Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, 2008 1 LCLS User Access Policy Goals Scientific thrust areas - Instrument Teams.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1-1 PRESENTER The Role of the Framework 7 Advisor Your Name Your Websites Websites
Advertisements

How Your Application Is Reviewed Vonda Smith, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer (SRO)
FACET: The Proposal Process with Q & A Carsten Hast SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory.
October 2, 2008Staff Development Plan & ImplementationPage 1 Briefing on Staff Development Plan and Implementation S. Kahn & D. MacFarlane October 2, 2008.
Tom Fornek LUSI June 17, LUSI UPDATE – June, 2008.
John N. Galayda LCLS Facility Advisory November 11, LCLS Update November 11, 2008 Construction Status LCLS Instruments.
John Arthur X-ray November 11, 2008 SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory 1 X-ray Overview LCLS Directorate structure.
John Arthur LCLS September 26, 2005 John Arthur SLAC LCLS Construction and Science.
LCLS Transition to Science DOE Status Review of the LUSI MIE Project The Instrument Readiness Review Process John Arthur LCLS Experimental Facilities Division.
J. B. Hastings LUSI Overview LCLS FAC March 20, 2007 LUSI Overview J. B. Hastings January 2007 Lehman Review Response to Lehman Review.
J. B. Hastings LCLS FAC October 29, 2007 LUSI Overview 1 LUSI Overview J. B. Hastings Science Opportunities Project Description Project.
J. B. Hastings LCLS User October 12-13, 2004 LCLS User Program J. Hastings SLAC/SSRL.
Diffraction studies of stimulated dynamics (pump-probe) Coherent-scattering studies of nanoscale fluctuations Atomic, molecular and optical science High.
LCLS – the Initial Scientific Teams and Thrusts AMO scienceLou DimauroNora Berrah Coherent scattering of Brian StephensonKarl Ludwig nanoscale fluctuationsGerhard.
John Arthur Photon October 27, Photon Systems Overview John Arthur SLAC.
LCLS Transition to Science DOE Status Review of the LUSI MIE Project NEH status and XFD operations Hal Tompkins, John Arthur LCLS Experimental Facilities.
John Arthur Photon April 20, 2006 Photon Systems Update John Arthur SLAC Photon Systems Manager.
1 T. Fornek 1 LUSI CXI FIDR June 3, 2009 Thomas Fornek Project Manager June 3, 2009 LUSI Coherent X-Ray Imaging Instrument Final.
John Arthur PIXEL Project April 7, 2005 Status of the Proposed PIXEL Project John Arthur SSRL/SLAC Photon Instrumentation.
1 T. Fornek 1 LUSI XCS FIDR June 17, 2009 Thomas Fornek Project Manager June 17, 2009 LUSI X-Ray Correlation Spectroscopy Instrument.
Senior Review Evaluations (1 of 5) Proposals due: 6 March 2015 Panel evaluations: Week of 22 April 2015 Performance factors to be evaluated will include.
John Arthur X-ray April 20, 2006 X-Ray Beamline and Experiment Layout John Arthur LCLS Photon Systems Manager.
APRE Agency for the Promotion of European Research Lifecycle of an FP 7 project Caterina Buonocore Riga, 13th September, 2007.
Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.
The Assessment of COST Actions PHOENIX Workshop in Kyrgyzstan, May 2007 “Road to excellence: Research evaluation in SSH“
SuperB. SuperB has been approved as the first in a list of 14 “flagship” projects within the new national research plan. The national research plan has.
Certification and Accreditation CS Phase-1: Definition Atif Sultanuddin Raja Chawat Raja Chawat.
Quadrennial Review Retrospective performance review every 4 years Standardized to fairly evaluate Staff Scientists despite various roles Success judged.
WFMOS Status Report Doug Simons Gemini Observatory January 2008.
John Peoples for the DES Collaboration BIRP Review August 12, 2004 Tucson1 DES Management  Survey Organization  Survey Deliverables  Proposed funding.
Keith O. Hodgson SSRL Director Brief Update on the Linac Coherent Light Source - LCLS February 26, 2002 Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Undulator.
1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES User Access and Beamline Development John Hill Director, NSLS-II Experimental Facilities Division NSLS-II User Workshop.
John Arthur LUSI DOE Review August 19, 2008 Transition to Operations p. 1 From construction project to operating facility Structure.
Building and Recognizing Quality School Systems DISTRICT ACCREDITATION © 2010 AdvancED.
International Accelerator Facility for Beams of Ions and Antiprotons at Darmstadt CBM Collaboration meeting Status Interim MoU J. Eschke, GSI.
BCO Impact Assessment Component 3 Scoping Study David Souter.
Light Source Reviews The BES Perspective July 23, 2002 Pedro A. Montano Materials Sciences and Engineering Basic Energy Sciences BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES.
PROJECT LIFECYCLE.
NOAA Cooperative Institutes John Cortinas, Ph.D. OAR Cooperative Institute Program, Program Manager NOAA Cooperative Institute Committee, Chairperson.
BESAC Workshop on Opportunities for Catalysis/Nanoscience May 14-16, 2002 William S. Millman Basic Energy Sciences May 14, 2002 Catalysis and Nanoscience.
DOE Stanford Site Office Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy 1 U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science Office of Science Review of the LCLS.
1 Proposal and Observation Handling Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC May 11, 2011.
Planning for School Implementation. Choice Programs Requires both district and school level coordination roles The district office establishes guidelines,
1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES NSLS-II Beamline Development John Hill NSLS-II Experimental Facilities Division Director PAC Meeting November 20, 2007.
Community Planning Training 8-1. Community Planning Training 8- Community Planning Training 8-2.
1 SBIR/STTR Overview Wang Yongqiang. 2 Federal SBIR/STTR Program ‣ A +$2Billion funding program set-aside for small businesses seeking to early stage.
Committee to Assess the Current Status and Future Direction of High Magnetic Field Science in the United States 18 May 2012 Dr. Patricia M. Dehmer Deputy.
1 BROOKHAVEN SCIENCE ASSOCIATES Beamline Development and Facility Usage.
Welcome and the ATF2 international collaboration in future 1.Introduction 2.Mission of ATF/ATF2 3.Organization of ATF/ATF2 4.International Collaboration.
DESY. Status and Perspectives in Particle Physics Albrecht Wagner Chair of the DESY Directorate.
Data Infrastructure Building Blocks (DIBBS) NSF Solicitation Webinar -- March 3, 2016 Amy Walton, Program Director Advanced Cyberinfrastructure.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
LSST CORPORATION Patricia Eliason LSSTC Executive Officer Belgrade, Serbia 2016.
Good Morning and Welcome
LCLS User Access Policy
Updating the Regulation for the JINR Programme Advisory Committees
WP13: Access to Plasma Beam testing facilities
Experimental Facilities Planning
LCLS Ultrafast Science Instruments
Office of Grant Resources
LCLS History and Science Overview Keith Hodgson, SSRL Director April 23, 2002 LCLS DOE Review, April 23, 2002 Keith Hodgson, SSRL.
LINAC OPS Budget Review
LCLS User Research Administration
LCLS User Access Policy
John Arthur – LCLS Experimental Operations
The Transition to User Operations
PIXEL Project Status John Arthur Photon Instrumentation for
LCLS Project Transition to Operations 14 May 2008
Linac Coherent Light Source Transition to Operations 11 July 2007
Roles and Responsibilities
Presentation transcript:

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, LCLS User Access Policy Goals Scientific thrust areas - Instrument Teams Tentative operation plan for LCLS and the instruments Proposal evaluation process Realization of externally funded additional instrumentation Jochen R. Schneider Visiting Professor of Photon Science at SLAC

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Goals of LCLS Access policy It is the objective of the LCLS program to attract a large number of users from diverse fields and to enable a broad set of important experiments that take advantage of the unique capabilities of the LCLS. In LCLS steady-state operation 75% of the time available for photon science experiments will be general user time and will be assigned following the LCLS proposal selection procedure, based upon the scientific quality of the proposals as judged by peer review. The remaining 25% of the photon science beam time may be allocated for in-house research, instrument maintenance and a Director’s Reserve. All access will be through the LCLS proposal review process.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Scientific thrust areas - Instrument Teams Based on the letters of intend received from the breadth of the scientific community LCLS SAC recommended that LCLS instruments be designed to enable scientific research in six thrust areas: Atomic, molecular and optical science (AMO) Coherent scattering of nano-scale fluctuations (XCS) Diffraction studies of stimulated dynamics (XPP) Coherent imaging of non-periodic objects (CXI) High energy density science (HED) Investigation of materials with soft X-rays (SXR) The authors of the original Letters of Intent were assigned to six Instrument Teams and, after consultation with the SAC, Team Leaders and Co-Team Leaders have been appointed by LCLS management.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Instrument Team- and Co-Team-Leader XPP (Instrument scientist: David Fritz) K. Gaffney (SLAC, leader) D. Reis (Stanford) T. Tschentscher (DESY) J. Larsson (Lund Inst Tech) CXI (Instrument scientist: Sebastien Boutet) J. Hajdu (SLAC + Uppsala U, leader) H. Chapman (CFEL-DESY) J. Miao (UCLA) XCS (Instrument scientist: Aymeric Robert) B. Stephenson (ANL, leader) K. Ludwig (Boston U) G. Grübel, DESY AMO (instrument scientist: John Bozek) L. DiMauro (OSU, leader) N. Berrah (WMU) The Team- and Co-Team-Leaders act as the points of contact between the team members and the LCLS instrument scientists and management.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, The role of Instrument Teams The Team and Co-Team Leaders have helped to define the layout of the AMO and LUSI instruments. They have helped to promote and define the science in the thrust areas. They have made an effort to interest new people in LCLS science and to incorporate them into the teams. They will stimulate the formation of collaborations including all the know-how necessary for successfully performing a certain class of experiments. In recognition of their early support of LCLS and valuable contributions to the design process, the instrument teams will be given some priority access to LCLS during the initial period of operation of each instrument. However, priority will always be given to the highest-rated proposals. Only in cases of equal ranking, proposals from the instrument teams will be given priority.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Tentative operation plan for LCLS and instruments 5,000 4, ,000 Photon science experiments 900 1,300 1,000 Machine studies photons 900 1,300 2,500 Machine studies electrons 2,100 2,200 4,300 Maintenance Tentative operation plan for LCLS [hours per fiscal year] LCLS XCS CXI XPP AMO Start of steady state operation Start of commissioning and early operation Tentative operation scheme of DOE funded LCLS instruments With this perspective LCLS invites the community to submit proposals for experiments with soft X- rays and especially in the field of atom, molecular and optical science (deadline for submission: September 1, 2008). Early operations phase: achieving FEL performance baseline goals as soon as possible commissioning the first experiments producing high-impact early science achieving a rapid and orderly transition to a general user program Steady-state operation

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Proposal evaluation process After consultation with the SAC, the LCLS management will invite scientists from outside SLAC and two non-voting representatives of LCLS management to serve on the LCLS Proposal Review Panel (PRP). The PRP will review all proposals for experiments at LCLS and rank each on a five- point scale from 1 down to 5, and explain the ranking in a written statement to the applicants. The PRP will meet twice a year. In order to facilitate the best science at LCLS, all access will be through the LCLS proposal review process, and priority will always be given to the highest- rated proposals. Calls for proposals will be publicized six months before the PRP meeting date with a deadline for submission three months before the PRP meeting. During start-up phase Instrument Teams will be given up to 50% of the beam time, in general not more than 1000 hours.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, LCLS proposal preparation workshops Because of the high expectations in early science from LCLS and because of the very significant differences in performing experiments at LCLS compared to work at synchrotron radiation facilities and laboratory-based lasers, LCLS offers two proposal preparation workshops: LCLS workshop on AMO and soft X-ray experiments June 2 - 3, 2008 LCLS workshop on experiments with hard X-rays June , 2008 At these workshops the status of the LCLS facility will be presented with emphasis on expected beam properties and performance of the instruments available, as well as on the needs for instrument commissioning. The hope is that these workshops will support the preparation of the best proposals for early science at LCLS and stimulate the formation of collaborations among participants with similar scientific goals.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Templates for proposal submission LCLS management will make available templates for the submission of proposals putting emphasis on: the scientific case reasons for doing the experiment at LCLS reports of results from earlier relevant experiments technical feasibility of the experiment description of the technical capability of the proposing group: recent publications in the corresponding field of research availability of group members for preparation of the experiment and during the measurement campaign know-how for data analysis potential hazards Proposal submission will be done electronically.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Externally funded additional instrumentation For instrumentation that offers a significant addition of general utility to LCLS, the LCLS management may enter into an agreement with an outside group, specifying the way in which this instrumentation will be deployed at LCLS so as to benefit the general user community, and the time period for which this instrumentation will be available at LCLS. Groups contributing funds, equipment and/or personnel to the construction of new instrumentation can expect to receive a fraction of beam time on the new instrument during a specified time period.  High energy density science (HED)  Investigation of materials with soft X-rays (SXR)

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Realization of externally funded instruments 1.The external collaboration intending to build new instrumentation must get the support of LCLS management, before negotiations with funding agencies are started. The LCLS commitment will generally be given for a specific period of time, and will be reviewed on a six-month basis. The discussions between LCLS and the collaboration should include:  Evaluation of the scientific potential by the LCLS SAC.  Submission of a Technical Design Report (TDR) to LCLS management.  Evaluation of the TDR by the SAC and additional experts in consultation with LCLS. The review will include feasibility of the program, staffing availability, general user access to instrumentation, permanence of the instrumentation or facility, data acquisition interface issues, etc.  Analysis of impact on beam time. 2.Negotiation between the collaboration and the funding agencies, involving representatives of LCLS/SLAC management.

Jochen R. Schneider AMO Proposal June 2, Realization of externally funded instruments 3.After securing funding the collaboration, together with LCLS instrument scientists and management, will work out the final layout of the instrumentation and the timeline for construction, commissioning and early operation. In addition, the LCLS involvement in construction oversight will be defined. The negotiations will conclude with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding by the spokesperson of the collaboration, the collaborating institutions, and the LCLS/SLAC management