BEE-spoke-data/govdocs1-by-extension huggingface dataset:
# Presentation: 232706

## Superconductor-Insulator transition 

- Superconducting islands,
- Phase fluctuations
-  and the
- Superconductor-Insulator transition
-                  _Yonatan Dubi *_, Y. Meir and Y. Avishai
-                   Ben-Gurion University, Beer-Sheva, Israel

** ****BGU**

- *currently at UCSD

##                                                   The B-tuned SIT

-  [Sambandamurty, D.Shahar *et.al.*    *PRL* _**92**_, 107005 (2004)]

- What is the nature of the transition ?

- SC

- SC

- INS

- INS

##                                                   The B-tuned SIT

- Some clues from experiment:

- [M. Steiner and A. Kapitulnik,
-  Physica C **422**, 16 (2005)]

- [ Sambandamurty, D.Shahar *et.al.*    *PRL* _92_, 107005 (2004)]

- Bc=3.68T

- [Crane *et.al., *PRB **75**, 18453 (2007)[

- Goal – Describe the transition from a 	    microscopic model

##                                                   Pairing fluctuations 

- First step : a mean-field calculation of pairing potential in a highly disordered system

- Formation of “SC islands”

##                                                   Pairing fluctuations 

- Non-zero pair-correlations are not enough for superconductivity-
- the system is superconducting only if the SC phases on the two sides of the system are correlated.
- Problem – the BdG formalism cannot capture phase fluctuations

##                                                             Phase fluctuations 

- Second step : Phase fluctuations beyond mean-field (thermal Monte-Carlo  [Mayr et.al., PRL 94, 217001 (2005)])

- [ YD, Y. Meir and Y. Avishay, Nature **449**, 876-880 (18 October 2007) ]

##                                                             Phase fluctuations 

- Third step:
-  A sample will be superconducting as long as there is a “phase-rigid” path

## Measuring SC islands by applying parallel field

##                                                   Summary 

- A mean-field calculation shows formation and evolution of SC islands with *B*-field.
- A phase-fluctuating model reveals the SIT from a microscopic Hamiltonian for the first time (no need for effective theory).
- A suggestion to measure phase-fluctuation-induced islands – via a local measurement with parallel magnetic field.
- The model agrees with many experimental observations.
- 	[ YD, Y.Meir and Y. Avishai, PRB **75**,054509 (2006) ;
- 	YD, Y.Meir and Y. Avishai, PRL **94**, 156406 (2005)]

##                                                   Outlook 

-    Relevance to Hight Tc?

##                                            Some mysteries left... 

-  What is the nature of the insulating state ?
-  Is the a metallic state at high fields ?
-  What  is the true ground-state of the system ?
-  ....

- Thank you for your attention
# Presentation: 322963

## The validation of in situ measurements of water isotopes on the NASA WB-57: scientific implications of the Harvard Hoxotope and ICOS observations.  

- Hoxotope: Thomas F. Hanisco and J. M. St. Clair,
- ICOS: E. J. Moyer, F. N. Keutsch, D. S. Sayres
- Harvard Water: J. R. Spackman, J. Smith, R. Lockwood, and E. M. Weinstock,  J. G. Anderson
- Harvard CO2: B. Daube, E. Gottlieb, S. Wofsy
- JPL H2O: R. Herman, R. Troy
- ALIAS 	H2O/HDO: L. Christensen, C. Webster
- MMS: T. P. Bui

- Aura Validation Meeting
- NASA Goddard
- September 20, 2005

## Compare isotopic results 
Quantify level of agreement
Quantify discrepancies
Identify possible sources
Arrive at best values for D
Discussion of scientific implications

- Quantify level of agreement
- Quantify discrepancies
- Identify possible sources
- Arrive at best values for D
- Discussion of scientific implications

- Hoxotope and ICOS intercomparison

## Water isotopes as tracers of Convection

- HDO condenses more readily than H2O
- Rainout leads to HDO depletion
- Ice injection can make the stratosphere “Heavy”
*In situ* water isotope measurements can offer a tracer for the condensation history of air parcels

- D = 1000 ( HDO/H2O/SMOW – 1)

## HDO Measurement Comparison

- Photofragment laser induced fluorescence

- Integrated Cavity Absorption

## deltaD Comparison

## deltaD Difference

## H2O regression

## HDO regression

## HDO fractional difference

- Large fractional differences in *stratospheric* HDO
- ICOS HDO is greater than Hoxotope HDO
- Likely due to ICOS offset (fit issues)
- Fit issues are mostly absent on 20050707

## 20050707 D

## presummary

- ICOS D offset of up to 100 per mil is likely due to the ICOS HDO fit.
- Source consistent with ICOS analysis
- Consistency on 20050707 when ICOS works best gives added confidence to D:
-  Dstratosphere = DHox = -462 per mil

## January July comparison

## CRYSTAL Comparison

## ATMOS tropical profiles

- Z. Kuang, G. C. Toon, P.O. Wennberg, and Y. L. Yung, Measured HDO/H2O ratios across the tropical tropopause, *Geophys. Res. Lett.,* 30(7), 1372, 2003.

- WB-57 Houston profile

## Stratospheric CO2 H2O

## Ice lofting D

## Ice lofting D lines

## Rayleigh Fraction

- XICE = (Dstratosphere – DRayleigh)/(DICE – DRayleigh)

## Summary

- Hoxotope and ICOS water isotope measurements are in excellent agreement throughout most of the dataset
- Within 3% difference in HDO for AVE_WIIF
- D agree within 100 per mil (within instrument uncertainties)
- Differences between Hoxotope and ICOS are in the stratosphere
- HDO difference likely due to ICOS HDO spectral retrieval
- Flight of 20050707 shows excellent agreement (-5 per mil)
- Stratospheric D = -462 per mil
- Significantly heavier than January (D = -590)
- Significantly heavier than CRYSTAL/FACE (D = -713)
- Ice lofting mechanism are likely dominant
- Thanks to NASA IIP, NASA WB57, Harvard Engineering

## Rayleigh with Ice
# Presentation: 829447

##  Halloween Fireworks(Oct-Nov 2003)

## Halloween Fireworks

- LASCO C3 [October 18 - November 8]

**Active regions 10484 & 10486 together produced:**
** **
** ****11 X-Class Flares**
** ****36+ M-Class Flares**
** ****Countless C-Class Flares**
** ****At least 15 “halo” CMEs**
** ****Many other small CMEs and jets.**

## Public Interest

- Unprecedented media coverage
- Over 2600 world-wide TV/Print reports
- Record SOHO Website Traffic
- > 4.5 million requests in one day
- >700 GB of data transferred in one day (bandwith limited)

##    Doubly ionized Carbon in the Plasma Tail of Comet Kudo-Fujikawa

- UVCS observations of Comet C/2002 X5 (Kudo-Fujikawa) when it passed within 0.2 AU of the Sun in Jan 2003
- Composite image: white light corona (purple), comet in Ly  1216 Å (blue) and in C III 977 Å (red-orange)
- The C III emission has never been observed before in a comet.
- The upper (zoomed-in) image to the right shows a disconnection event with the plasma tail drifting away from the Sun, as a new tail is being formed.
- The unexpected brightness of the tail in C II and C III is due to a production rate of carbon ions that is at least 25% of the mean water production rate.
- The high carbon production rate is unexplainable by photodissociation of CO but instead attributed to the evaporation and photoionization of atomic carbon from organic refractory compounds in the cometary dust grains.

- Povich et al., Science 302, Dec. 2003
# Presentation: 763322

## NWS Partners Website

- Overview and Feedback

- Mike Gerber, Office of Climate, Water, and Weather Services
- _[Mike.Gerber@noaa.gov](mailto:Mike.Gerber@noaa.gov)_
- 301-713-1706 x116

## Slide 2

## Feedback

## Ideas for Improvement

- Latest SCNs and TINs on main page with option to subscribe via RSS feed
- Searchable Directives and Procedures
- Product information and specifications
- Integration of Industrial Meteorology site content
- Partners List
- Calendar of Partner related events
- Partner Initiatives
- Other ideas?
# Presentation: 487594

## IP/8

**IP/8**
**Safety Assessment Process and Data Requirements to Support Operational-Trial Use of ADS-based Separation Standards In the Anchorage Flight Information Region**

**Presented By:****	****FAA****	**
**Date:****	****May 14-18, 2007**

## Overview

**The paper provides:**
- a brief description of the safety assessment process and data requirements for ADS-based separation standards in the Anchorage FIR
- It also provides a preliminary summary of ADS operations observed to date in Anchorage oceanic airspace

## Data Sources & Safety Assessment Methodology

**Data sources**
- Data from Ocean21 system
- FAA safety databases
- FAA Enhanced Traffic Management System
**Safety Assessment Methodology**
- Following the requirements and guidance of ICAO Doc 4444, Doc 9689, and Annex 11  the safety assessment consists of estimating the risk of collision which will pertain when the 50-nm longitudinal separation standard and the 30-nm lateral and longitudinal separation standards are applied in Anchorage oceanic airspace and comparing this risk to the specified Target Level of Safety (TLS)
- The value of the TLS which applies to both the lateral and longitudinal dimensions is 5 x 10-9 fatal accidents per flight hour
- Estimation of collision risk is carried out using the general collision risk model, which has different forms for the lateral and longitudinal dimensions

## ADS Operations Observed in Anchorage Oceanic Airspace

**Average number of ADS flights per day from 1 March through 23 April =  98 flights per day**

## ADS Operations by RNP-Type in Anchorage Oceanic Airspace

## ADS Operations by RNP-Type in Anchorage Oceanic Airspace

| RNP-Type | Average Number of Observed Operations per day |
| --- | --- |
| RNP-4 | 13 |
| RNP-10 | 85 |

## ADS WPC Reports – March 2007

## ADS BAS Reports – March 2007

## ADS LDC Reports – March 2007

## Slide 10
# Presentation: 189591

## 2nd OZARK AQUFER FORUMMissouri Southern State UniversityNovember 20, 2007

- TONIGHT’S AGENDA
- Introduction – Walt Aucott, USGS-KS
- MO Ground water 101 – Jim Vandike, MO-DNR
- KS  Ground water 101 – Al MacFarlane, KGS
- Ozark Aquifer GW Flow Model– John Czarnecki, USGS-AR
- POSTER Session—See what organizations are doing in Tri-State area and ask questions

## USGS Ozark Aquifer Study Overview

- Duration – 3+ years
- Start – August 2005
- Finish – March 2009
- Study Funding/Work Hiatus –
- 		October 2006-March 2007
- Public Meetings – Fall 2006, Fall 2007, Spring 2009 (rollout)

## USGS Ozark Aquifer Study Approach

- Construct a ground water flow model to help address ground water availability questions
-    – John Czarnecki, USGS-AR
- Collect ground water quality samples to help assess water quality and potential for migration of poor quality water
-    – Mike Pope, USGS-KS

## Progress/Status To Date

- Regional water-level maps completed and almost published
- Ground water flow model calibration in progress
- Water quality sampling in KS, MO, OK, and AR and vertical samples in KS completed

## Study Funding

- USGS – earmark
- Kansas Water Office
- USGS – cooperative program

## Technical Advisory Committee

- Sam Perkins-KDA
- Al MacFarlane-KGS
- Bob Kirby-KRWA
- Jim Vandike-MDNR
- Pete Rauch-Monett
- Bob Fabian-OWRB
- Mark Doolan-EPA 7

-                  _**USGS**_
- Walt Aucott-KS
- John Czarnecki-AR
- Mike Pope-KS
- John Schumacher-MO
- 	(Joe Richards)
- Mark Becker-OK
- 	(Kelli DeHay)

## 2nd OZARK AQUFER FORUMMissouri Southern State UniversityNovember 20, 2007

- TONIGHT’S AGENDA
- Introduction – Walt Aucott, USGS-KS
- MO Ground water 101 – Jim Vandike, MO-DNR
- KS  Ground water 101 – Al MacFarlane, KGS
- Ozark Aquifer GW Flow Model– John Czarnecki, USGS-AR
- POSTER Session—See what organizations are doing in Tri-State area and ask questions
# Presentation: 019317

## DTCA: The Need for Greater Regulation and Enforcement

***www.prescriptionaccess.org***

**Notes:**
Marketing to medical professions
Control of research 
Lobbying and political power
Patent protection
Still one of most profitable industries in U.S.

## Harms of DTCA

- Interferes with Doctor-Patient Relationship
- “Fields of Flowers” effect
- Promotes brand-name drugs over generics, diet, exercise
- Drives up costs
- Skews research priorities

## BITTER PILL AWARDS

**BITTER PILL AWARDS**
**Exposing Drug Company Manipulation of Consumers**

## Speak No Evil Award: For Concealing Drug Risks and Benefits in the Name of Profits

- 20 million+ took Vioxx – mostly due to ads
- 70% of Cox 2 users in 1st three years didn’t need them
- How many heart attacks were caused by the ads?
- How many billions wasted?

## Least Extreme Makeover Award: For Dressing Up an Old Drug with a New Name and a New Price Tag

- Nexium is no more effective than Prilosec
- Nexium is 7 times more expensive
- $4.6 billion estimated 2005 sales
- Made possible only by marketing

## Are drug ads the best way to educate patients?	

- “[T]o rely on the drug companies for unbiased evaluations of their products makes about as much sense as relying on beer companies to teach us about alcoholism...
- The fact is that marketing is meant to sell drugs, and the less important the drug, the more marketing it takes to sell it. Important new drugs do not need much promotion. Me-too drugs do.”
-  Marcia Angell, MD, New England Journal of Medicine

## Recommendations

- Increase enforcement
- Ensure adequate staff to review promotions
- End Chief Counsel review of all  enforcement letters
- Require pre-broadcast ad submission
- Ask Congress for power to impose civil monetary penalties
- Prohibit reminder ads

## Recommendations, continued

- Regulate “disease awareness” ads

## Recommendations, continued

- Regulate drug ads aimed at children

## Recommendations, continued

- Prohibit coupons
- Return to pre-1997 requirements

***www.prescriptionaccess.org***
# Presentation: 363459

##  PMDB

** ****PMDB**

**Limit Setting**

## LEVELS OF STRESS

| Stress Level | Staff Action |
| --- | --- |
| Moderate Stress | Verbal Intervention |
| Severe Stress | Limit Setting |
| Panic | Personal Safety Skills or Therapeutic Containment |
| Tension Reduction | Therapeutic Rapport |

## Therapeutic Verbal Interventions

- Using silence
- Accepting
- Giving recognition
- Offering self
- Giving broad openings
- Asking open ended questions

## Therapeutic Verbal Interventions

- Placing event in time or sequence
- Making observations
- Encouraging descriptions of perceptions
- Encouraging comparison
- Restating

## Therapeutic Verbal Interventions

- Reflecting
- Focusing
- Exploring
- Giving information
- Seeking clarification
- Presenting reality
- Voicing doubt
- Seeking consensual validation

## Therapeutic Verbal Interventions

- Verbalizing the implied
- Encouraging evaluation
- Attempting to translate into feelings
- Suggesting collaboration
- Summarizing
- Encouraging formulation of a plan of action

## SEVERE LEVEL OF STRESS

- Perceptual Field Limited
- Focused on One Thing
- Tunnel Vision
- Processing of Information Severely Limited

**SELF**

***SOUND***

***SMELL***

***TASTE***

***TOUCH***

***VISION***

## SIGNS OF ESCALATION

**Threats to Others**
**Increasingly Loud / Boisterous Behavior**
**Begins to Lose Control**
**Harmful or Dangerous Behavior**
**Violation of Policy or Procedures**

## LIMIT SETTING

**Clear / Calm**
**Non-Threatening**
**Encouraging**
**Enforceable**
***Person may need time to process the information***
***Directions may need to be repeated***

## LIMIT SETTING

**Firm Yet Supportive**
**Simple and Direct**
**Describe Desired Behavior**
**Appropriate to Situation**
**Progressive in Nature**

## By Enforcing Consequences, Staff Provide a Structure for Future Learning

## AVOID POWER STRUGGLES

## Limit Setting Summary

**Use when more control is needed**
**Should be appropriate to circumstances**
** ****Be clear, direct and supportive**
**Show respect for others**
**Give options if possible**
**State consequences if necessary**
**Seek to maintain personal dignity and therapeutic relationships**

## PANIC LEVEL OF STRESS

**Perceptual Field Very Narrow**
**Unable to Process Information**
**Unable to Problem Solve**
**Dangerous to Self or Others**

## INTERVENTIONS FOR ACTING OUT PERSON

**Personal Safety Skills**
**Therapeutic Containment**

## LEVELS OF STRESS

| Stress Level | Staff Action |
| --- | --- |
| Moderate Stress | Verbal Intervention |
| Severe Stress | Limit Setting |
| Panic | Personal Safety Skills or Therapeutic Containment |
| Tension Reduction | Therapeutic Rapport |

## TENSION REDUCTION

*Touch*

**  ****Returning to Normal **
**  ****Perceptual Field is Keen**
**  ****Taking in Information**
**  ****Returning to Normal – **
**  ****Takes Time**
# Presentation: 157148

## SRM v3.0

**SRM v3.0**
**LBNL Implementation**
**Status Report**
**Scientific Data Management Research Group**
**Computational Research Division**
**Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory**

## LBNL status on SRM v3.0

**SRM v3.0 Web Services prototype**
**Based on LBNL implementation of SRM v2.1.1**
**Most of the functions reused, and only interface changed**
**For compatibility testing for future versions of SRM**
**Successful test prototype with additional input and output parameters**
**The test prototype available online**
**http://sdm.lbl.gov/srm-dist/examples**

## LBNL status on SRM v3.0

**SRM v3.0 Web Services prototype**
**Operational Spec**
**Keep the same function names as port types**
**Optional parameters for inputs and outputs, rather than multiple methods with different parameters for the same function**
**Compatibility tested for possible added parameters in the future versions**
**http://sdm.lbl.gov/srm-dist/examples**

## LBNL status on SRM v3.0

**SRM v3.0 Web Services prototype**
**interfaces grouped into different WSDL files by the core and advanced feature set**
**srm-core.3.0.wsdl with srm-core.3.0.xsd**
**srm-copy.3.0.wsdl**
**srm-space.3.0.wsdl**
**srm-dir.3.0.wsdl**
**srm-authz.3.0.wsdl**
**srm-admin.3.0.wsdl**
**WSDL file name follows the agreed format from v.2.1.1 WSDL discovery method**
**srm[.version].wsdl**
**WSDL files available online**
**http://sdm.lbl.gov/srm-dist/examples**

## LBNL status on SRM v3.0

**Experiences on SRM v3.0 WS prototype**
**Fast transition from SRM v2.1.1**
**Easy implementation of Core functions**
**If SRM v2.1.1 implemented, easy implementation of Advanced features**
**SRM V3.0 client based on SRM v2.1.1 client**
**srm-copy, srm-space, srm-dir, srm-request, srm-admin**
# Presentation: 223366

## Three-Dimensional Equilibrium Reconstruction: The V3FIT Code

- James D. Hanson, John Shields, Stephen F. Knowlton
*Auburn University*
- Steven P. Hirshman, Edward A. Lazarus
*Oak Ridge National Laboratory*
- Lang Lao
*General Atomics*

## Equilibrium Reconstruction - Inverse Problem

- Forward Problem, Given parameters **p**, compute model values of signals (diagnostics): _**S**_model(**p**)
- Minimize
- Obtain **p**(model; Sobserve)

- V3FIT Code: Fast, Flexible, Extensible

- Fortran 95, modules, derived types
- VMEC is Equilibrium Solver
- Magnetic Diagnostics for Signals

## First Reconstruction:  October 2006

- Future Work

- Code Completion, Algorithm Development
- Benchmark with EFIT, axisymmetric reconstruction
- Interface with Experimentalists
- Add Signal Types Beyond Magnetic Diagnostics
- Other Equilibrium Solvers

- Contour Plot of g2 in parameter space
- CTH Equilibrium, simulated observations
- 12 magnetic diagnostics, 2 parameters
- Jacobian computed by Finite Difference
- Red dots and dashed line - reconstruction path
# Presentation: 098141

## Broadcast Television Archiving

- Rod Hewitt
- rod@coolstf.com

## Current System

- Analog input-based
- Encodes to MPEG-2 Program Stream files
- Initially DLT tape based
- Now uses removable 3.5 inch drives
- Operational since 2000

## Current System

- Records up to twenty channels on five PCs
- Content from around the world
- More than half of these channels have EPG
- US and Canadian channels have captions
- Operates at a house in suburban MD

## Current System Issues

- Analog based
- Recodes video that comes in digital
- Caption data is lost in recordings (kept as text)
- Expensive to expand
- A big chunk stops working in February 2009!

## Digital Future

- The future of broadcasting is digital
- One big lesson learned:
- Needs to be geographically redundant
- ...and therefore inexpensively implemented
- ...and inexpensive to run long term

## MPEG-2 Transport Stream

- The worldwide standard for broadcast DTV
- A single analog **channel **is replaced with a digital **multiplex**
- The multiplex can contain one or more **programs**
- Encoded with different codecs
- With multiple audio and data streams

## Digital Archiving

- Splits programs from MPEG-2 transport streams
- One tuner required per multiplex
- Multiplex may contain a number of useful programs or just one
- Transparent across the world’s DTV standards
- Works with terrestrial, satellite and cable

## Digital Archiving

- Splits files based on EPG or a timer
- EPG from in or outside the multiplex
- Extracts captions in North America
- Extracts subtitles in some European countries
- Generates thumbnail pictures of video
- Automatically moves data onto empty drives
- XML index to each event recorded

## Hardware is cheap!

- For two channel terrestrial:
- PC - $400
- Monitor - $150
- Two off-air DVB-T or ATSC cards - $200
- UPS - $200
- Antenna - $50
- Around $1000 per system

## Storage is cheap!

- 1 TB SATA drives are now typically $179
- With MPEG-2 SD, that’s 23 days
- ...or 46 days with H.264 SD
- ...and 6 days MPEG-2 HD
- About $8 per channel per MPEG-2 SD day
- Two MPEG-2 SD per year for less than $7000

## Digital Archiving Examples

- Multiplexes from around the world

## European Satellite

## UK Terrestrial

## France Terrestrial

## Finland Terrestrial

## Germany Cable

## Mali Cable

## Dallas,TX Terrestrial

## Columbus, NC Cable

## Brazil Terrestrial

## Broadcast Television Archiving

- Rod Hewitt
- rod@coolstf.com
# Presentation: 831638

## Status of Visual DCT

- EPICS Workshop, Berlin, May 2002

- R. Sabjan on behalf of M. Sekoranja
- J. Stefan Institute and Cosylab Ltd.
- in collaboration with **SLS** and **APS**

## Status after ICALEPCS

- we are now "100% committed” to make a CapFast replacement
- VDCT is released under modified BSD license
- A lot of people are already testing it
- key changes (current build 1232):
- (http://kgb.ijs.si/VisualDCT/release/changelog_generated.html):
- remove all blockers, bugfixes, enhancements
- allows plugins
- for now simulators
- JoiMint?
- JCA-plug directly into EPICS

**Notes:**
KZjev Management/Documentation/XML_Documentation.xml source + drop	
mark/doc-test/WIP/XML/*.xml

## A Lot of User Feedback

- EPICS community contact: John Maclean
- current possibilities
- write to kgb.ijs.si/bug
- select product VisualDCT
- send feature requests to
**rt-CSL-VisualDCT@cosylab.com**
- new sourcefourge-style project pages in preparation, including
- support@VisualDCT.cosylab.com
- bug@VisualDCT.cosylab.com
- list@VisualDCT.cosylab.com
- ...

## Example of Problems

- Typically incorrect usage of VDCT by first-time users
- user manual will be updated for FAQs
- unexpected types of DBs have to be considered
- SLAC  - they reserved “::”, while VDCT uses “:” for hierarchy separator
- results in “null” group
-  naming convention: what is record and what is group?

## Package A (funded by APS)

- More or less bug fixes:
- 1) Make all fields available as link destinations
- 2) Always place connectors on top of symbols.
- 3) The "Up One Level" button doesn't work when vdct is first started.
- 4)  Multiple zoom/un-zooms relocates the view rectangle location.
- 5)  Symbols don’t scale at the same proportion than the lines/spaces
- 6)  Print Preview doesn’t erase previous preview
- 7)  Create Makefile for VDCT.
- Go to JDK 1.4 – but are now really I/O performance problems?

## Package B (funding open)

- New features in:
- data entry (links,..)
- option to select which fields are shown
- "shortcut-stub" (global tags), “external link stub”
- place comments and graphical objects
- Scaling of Printing: resolution and paper size
- Inspector
- Configuration
- Hierarchical capabilities
- Navigation tools
- Documentation

## Package C (funding open)

- Provide a gdct conversion tool.
- Provide the ability to have multiple files/dbs open at one time.
- Define interactions with higher level tools/applications (Oracle).
- Use the dbStaticLib to access the files
- dbStaticLib would need to be modified by APS staff to cope with comments.
- Provide a CapFast conversion tool

## Interesting!

- Dr Chong Lee of “Phase 3” asked:
- “are we interested in source code licenses for Capfast”?
- Price unknown at present.
- Depends on:
- # OS’s
- How many sites want source code
- How many want just binaries
# Presentation: 712986

## Suspicious Activity Report by Casinos & Card Clubs Filing Trend

***Total SARs: 1,358***

**Suspicious Activity Report by Casinos & Card Clubs Filing Trend**
**State of Oklahoma**
**For the Period August 1, 1996 through December 31, 2007**

## Suspicious Activities Reported by Casinos & Cards Clubs

- Note: The pie chart represents the top nine characterizations plus additional characterizations in total.
- An individual SAR-C may cite more than one suspicious activity.  Hence, the number of activities detailed here
-  exceeds the total number of SARs.

**Suspicious Activities Reported by Casinos & Cards Clubs**
**State of Oklahoma**
**For the Period August 1, 1996 through December 31, 2007**

## Suspicious Activity Report by Casinos & Card Clubs Filing Trendby Type of Gaming EstablishmentsState of OklahomaFor the Period January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2007

## Suspicious Activity Report by Casinos & Card Clubs

**Geographic Reporting Locations**
**State of Oklahoma**
**For the Period January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2007**

**Note: Statistics based on Casino Address**

- Thackerville

- Devol

- Okemah

- Newkirk

- Red Rock

- Watonga

- Oklahoma City

- Catoosa
# Presentation: 177783

## Designing the Time of Flight System

- Rajendran Raja
- Fermilab
- MIPP Collaboration meeting
- November 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

## MIPP Radiation lengths

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002

- Rajendran Raja, MIPP Collaboration Meeting

- Nov 9, 2002
# Presentation: 248963

## SM Higgs in the 160-250 GeV Mass range

- Paul Derwent
- FNAL/Beams Division/Pbar/CDF
- 4 May 2001

## Standard Model Higgs above WW Threshold

- Dominated by WW
- Depends on weak coupling constant *g* and kinematic constraints for on-shell W bosons
- Above 2MZ significant contributions from ZZ
- Test:  Higgs coupling to weak gauge bosons
- Mass coupling?
- For bbar b? small coupling!
- Others even smaller!

## Higgs Branching Fractionsfrom HDECAY

## Simple Statistical Analysis

- For measuring branching fractions:
- Numerator:  identified Higgs decays to WW
- Denominator:  number of Higgs produced
- Use process e+e- -> ZH
- Followed by Z->e+e- or Z->μ+μ-
- Identify Higgs via Missing Mass Technique
- Mass recoiling against Z
- Assume 80% efficiency in finding events of this type
- Measure Numerator and Denominator in same dataset
- Independent of luminosity and cross section calculations

## Scenarios

- Cross Section for Associated Production from
- W. Kilian, M. Krämer, and P.M. Zerwas, hep-ph/9605347
- SM Branching ratios from HDECAY
- A. Djouadi, J.Kalinowski, and M. Spira, Comput. Phys. Commun. **108**, 56 (1998)

- Scenario 1:
- Gauge Boson Decays
- √s = 500 GeV
- 250 fb-1

- Scenario 2:
- Rare Decays
- √s = MZ+MH+50 GeV
- (optimal value)
- 2000 fb-1

- 10 fb-1 = 107 seconds at 1033

## Scenario 1

- WW ID:
- ≥ 50%
- ≥150 events
- ≤10% Statistical uncertainty

## Scenario 1

- ZZ ID:
- Leptons only
- ~40%
- ≤ 60 events
- ≥13% Statistical uncertainty
- Difficult below 2MZ
- Distinguishing ZZ hadronic decays from WW challenging but could add significantly to this channel

- b bbar very difficult for MH > 160

## Scenario 2

- WW even easier
- ZZ straightforward for MH > 2 MZ
- b bbar still somewhat problematic

## Scenario 2

- b bbar
- 90% ID for 1 b
- Problematic for MH >2MZ

## Scenario 2

## Things to consider

- Include WW fusion production process
- Increase number of Higgs
- How to identify as Higgs events?
- Include background processes
- ZZ*  and Z expect to be important
- Can we distinguish H->ZZ from H->WW hadronic decays?
- Simulation/detector design question

## Conclusions

- For MH > 2 MW
- SM Higgs decays dominant to gauge bosons
- Measurement of BR(H->WW) straightforward
- Could distinguish SM Higgs from non-SM Higgs
- Difficult to measure coupling to fermions
- Requires significant luminosity for b bbar
-  and c cbar probably not possible
# Presentation: 675643

**MTAC 117**

- November , 2007

## Seamless Acceptance, Performance-Based Verification Implementation, Benefits, Obstacles and Feedback 

Ty Taylor, JC Penney
Pritha Mehra, USPS

- Ty Taylor, JC Penney
- Pritha Mehra, USPS

**MTAC 117**

## Vision

**Electronic**** ****Mailing **
**Information**

**Electronic **
**Centralized **
**Payment**

**Scan at**
**Entry**** ****Induction**

**Electronic **
**Advance**** ****Notification**

**Electronic **
**In-Process & Performance-Based**
**Mail Verification**

## Identify obstacles  
Define benefits
Identifying feedback elements, reports and reconciliation process
Define tolerances  
Identify communication and education processes
Raise system wide awareness of the value the Intelligent Mail Barcode will bring to address quality

**Define benefits**
**Identifying feedback elements, reports and reconciliation process**
**Define tolerances  **
**Identify communication and education processes**
**Raise system wide awareness of the value the Intelligent Mail Barcode will bring to address quality**

**Desired Results**

## Four Telecons
Reviewed Performance-Based Verification
Reviewed Electronic Mail Improvement Reporting
Reviewed Seamless Acceptance Pilot
One Workgroup Meeting
Reviewed Intelligent Mail Barcodes
Reviewed Electronic Documentation Options

**Reviewed Performance-Based Verification**
**Reviewed Electronic Mail Improvement Reporting**
**Reviewed Seamless Acceptance Pilot**
**One Workgroup Meeting**
**Reviewed Intelligent Mail Barcodes**
**Reviewed Electronic Documentation Options**

**Review**

## Implementation Obstacles
Intelligent Mail Barcodes Generation and Application
Intelligent Mail Barcode
Intelligent Mail Tray Barcode
Intelligent Mail Container Barcode
Mailer ID Issuance/Management
Electronic Documentation Options
Vendor Solutions
Mail.dat, Web Services, Postage Statement Wizard
Unique Piece, Unique Tray, Unique Container

**Intelligent Mail Barcodes Generation and Application**
**Intelligent Mail Barcode**
**Intelligent Mail Tray Barcode**
**Intelligent Mail Container Barcode**
**Mailer ID Issuance/Management**
**Electronic Documentation Options**
**Vendor Solutions**
**Mail.dat, Web Services, Postage Statement Wizard**
**Unique Piece, Unique Tray, Unique Container**

**Immediate Next Steps**

## Intelligent Mail Barcodes, Labeling, eDoc
Industry Co-Chair: Charlie Howard, Jody Berenblatt
USPS Co-Chair: Margaret Choiniere, Uni Han-Norton

MLOCR
Industry Co-Chair: Steve Krejcik
USPS Co-Chair: Karen Zachok

Pallet Separation for Origin Mail Subgroup
USPS Co-chair: Joel Walker
Industry Co-Chair: Sharon Harrison

Web Services
USPS Co-chair: Dana Nacke
Industry Co-chair: Lisa Bowes

**Industry Co-Chair: Charlie Howard, Jody Berenblatt**
**USPS Co-Chair: Margaret Choiniere, Uni Han-Norton**
**MLOCR**
**Industry Co-Chair: Steve Krejcik**
**USPS Co-Chair: Karen Zachok**
** **
**Pallet Separation for Origin Mail Subgroup**
**USPS Co-chair: Joel Walker**
**Industry Co-Chair: Sharon Harrison**
**Web Services**
**USPS Co-chair: Dana Nacke**
**Industry Co-chair: Lisa Bowes**

**Subgoups**
# Presentation: 679269

## GPRA:  New Climate Observations Introduced

-      FY2005 Target: 1014 new ocean observing platforms deployed;
-      January 2005:  139 total ocean observing platforms (relative to total FY04 deployments); 192 ARGO floats

- Jan. 05

**B**

**Notes:**
The drop in total platforms deployed seems to be caused by two reasons -- 1) our moored buoy count includes Great Lakes moored buoys and those do not report in winter; 2) a temporary drop in the number of active drifters -- i.e., more deaths than redeployments -- the redeployments will catch up over the next couple months.  Such fluctuations are normal.

## GPRA:  Reduce the Error in Global Measurements of Sea Surface Temperature

-      FY05 target: 0.5 °C; Long-term Target: Error of 0.2 °C by 2008
-      Long-term measure:  annual targets, progress reported quarterly

- More rapid expansion of the in situ network over the next several years will minimize the satellite bias error, enabling more accurate global sea surface temperature from a combination of satellite and in situ measurements.

- Note: this measure is proposed as a new GPRA for FY2006; it is already reported on quarterly

- Satellite bias error: the systematic difference between satellite-derived vs. in situ measurements of sea surface temperature

- Jan. 05

**B**
# Presentation: 287381

## PoP  “We Want It But Don’t Get It”

- Kurt M. Van Speybroeck
- NWS Brownsville TX
- GFE Workshop #4
- 22-24 Apr 2003

## Background Info

- Lower 8 counties in Texas
- Complex terrain begins 70 miles west and southwest of Brownsville
- West, south, and southwest winds all downslope
- High RH in strong low level shear
- Model QPF and PoP almost always too generous
- Model Thunder is often too agressive

## Cross Section of Deep South Texas

## Why ?

- PW above 2 inches most likely to produce
- Low level jet pumps up moisture but shreds/stretches convective column
- Often results in light precipitation with  streamer type showers
- Thunder is also too generous in the models

## Is It a Best Practice?

- Delete ALL model and SmartInit PoPs
- 50% Modify the Wx grid and generate PoP
- 50% Modify Pop and generate Wx
- Still thinking of PoP as we used to and applying that to grids...then fragment into the required time blocks.

## Dangers

- Unscientific – You bet!
- Verification – Yeah right!
- Accountability!
- Meteorological Cancer – Well on the way!

## Population vs. Verification

## What Are We Searching For

- A scientific or empirical formula tailored to our area.
- Investigating the relationship between low level shear strength, PW and actual precip
- Need to account for shear or a surrogate in GFE to get PoP more realistic.

## Conclusions

- Meteorologists are proficient and comfortable, with current Zone type PoP
- Sufficiently Vague for the “customers”
- Basically making a mental transfer
- Areal and Temporal Resolution, with  verification will always be a problem.
# Presentation: 406522

## GTP for FNAL test stand

**True GTP will use Myrinet**
**1 trigger per message !**
**Proceed on 2 paths in parallel:**
**Use one of the test stand PCs as GTP**
- Will not be able to get us close to 100 kHz
**Use the MVME 2304 board as GTP**
- Use real-time OS:
**VxWorks ? (standard)**
**RT Linux ? (new, preferred)**
- Apparently boots diskless
- Both supported by Myricom

## MVME progress

**Now have VME crate**
**VxWorks help from ODS:**
**David Berg, Dinker Charak (and Luciano Piccoli)**
**RT Linux help from:**
**Don Holmgren**
- Maintains RT Linux pages at FNAL
**MiniBooNe**
- Using RT Linux on VME boards
**Need to buy:**
**Myrinet PMC ($1100+)**
**Myrinet SAN-LAN converter (~$100?  Not advertized)**
**Myrinet LAN cable ? (~$130)**
**Myrinet PCI NIC #2 for EVM ? ($1200+)**
# Presentation: 295217

## Network Measurements Working Group 

- Chairs:	Brian Tierney
- 			Bruce Lowekamp
- 			Richard Hughes-Jones
- NM-WG GGF7

- R. Hughes-Jones    ICFA Meeting    CERN    Nov 1999

## Agenda for Thursday Meeting 6 March 12:00

- Agenda bashing
- Note Takers
- Progress on the publication schema for network measurement data – “Schema Document”
- Summary of work from DAMNED Brian Tierney
- Update from the CIM Group Andrea
- Network Schemas EU DataGrid project Paul Mealor
- Work from the GLUE schema project  Augusto Ciuffoletti
- Discussion of “Schema Work”
- What to do
- How to proceed
- Suggestions from “Characteristics” discussion
- NM-WG Mile Stones

- R. Hughes-Jones    ICFA Meeting    CERN    Nov 1999

## Agenda for Thursday Meeting 6 March 12:00

- Agenda bashing
- Note Takers
- Progress on the publication schema for network measurement data – “Schema Document”
- Summary of work from DAMNED Brian Tierney
- Update from the CIM Group Andrea
- Network Schemas EU DataGrid project Paul Mealor
- Work from the GLUE schema project  Augusto Ciuffoletti
- Discussion of “Schema Work”
- What to do
- How to proceed
- Suggestions from “Characteristics” discussion
- NM-WG MileStones

- R. Hughes-Jones    ICFA Meeting    CERN    Nov 1999

## NM-WG Milestones (Old)

- July 2002	Begin work on tools classification
- Oct 2002   GGF 6 Chicago
- Oct 2002	Submit hierarchy document to GFSG
- Oct 2002	Finalize classification format and writeup
- Oct 2002	Begin work on relationship document
- Mar 2003   GGF 7 Tokyo
- Mar 2003	Submit tools classification to GFSG
- Mar 2003	Solid draft of relationship document
- Mar 2003	Begin working with implementers
- Jun  2003  GGF 8 Seattle
- July 2003	Submit relationship document to GFSG

- R. Hughes-Jones    ICFA Meeting    CERN    Nov 1999

## Proposed NM-WG Milestones

- July 2002	Begin work on tools classification
- Oct 2002   GGF 6 Chicago
- Oct 2002	Submit hierarchy document to GFSG
- Oct 2002	Finalize tools classification format (and writeup)
- Oct 2002	Begin work on relationship document
- Mar 2003   GGF 7 Tokyo
- Mar 2002	Finalize hierarchy document
- Mar 2003	Finalize tools classification note / web pages
- Mar 2003	Begin work on Schemas document
- Apr 2003	Submit hierarchy document to GFSG
- May 2003	Submit tools classification to GFSG – Discuss is web OK?
- Jun 2003  GGF 8 Seattle
- Oct 2003	Draft of Schemas document
- Oct 2003   GGF 9 Chicago

- R. Hughes-Jones    ICFA Meeting    CERN    Nov 1999

## Getting Involved in NMWG

- Network Measurements Working Group (NMWG) is part of the Performance and Information Systems area.
- Mailing list is nm-wg@gridforum.org
- Webpage is http://www-didc.lbl.gov/NMWG
- Join mailing list and participate
- Send an email to majordomo@gridforum.orgwith the body "subscribe nm-wg"

- R. Hughes-Jones    ICFA Meeting    CERN    Nov 1999
# Presentation: 748527

## 20%

**1**

**12**

**28**

**89**

**6**

**49**

**44**

**75**

**77**

**4**

**22**

**11**

**2**

**5**

**92**

**18**

**27**

**73**

**82**

**58**

**114**

**94**

**Distribution of invasive isolates from Active Bacterial Core surveillance **
**(ABCs) among the 22 most common *****emm***** types found during 2003. These **
**22 types accounted for 870/1042 (83.5%) of year 2003 isolates and 604 (78.6%)**
**of year 2004 isolates. There was a total of 51 *****emm***** types among year 2003**
**isolates and 49 *****emm***** types among year 2004 isolates. Note that the numbers **
**reflect *****emm***** typed isolates only,  and not the total numbers of ABCs GAS cases.**

**20%**

**40%**

**60%**

**80%**

**100%**

**2003, N = 1042 GAS isolates**

**2004, N =   768 GAS isolates**

***emm types***
# Presentation: 524430

## Analysis of the Probability of Availability of Navigation Guidance for NPAbyBrian O’KeeffeAdjunct Professor University of Canberra 

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Flight Scenario

**O ****------>---------->--------- ****D **------>-----**A**
**	****	****	****2 Hours****	****	****	****  1⁄2 Hour**

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring   (RAIM)

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Second type of RAIM

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Two main causes for RAIM being unavailable to ensure integrity :

**Because of insufficient satellites of appropriate angular spacing visible from the receiver location**
**Predictable before flight**
**Provided RAIM forecast taken into account when flight planning, **_**does not constitute a safety problem**_**  (same as a NOTAM)**
***and***

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## .....causes for RAIM being unavailable..

**2. Because of unpredictable failures of satellites during the aircraft’s flight which result in hazardously misleading information being radiated**
**TSO-C129 receivers will suffer Loss of Integrity (LOI) while faulty satellite in view**
**TSO-C145/6 receivers can **_**exclude**_** the signal from a faulty satellite and can continue the flight with integrity **

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## TSO-C129 and TSO-C145/146 Comparison 

_**TSO-C129**_
**Has FD only : results in LOI with one satellite failure**
**Assumes SA is ON at all times : reduces FD availability**
**Unable to range to GEOs : reduces FD availability**

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

_**TSO-C145/6**_
**Has FDE : GPS position with integrity available, even after satellite failure**
**Can detect SA *****ON***** or *****OFF***** : increases availability of FDE when SA *****OFF***** **
**Can range to GEOs : increases FDE availability**

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Comparison of Operations

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Comparison of Operations

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005

## Comparison of Operations

- CGSIC 45  Sept 2005
# Presentation: 904349

## The Other Health Programs

- Workers’ Compensation
- Employee Assistance Programs
- Fitness Programs
- Emergency Medical Services

## The Other Health Programs

***Workers’ Compensation***
-   Meeting Federal Worker 2000
- LPD goal 9.6 days per 100 workers  NASA is at 8.6 days –10.4%
- Federal LPD baseline: 68.1             Federal LPD 75.1 +11.3%
- Return to work policy

## The Other Health Programs

***Workers’ Compensation***
- Costs for 2002: $3.492M (1/2 yr)           Costs for 2001: $7.245M
- Reporting Costs to Center Management
- NPG 1840.1 Management of Workers’ Compensation Programs

## The Other Health Programs

***Employee Assistance Program (EAP)***
- Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (CISD) programs and training
- EAP post 9-11
- Increased Utilization Noted

## The Other Health Programs

***Employee Assistance Program (EAP) continued:***
- Minimum staffing
- On line training proposed
- Additional off hour resources

## The Other Health Programs

***Fitness Program***
- New Facilities: MSFC/GRC/WSTF
- Am College Sports Medicine standards
- Greater emphasis improved health stress reduction

## The Other Health Programs

***Emergency Medical Services (EMS)***
- Medical Aspects of EMS
- Different from Code QS PV
- EMS different from clinic
- Lack of National Standards
# Presentation: 826294

## Lunar Surface Solar Origins Explorer (LunaSSOX)

**Lunar Surface Solar Origins Explorer (LunaSSOX)**

_**Science Objectives:**_
**Upstream solar wind plasma ion contributions to lunar surface volatile composition via orbital measurements**
**Global  distribution of volatile and refractory surface composition via pickup ions from SEP ion sputtering**
**Solar F-corona plasma composition & near-solar dust interaction via remote spectroscopic & doppler imaging**
_**Associated Heliophysics RFAs:**_
**F3. Understand role of plasma and neutral interactions in nonlinear coupling of solar system regions. **
**J4. Understand and characterize the space weather effects on and within planetary environments to minimize risk ..**

_**Enabling and Enhancing Technology Development:**_
**High resolution plasma and neutral gas composition spectrometers integrated to energetic ion detectors for complete characterization of plasma/SEP interactions**
**Compact steerable high-resolution UV-VIS-IR spectroscopic imaging system for solar F-Corona, lunar surface & atmosphere, and other geospace observations – not diffraction limited by s/c occulter !**
**Lightweight solar-powered spacecraft bus system for flexible lunar orbital and solar observation operations**

_**Mission Implementation Description:**_
***Number of Spacecraft : 1 or more**
***Location: lunar 50-km polar orbit, day-night orientation **
***Attitude control: 3-axis stabilized (ram, nadir, solar)**
*** Instruments: **
**	****in situ low-energy ion-neutral  and energetic heavy ion mass spectrometers , magnetometer (20 kg/20 W)**
**	****remote UV-VIS-IR spectroscopic imagers (30 kg/30 W)**
_**Measurement Strategy:**_
_**Lunar orbit for near-lunar plasma ion, gas, mag, SEP**_
_**Lunar limb occultation from orbit for solar corona obs.**_

- North (E-Field)

- East-West           (B-Field)

**Lunar Limb “Knife-Edge” for solar coronal occultation**

**Solar Wind Ion Implantation Injects Solar Coronal Composition Into the Lunar Surface and Solar Energetic Ions (SEP) Sputter Surface Atoms**

_**Lunar He**__**+**__** Antisolar Pickup Ion Flux**_

_***John F. Cooper***_***, Richard E. Hartle, Edward C. Sittler                         NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland***
***Contact: John.F.Cooper@nasa.gov  (phone: 301-286-1193)***