- 220	DIII-D CAE similarity experiment
- New diagnostic results

## Xp426 - Collectively driven fast ion losses

- One run day with dedicated scans in beam power and plasma current.
- Much more data collected throughout campaign.
- No decrease of loss fraction yet seen at higher plasma current or beta (or "q(0)").
- More subtle correlations are being investigated.

## Experiments have found no empirical scaling of fast ion loss with plasma current or 

- Both TAE and chirping modes (fishbones, rTAE) seen to high .
- Thermal ion Landau damping expected to stabilize TAE at high .
- Precession drift reversal expected to stabilize chirping modes at high ; bounce precession resonance is unaffected.
- Reduced loss at high current expected (smaller pol*).
- Both TAE and chirping modes contribute to fast ion losses in these events.

## Xp427 - 1 day run of sawtoothing plasmas with beta scans

- Plan was to introduce repetitive "standard" trigger, look for NTM excitation, growth, decay.
- Results not so clean, but very nice.
- More data added from random sawtoothing shots.
- Non-NTM n=2 modes?

## Soft x-ray data provides only internal measurements

- Island (tearing mode) suggested by phase inversion in soft x-ray data.

- Mode amplitude drops substantially at sawtooth crashes; not a feature of true NTMs.

## Mp220 - CAE similarity study

- CAE-like modes are also found in conventional aspect ratio tokamaks (DIII-D).
- NSTX portion waiting for 6 kG capability.
- Beam voltage scans done at two fields.

## New diagnostic data from this campaign.

- Poloidal array of fast Mirnov coils; measurement of CAE poloidal structure.
- Lost one coil to grounding problem.
- Need work to understand phase shifts.
- Multi-channel heterodyne reflectometer data on CAE in L-mode plasmas.
- Should give internal measure of CAE (and TAE) mode amplitudes.  Data available from at least on run-day.
# Presentation: 730224

## SVW Requirements

**Capt Caroline Bower**
**Joint Typhoon Warning Center**

## Operational Requirements

**Better spatial coverage**
**Decrease data gaps**
**Wider swath width**
**Multiple sensors**
**Improved spatial resolution**
**For improved TC positioning potential**
**For improved TC structural analysis (yields better model input, and better forecasts)**
**For improved wind distribution analysis**

## Operational Requirements

**Improved data integrity**
**Rain flag discrimination**
**Multiple algorithms available –   which one is right?**
**Performance in critical and high-interest areas (TC core)**

## Operational Requirements

**Transitional displays**
**Streamline transition from current displays to future displays**

## Operational Requirements

**Documentation**
**Knowledge needed for correct application**
**Intended or recommended use**
**Known strengths and weaknesses**
**User tutorials**
**COMET modules**

##                                         Questions?

- Capt Caroline Bower
- JTWC
- 808 474-3946
- e-mail: caroline.bower@navy.mil
# Presentation: 546613

## William Herschel

- The Science Museum, UK

- F.W. Herschel, Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. London **90**, 49 (1800).

- The discovery of infrared light

- In 1800, Herschel studied the spectrum of sunlight with a prism. He measured the temperature of each color, and found the highest temperature was just beyond the red, what we now call the infrared (‘below the red’).

## William Herschel

- Herschel then placed a water-filled container between the prism and thermometer and observed that the temperature measured was lower than the one measured without the water. Consequently, the water must partially absorb the radiation.

- F.W. Herschel, Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. London **90**, 49 (1800).

- The discovery of infrared light

- In addition, Herschel could prove that depending on how the prism was rotated (i.e. depending on the spectral range) the difference in the temperatures measured for each color varied. This was the beginning of infrared spectroscopy.

- Infrared
# Presentation: 095806

## POLYGON WEATHER WARNINGS – A NEW APPROACH	FOR THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE 

- Ken Waters
- National Weather Service, Honolulu HI
- *, J. M. Coyne, P. L. Wolf,  J. T. Schaefer,
- J. M. Looney, S. Naglic, B. W. MacAloney II, M. A. Tew,
- J. Lorens, R. J. Okulski, and N. O. Schwein
- Jan 12, 2005
- AMS – San Diego

## Background

- National Weather Service issues four types of short-fused warnings:
- Tornado Warnings (TOR)
- Severe Thunderstorm Warnings (SVR)
- Flash Flood Warnings (FFW)
- Special Marine Warnings (SMW)
- Issued normally for one county at a time
- Can lead to a large false-alarm area, especially in the case of large or irregular-sized counties
- Verification has been strictly county-based
- Legacy dissemination methods all tied to counties:
- NOAA All-Hazards/Weather Radio
- Uses SAME alert code based on counties
- Internet displays – again, based on counties

## WARNGEN

- Allows forecaster to graphically highlight the area of greatest threat
- Creates a template text product for the warning, including proper headers, issue/expiration times, county UGC codes
- ALSO: includes latitude/longitude vertex points for the pathcast, or polygon warning --- LITTLE USED by NWS, partners, and public

## Slide 4

- NWS Polygon Team formed in 2004
- Purpose: Encourage warnings by polygon rather than county-based
- Test will be run in 2005 with some NWS forecast offices
- De-emphasis on county borders
- Focus on location of severe threat
- Test alternate measures of verification that are polygon-based
- Will open the door for dissemination using current technologies (e.g., cell phones, pagers, GPS-enabled devices)

## Using GIS with Polygon Warnings

- Polygon vertices well-suited to include in GIS
- Mechanism was established to strip off the lat-long polygon information, database the polygons, and create real-time GIS shapefiles
- Using only open source (“freeware”) software
- Code written in Perl
- Polygon values formatted in ESRI “gen” format
- Use “gen2shp”  and “txt2dbf” packages

- And now, some examples, using 2004 warnings

## Tornado Warnings

## Tornado Warnings

## Severe Thunderstorm Warnings

## Severe Thunderstorm Warnings

## Tendency to align warnings to county borders continued in 2004

## Flash Flood Warnings

## Special Marine Warnings

## Warning Shapefiles

- Updated every minute for TOR, SVR, FFW, SMW, as well as SPC watches
- Available at:
- _[http://www.prh.noaa.gov/hq/regsci/gis](http://www.prh.noaa.gov/hq/regsci/gis)_

- Ken Waters
- Regional Scientist
- NWS Pacific Region
- Honolulu, Hawaii
- _[Ken.waters@noaa.gov](mailto:Ken.waters@noaa.gov)_
- (808) 532-6413
# Presentation: 320534

## A Singular Value Decomposition Method

**A Singular Value Decomposition Method**
**For Inverting Line Integrated Electron **
**Density Measurements in **
**Magnetically Confined Plasma**

**Christopher Carey, The Ohio State University**
**Ivo Furno, Los Alamos National Laboratory**

- Problem Definition

- As can be seen on the right, the phase shift of an interferometer chord can be related to the line integral of the electron density along the path of the beam in the plasma. The 14 interferometer measurements form a system of inhomogeneous *Fredholm* equations of the first kind, which is always underdetermined. One method for solving this system is to expand the unknown parameter, *n**e**,* in orthogonal basis functions that depend only on the magnetic flux surface, ρ. This assumes that the electron density is constant on a magnetic flux surface, which is valid in the case that there is not strong MHD activity in the plasma. These functions are line integrated, and the resulting system of equations can then be solved for the expansion coefficients.

- Singular Value Decomposition for Inversion

- Our novel method for inversion of the interferometer data utilizes the singular value decomposition (SVD) of the Thompson scattering data to determine the basis functions for the expansion of the electron density. The Thomson scattering data has both temporal and spatial dependence. We can arrange this data in a matrix **N****e** such that the spatial dependence is stored along the columns and the temporal dependence along the rows, as can be seen on the left. Using the SVD, **N****e** can be decomposed into the product of three matrices; **U**, **S**, and **V**. The columns of **U** form a set of orthogonal spatial eigenmodes that contain the spatial information of **N****e** and are often referred to as topos. Moreover, most of this information is stored in the first three to four topos. Thus, these topos make an excellent choice of basis functions for the expansion of the local electron density. Because we are able to use only a few basis functions, solving the set of 14 equations for the expansion coefficients, *a**i*, becomes an over determined problem for which a least squares solution can be found.

- Diagnostics

- TCV is equipped with a 14 chord interferometer and a Thomson scattering system for the measurement of electron density profiles. Data from the interferometer can be acquired at a rate of 25 kHz, which is fast enough to resolve features of interest in the density profiles. However, the interferometer gives a line integrated measurement of the electron density along the path of each laser in the plasma. Thus, to determine the local electron density profiles this measurement must be inverted. The Thomson scattering system can acquire data at a rate of up to 20 Hz, which is far to slow to resolve features in the electron density. Nevertheless, the Thomson scattering system has the advantage of giving a local measurement of the electron density at 25 positions along a vertical line in the plasma cross section.
# Presentation: 211956

## A Distributed Robotic Sensor Network for Tracking and Coverage

**Gaurav S. Sukhatme**
**R****obotic ****E****mbedded ****S****ystems ****L****ab**
**Robotics Research Labs**
**Computer Science Department**
**University of Southern California**
**gaurav@usc.edu**
**http://robotics.usc.edu/~embedded**

## Sensor/Actuator Networks

- Many nodes, spatially distributed
- Capabilities
- Sensing
- Computation
- Communication
- Motion (or limited actuation)
- Autonomy

## Sensor/Actuator Networks

- ... Are a generalization of distributed robotics
- Nodes which sense-compute-act *are* robots
- Distributed robotics
- Fault tolerance
- Coping with uncertainty
- Inherently multi-robot tasks

## Challenges

- How to allocate tasks across robots ?
- How many robots to a task ?
- How to coordinate robots ?
- (How) should robots communicate ?
- (What) should robots communicate ?

## Today

- A scalable approach to coordination, computation, sensing and actuation using the tracking and mapping problems as examples

## Cooperative Observation

## Cooperative Observation

## Cooperative Observation

- Given a bounded enclosed region, a team of sensors (some are mobile robots, others are stationary) and a set of targets, maximize

## How should robots position themselves ?

- Divide and conquer
- Divide area into topologically simple regions (i.e. build a topological map)
- A map is a planar labeled graph
- For each region compute (estimate at run time)
- Robot (sensor) density
- Target density

## Mapping Algorithm Outline

- Individual robots/ sensors detect features
- Each robot/sensor creates a topological maps with approximate metric information
- Match algorithm finds best match using heuristic pruning
- Shown to be efficient
- Suitable for a real-time user interface

## Landmark Detection and Mapping

## Slide 12

## Results of Map Matching

## Cooperative Tracking Algorithm

## Density Based Approach

- Robot Availability

- Region Urgency

- No targets in R

- Too many
- robots
- in R

- Unobserved targets in R

- Too many targets
- in region R

- Region R is unobserved

## Tracking using Laser and Vision

## Slide 17

## Slide 18

## Slide 19

## Slide 20

## Observation vs. Number of Robots

## Following vs. Divide and Conquer

## Today

- A scalable approach to coordination, computation, sensing and actuation using the tracking and mapping problems as examples

## Extensions

- The general problem is of *action selection*
- What should an individual robot do at every point in time to optimize a global goal ?
- We are exploring distributed approaches to entropy minimization as a possible extension
- Other extension involve the use of smaller devices (e.g. motes) as regions markers and monitors

## Acknowledgments and Pointers

- Robotic embedded systems lab (RESL)
- 	_[http://robotics.usc.edu/~embedded](http://robotics.usc.edu/~embedded)_
- SCOWR project
- _[http://netweb.usc.edu/scowr](http://netweb.usc.edu/scowr)_
- MARS project
- _[http://robotics.usc.edu/projects/mars](http://robotics.usc.edu/projects/mars)_
- Support
- NSF, DARPA, ONR, NASA
# Presentation: 012315

## Turning Goals Into Reality (TGIR) 

**Commercialize Technology Panel**
**Malcolm R. O’Neill****	****	****Introduction/Session Overview**
*VP & Chief Technical Officer, Lockheed Martin Corporation*
**Bob Norwood ****	****	****	****Commercial Technology Program**
*Director, Commercial Technology Division, NASA Headquarters*
**Raj Aggarwal****	****	****	****Business Environment **
*VP, Advanced Technology Center, Rockwell Collins*** **
**Jim Fontana****	****	****	****Legal Regulatory Perspective**
*VP, Corporate Development and Law, Getronics Government Solutions, LLC*
**Bob Pap****	****	****	****Small Business Perspective**
*President & Chairman of the Board, Accurate Automation Corporation*
**Rich Hular****	****	****	****Describing Technology and Start **
*President & CEO, BioLuminate, Inc.**	***Up funding**
**Paul Brownell****	****	****	****Venture Capital Opportunities**
*Vice President for Public Policy, National Venture Capital Association*** **
# Presentation: 100773

## Marketing and Outreach: The Arctic Theme Page andArctic Change Detection

- Nancy SoreideNOAA/PMELAugust 26, 2004

## Comprehensive Arctic Resource

- Data & climate indices
- Expert Essays
- Photographs & maps
- Arctic links
- Educational links
- NOAA programs

- The Arctic Theme Page
- http://www.arctic.noaa.gov

## NOAA’s Climate Research Activities  

- The Arctic Theme Page
- http://www.arctic.noaa.gov

## North Pole Web CamDeployed April 30, 2004

## Expert Essays on key Arctic issues

- How do scientists study climate change? *Nick Bond*
- Are environmental changes impacting Alaska Natives? *Caleb Pungowiyi*
- How rapidly is permafrost changing?  Impacts? *Vladimir Romanovsky*
- UVB radiation:  Threat to the Arctic?  *Betsy Weatherhead*
- How does Arctic sea ice form and decay? *Peter Wadhams*
- How has sea ice volume changed? *Norbert Untersteiner*
- Is sea level affected by changes in Arctic land ice? *Roger Barry*
- What long term trends are seen in the Arctic atmosphere? *John Walsh*
- Is mercury a significant contaminant? *Steve Lindberg/Steve Brooks*
- What organisms thrive in Arctic sea ice? *Christopher Krebs/Jody Deming*
- Is there life on the Arctic sea floor? *Peter Vogt*
- Arctic Wolves and their prey *David Mech*
- What’s happening to Polar Bears? *Scott Schliebe*
- The puzzling Arctic summer of 2003  - *Norbert Untersteiner*

- The Arctic Theme Page
- http://www.arctic.noaa.gov

## Impact

- 5000-6000 hits/day
- Science magazine, USA Today, Yahoo, Scientific American
-  Ranks high on Google search
- Significant Arctic
-   Web Presence

- The Arctic Theme Page
- http://www.arctic.noaa.gov

## ACIA Report

- Multi-year, multi-government effort by hundreds of  scientists
- Draft report finalized in November 2004

## Arctic ChangeWebsite

- A NOAA contribution to the IPY
- To be released concurrent with ACIA report in November 2004

- Arctic ChangeWebsite
# Presentation: 731098

## Alliance of Glycobiologists for Detection of Cancer and Cancer Risk

- Review Information

## Scientific Review Administrator

- 	Marvin L. Salin Ph.D
- 	Special Review and Logistics Branch,
- 	Division of Extramural Activities
- 	National Cancer Institute, NIH, PHS, DHHS
- 	6116 Executive Blvd. Rm. 7145
- 	Bethesda MD 20892
- 	Phone: (301) 496-0694
- 	Fax: (301) 480-4345
- 	msalin@mail.nih.gov
- 	For Express Services:
- 	6116 Executive Blvd. Suite 703
- 	Rockville, MD 20852

## Critical Dates

- Tentative Panel Meeting:
- 			November 8 and 9, 2006
- Tentative Mailout to Reviewers:
- 			October 5, 2006
- Last Day for Last Minute “Hot Data Submission:
- 			October 25, 2006

## Additional Data Submissions

- Prior to Mailout (Oct. 5) – 5 copies (<5 pages)
- 		Marvin L. Salin Ph.D
- 		Special Review and Logistics Branch,
- 		6116 Executive Blvd. Suite 703
- 		Rockville, MD 20852
- After Oct.5 and up till Oct. 25: email files to:
- 		msalin@mail.nih.gov

## Page Limits

- Sections 1-3 (Team, Scope of Research, Collaborative Activities)
- 				35 pages

## Appendix Material

- Up to 10 publications.
-  manuscripts (***accepted ***for publication), abstracts, patents, or other printed materials directly relevant to this project.
*Do not include manuscripts ****submitted ****for publication.*

## Appendix Material

**Publications in press:**
** **Include only a publication list with a link to the publicly available on-line journal article
- Do not include the entire article.

## Appendix Material

**Manuscripts accepted for publication**
**but not yet published: **
- The entire article should be submitted and may be stapled.

## Appendix Material

- Surveys, questionnaires, data collection
- instruments, clinical protocols, and informed
- consent documents. These may be stapled
- as sets.

## Review Criteria

- Significance
- Approach
- Innovation
- Investigators
- Environment
- Additional Review Criteria
- 	Protection of Human Subjects, Inclusion of Women and Minorities and Children, Care and Use of Animals in Research, Biohazards
- Budget: Does not impact priority score
- Data Sharing Plan: Must be included but not factored in score

## Collaborative Activities

- Interaction and Sharing of Data with Alliance
- Sharing Research Resources with TGL, NCI, CFG
- Collaborations with other NCI Programs

## Scores and Summary Statements

- Scores Available on NIH Commons within 3 business days after the Panel Review
- Summary Statements around the first week in January, 2007
# Presentation: 409742

## A Comparison of Six Expendable Bathythermograph Data Acquisition Systems

**Derrick Snowden**
**Molly Baringer**
**Gustavo Goni**

## Slide 2

## Instruments List

- 366 total profiles

## XBT Errors

- XBT differs from the CTD due to :
- 	A: inaccurate depth measurements
- 	B: inaccurate temperature measurements

- A

- B

**Notes:**
What we’re calling temperature measurements is actually a combination of all non fall rate equation related errors, including geophysical noise.

A and B can be estimated from data if CTD measurements are accurate enough.

## Slide 5

## Slide 6

## Slide 7

## Fall Rate Error:  Initial Conditions

- Hallock and Teague 1992

**Notes:**
Mean offset over the entire day was 2.5m.

## Fall Rate Equation

- a: Change of mass of the probe due to spooling wire.
- b: Probe geometry and initial terminal velocity
- c: Describes startup transients i.e. initial conditions

- Currently used FRE (WMO 1770:52) for Deep Blue probes contains no constant term ( c ).

- e.g. Hallock and Teague (1992)

## Determining Depth Offset

- Focus on the temperature gradient: derivative of temperature with respect to depth
- Minimize temperature error effect

- Hanawa et al (1995)

## Depth Offset Prior to Correction

## Depth Correction Algorithm

- Assemble the depth offsets (dZ)
- Recalculate XBT depths
- 		Znew = Zxbt+dZ
- Back calculate time (t)
- Fit new fall rate equation to (t)
-              z = at^2 + bt + c

## Depth Offset: Post-Correction

## Summary of Fall Rate Coefficients

|  | A | B | C |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Wmocode 52 | -0.00225 | 6.691 | 0 |
| this study | -0.00191 | 6.487 | 0 |
| this study | -0.00299 | 6.639 | -4.5117 |
| other studies (1) | -0.00131 – 
-0.00329 | 6.440 – 
6.798 | 0 - 0 |

- 1: Taken from Hanawa et al 1995

**Notes:**
Concentrate on the offset and point to possible reasons without taking too much away from Franco’s talk.

## Slide 15

## Slide 16
# Presentation: 301556

## Analytic Formulas for the Orientation Dependence of Step Stiffness and Line Tension: Key Ingredients for Numerical Modeling

*T.J. Stasevich and T.L. Einstein*
- Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742-4111
-      A crucial ingredient to characterize the fluctuations of steps is the stiffness, essentially the energy cost of meandering.  Likewise, the line tension (free energy per length) b of steps determines the shape of islands as implemented in the celebrated Wulff construction.  Thus, it is important to be able to characterize the orientation dependence of these two quantities.  Particularly the stiffness () + ''() is often approximated as circularly symmetric and is evaluated via the value in a facet direction.  The former is a mediocre approximation, while the latter procedure is poor, since there is distinctive behavior associated with the cusp or near cusp in () in the facet directions.  In earlier work, based on the Ising model and solid-on-solid approximation, we developed simple expressions for the stiffness for (100) and (111) facets of fcc lattices that agree very well with experimental data.  For the (100) it is often important to include next-nearest neighbor interactions as well as nearest neighbor (NN) ones; in the (111) the NN interactions typically suffice.  We have recently extended this work to develop an analytic formula, twice differentiable everywhere, suitable for implementation in finite-element calculations.  While no longer simple, it is straightforward to code, and so should have wide applicability [1].
-      The scheme starts with the simple expression for [inverse] stiffness (or alternatively for line tension), valid at low temperatures.  Next we add (for the (111) surface) an orientation-independent term  which accounts for the finite-temperature correction at the =/6, the high-symmetry non-facet direction, for which the solution is know exactly.  Only near the facet direction =0 does this formulation break down.  In that region, we fit to a 5th order power series.  The first 3 terms are fit to the exactly-know solution at =0; the next 3 are adjusted to produce a smooth joining at an angle c determined to optimize the fit.  This procedure is illustrated in the figure.  A summary of the results is given in the table.
- [1] T.J. Stasevich and T.L. Einstein, SIAM--Multiscale Model. Simul. **6**, 90 (2007) [cond-mat/0609237]

## Slide 2

## Slide 3
# Presentation: 324913

## EHR Readiness

- Are You Ready for an
- Electronic Heath Record?

- Will Gaud
- Will Gaud & Associates

- HCAP 2005 New Grantee Orientation

## Why a Readiness Assessment?

- Implementing an EHR is risky
- Costly
- Pressure to avoid a poor or mediocre investment
- Risk of failure is high
- Trust is a scarce resource – difficult to regain if lost

- Will Gaud & Associates

## Why a Readiness Assessment? (continued)

- Can help the organization identify and develop strategies to address common issues:
**IT**
- Lack of or insufficient necessary technical (IT) skills
- Insufficient infrastructure

- Will Gaud & Associates

## Why a Readiness Assessment? (continued)

- Outdated or missing procedures addressing business processes – (what the practice does)
- Inadequate preparation
- Lack of administrative and clinical support

- Will Gaud & Associates

## Why a Readiness Assessment? (continued)

- Insufficient knowledge of minimum requirements system must meet
- Insufficient knowledge or understanding of the EHR marketplace:
- Vendor
- Product

- Will Gaud & Associates

## Why a Readiness Assessment? (continued)

- Impact the system will have in the workplace environment is not well understood
- Failure to understand that this is not an IT issue, but an interdisciplinary project that covers the entire organization

- Will Gaud & Associates

## So... how do we get started?

- What components should an EHR Readiness Assessment contain?
- Start with a _VISION_ statement
- An inventory – skills, technical, procedural
- Clinicians Survey – knowledge, skills, and attitude (bias)

- Will Gaud & Associates

## So... how do we get started?

- Education
- HIT
- Available infrastructure
- Available technical skills
- Needs
- Marketplace
- Vendor landscape
- Product landscape

- Will Gaud & Associates

## So... how do we get started?

- Leadership
- Clinician involvement – clinicians as champions
- Expectation Management
- Setting realistic expectations consistent with the organization’s technical infrastructure, ability to learn, leadership, and commitment to the EHR system

- Will Gaud & Associates

## Resources

- EHR Specifications
- _[http://bphc.hrsa.gov/chc/CHCInitiatives/emr.htm](http://bphc.hrsa.gov/chc/CHCInitiatives/emr.htm)_
- Readiness Assessment Tools
- Community Clinics Initiative
- Tides Foundation
- _[http://www.communityclinics.org/content/article/detail/783](http://www.communityclinics.org/content/article/detail/783)_
- Practice Readiness Assessment
- DOQ-IT Practice Performance Improvement Initiative
- (Attached)

- Will Gaud & Associates
# Presentation: 329891

## FOT Hot TopicsAura Science Team Meeting ’08

**Dimitrios Mantziaras**
**EOS-Aura Flight Systems Manager**
**Phone 301•614•5234**
**Fax 301•614•5009**
**Dimitrios.C.Mantziaras@nasa.gov**

## Topics

**Aura Limit Handling/Response**
- Yellow/Red Definitions
- Current Approach
- Desired Approach
**SCE-4B FOP Change (Discussed tomorrow)**
- TES +10 Roll

## Red / Yellow Limit Definitions

**The Aura PDB and EMOS can distinguish Red and Yellow alarms during Real-time contacts**
**Yellow limit Violations**
- Defined as not being immediately time critical
- Yellow limits are to be logged and trended immediately
- Subsystem engineers will be notified via Subsystem Contact List SOP
- Subsystem engineers will then instruct online personnel for specific trend requests and others to notify
**Red-limit Violations**
- Defined as operator action being required to avoid potential damage to a spacecraft component, subsystem, instrument or mission
- Each violation *is required* to have a corresponding red-limit response Cecil procedure to specifically deal with red-limit violations
- This time-critical anomaly response will be the responsibility of the FOT

## EOS-Aura Current Operational Approach to Limit Violations

**FOT Real-time Operator monitors spacecraft and instrument telemetry**
- Operators are required to pay attention to RED and YELLOW limit violations
- Operators take action as agreed upon with the Instrument Operations Teams (IOTs)
**RED & YELLOW Limit Violations**
- Yellow Limit Violations require operator attention & notification of the IOT / FOT Offline Instrument Engineer
- Red Limits Violations require _immediate_ action by FOT using pre-approved procedures (Cecil PROC via Red Limit Response Database)
- DOES NOT WAIT FOR IOT APPROVAL
**(or)**
**Call IOT**

## EOS-Aura Desired Operational Approach to Limit Violations

**FOT Real-time Operator monitors spacecraft and instrument telemetry**
- Operators are required to pay attention to RED and YELLOW limit violations
- Operators take action as agreed upon with the Instrument Operations Teams (IOTs)
**RED & YELLOW Limit Violations**
- Yellow Limit Violations require operator attention & notification of the IOT / FOT Offline Instrument Engineer
- Red Limits Violations require _immediate_ action by FOT using pre-approved procedures (Cecil PROC via Red Limit Response Database)
- DOES NOT WAIT FOR IOT APPROVAL
**Resulting Control Center Benefits**
**Eliminates confusion.**
- All telemetry is **GREEN**, unless a problem is occurring
- No “Good” or “OK” Red/Yellow Limits
- Same as Aqua
**Streamlines practice**
- Operators have exact instructions for dealing with every Red Limit Violation
**Safer Operations/Longer Mission Life**
- Quick response for critical problems
# Presentation: 531985

## Primary mirrors for exoplanet imagingDevelopments at Steward Observatory Mirror Lab 

- MMT with deformable secondary
- Off-axis figuring
- active thermal figure control for large, lightweight honeycomb primary mirrors

## Phase apodization at 5 m at MMT

- Codona phase apodization at the MMT at 5 m (50% in core)
- Giant planets anomlously bright at 5 m
- 90% Strehl with deformable secondary
- Flux at 2.5 /D in circle 3.10-3 of peak
- Rms fluctuations in 20 sec 2.5 10-4 (9 magnitudes)
- (Codona ,Kenworthy and Hinz)

## Current status of NST off-axis mirror.  parent f/0.7)

- Spurious data due to fiducial markers on test optics have been masked out. Alignment aberrations and flexible bending modes have been subtracted.

- nm surface

- Smoothed with 30 mm FWHM Gaussian
- 19 nm rms surface error

- Central 1.2 m subaperture
-  21 nm rms surface error

- Mirror is 1.7 m diameter, R = 7.7 m, 1.84 m off-axis. Aspheric departure is 2.7 mm.

## Projected 5 nm surface after ion figuring 

- Difference between original and smoothed maps represents residual error after ion figuring with 30 mm ion beam.  5.2 nm rms surface error

## 8m off-axis

- Mirror Lab currently making first of 6 8.4 m off-axis  mirrors for Giant Magellan telescope
- Goal Magellan quality (20 nm rms surface)
- Blank cast, mounts being bonded now
- Metrology tower being built, 3.8 m spherical folding mirror for test
- (6.5 m vacuum test collimator nearly completed)

## Advantages of active primary over conventional relay and conjugated dm

- higher throughput and simpler – no additional optics needed
- simpler and lighter translates to lower cost, lower mass
- no cross coupling of phase into amplitude errors, which limits spectral bandwidth for very high contrast imaging.  This is very important for exoplanet imaging
- no increased field aberrations from the added relay
- Allows full spacecraft system test on ground

## Principles of thermal actuation

- The neutral state of the mirror will be one in which a steady state heat flow is established.
- Corrections made by increasing or decreasing the power in the different heaters, to expand or contract the local glass as required.
- Low order modes controlled by front-to-back gradients (bimetallic strip type bending)
- High order modes by local rib expansion and contraction

## Thermal finite element modelfor 37 cell mirror 

- Color coded for equilibrium temperatures when the cold fingers are held isothermal, Joule heating of face and ribs

## Fractional residual errors for thermally induced Zernike terms.  

## Start on lab test

- Hextek borosilicate honeycomb sandwich mirror                  2 inch cells, 2.5 inches deep, 8 mm thick ribs

## 3 cells have enlarged back holes and radiative cooler plates

## Interferometric surface metrology 

- Interferometric surface metrology
- after cooling for 11 minutes

## 100 mm

- 320 nm

- 250 nm

- t=11 min, T=22 - 2.7°C

- t=27 min, T=22 - 4°C

- t=0 min, T=22°C

- Rib cooling influence function

- For space use proven fused silica honeycomb technology