|
Not all our talks need to carry an explicit GENIE label. Ultimately, I feel this limits the number of talks we can give because there will always be some (low) quota for generator groups. But there is no reason why, for example, Teppei can give a talk on (GENIE) hadronization and Callum can give a talk on bubble chamber data fits (incl GENIE), but GENIE authors working on the same topics must squeeze a couple of slides in the GENIE summary talk or must compete against each other for a limited number of “GENIE” talks. I think we should have a single GENIE summary talk, as always. Then we can try to promote a number of other talks focussing on specific phenomenology / tuning work (this work may be implemented in GENIE, but this is not the main feature - indeed, the emphasis should be on the phenomenology, not GENIE).
The following are possible talks I know about from STWG work (there may be others from NPWG, PPWG developments). 1 and 2 is mature enough work. 3 will be developed over the summer and I believe it should be mature enough by NuInt. 4 will is partially developed and may or may not be something we can present by NuInt.
1 - Pion production model fits to free-nucleon/deuterium data
2 - Quantitative characterisation of comprehensive neutrino interaction models
3 - New hadronization model tunes and evaluation of model uncertainty
4- Global fits of neutrino-nucleus data
cheers
C
--
Dr. Costas Andreopoulos
Associate Professor
University of Liverpool & STFC / RAL
http://costas.andreopoulos.eu
Sent from my iPhone
On 3 Jun 2018, at 19:45, Gabriel Nathan Perdue <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi all,
I am on the NuInt 2018 scientific program committee this year, and we're doing things a bit different. Instead of organizing into groups (0pi, DIS, etc.), all the organizers are one big committee working on the whole program. May or may not work, but here's to experimenters, eh?
At any rate, how many presentations would GENIE like at NuFact, and on what topics? I, of course, can't promise we'll get everything, but if I can take a decent estimate to the rest of the committee and say "this is what GENIE would like to cover," it makes a good starting point. Obviously, we'd like at least one talk on the tuning efforts, but is there something else we'd like to highlight (e.g., some technical/physics model development)? Would one talk be enough for us? Do we need two tuning talks (e.g., free nucleon, nuclear targets)?
Gabriel Perdue
Associate Scientist
Scientific Computing Division
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
PO Box 500, MS 234, Batavia, IL 60510, USA
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Office: 630-840-6499
Cell: 630-605-8062
Connect with us!
<http://www.fnal.gov>Web<http://www.fnal.gov> | Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/Fermilab> | Twitter<https://www.twitter.com/fermilab>
________________________________
To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the NEUTRINO-MC-CORE list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=NEUTRINO-MC-CORE&A=1
|
