Changes between Version 91 and Version 92 of DevelopersCommittee/Agenda/2013-06-18

Timestamp:

2013-06-11T14:06:45+02:00 (11 years ago)

Author:

clevy

Comment:

--

DevelopersCommittee/Agenda/2013-06-18

@@ -13 +13 @@
 10:30 - 10:45                Opening of the meeting (S. Joussaume)
 
-10:45 – 12:00             '''Brief presentation of available documents: '''10 mn for each: CMCC (S. Dobricic) , CNRS (G. Madec), INGV (P. Oddo), Mercator (Y. Drillet), !MetOffice & NERC-NOC (J. Holt) , others: CONCEPTS & CCCma, Canada (Y. Drillet), EC-EARTH & ECMWF(K. Mogensen)
+10:45 – 12:00             '''Brief presentation of available documents, '''10 mn for each: 
+
+CMCC (S. Dobricic) , CNRS (G. Madec), INGV (P. Oddo), Mercator (Y. Drillet), !MetOffice & NERC-NOC (J. Holt), 
+
+others: CONCEPTS & CCCma, Canada (Y. Drillet), EC-EARTH & ECMWF(K. Mogensen)
 
 12:00 –  12:20              Presentations:'''[[BR]]                    About Gung-Ho '''       (Nigel Wood – Met Office)
@@ -21 +25 @@
 2:00 – 3:30            '''Discussion on the five white papers and additional contributions'''
 
-3:30 – 4:15            Thematic discussions:[[BR]][[BR]]'''Session 1: NEMO platform: seamless to what extend?''' (Leaders: J. Holt and P. Marsaleix) With ORCA12 (global 1/12°) are we reaching an optimal level? Should we continue moving towards higher resolutions or should we stop there and work in a probabilistic way to quantify errors?[[BR]]In the future, is the NEMO platform expected to be modelling all time and space scales from global to coastal (up to rivers, tide banks, module sedimentary module, etc…) or is there a boundary in small scales (coastal) and associated processes where NEMO should stop, and/or be properly connected to another modelling platform?[[BR]]Contours of NEMO in the future (components, diagnostics, data reduction)
+3:30 – 4:15            Thematic discussions:[[BR]][[BR]]'''Session 1: NEMO platform: seamless to what extend? (Leaders: J. Holt and P. Marsaleix)''' 
+
+With ORCA12 (global 1/12°) are we reaching an optimal level? Should we continue moving towards higher resolutions or should we stop there and work in a probabilistic way to quantify errors?[[BR]]In the future, is the NEMO platform expected to be modelling all time and space scales from global to coastal (up to rivers, tide banks, module sedimentary module, etc…) or is there a boundary in small scales (coastal) and associated processes where NEMO should stop, and/or be properly connected to another modelling platform?[[BR]]Contours of NEMO in the future (components, diagnostics, data reduction)
 
 4:15 - 4:45   Coffee break
@@ -27 +33 @@
 4:45 - 6:15  Thematic discussions (cont’):
 
-'''Session 2: New dynamical cores, HPC and science '''    (Leader: S. Masson & N. Wood)
+'''Session 2: New dynamical cores, HPC and science     (Leaders: S. Masson & N. Wood)'''
 
-'''Session 3: Sea-ice and biogeochemical components: '''which level of  flexibility should we target to take efficiently in account the panel of  available and used components for sea-ice (NEMO-LIM, CICE, GELATO…) and  for biogeochemistry (NEMO-TOP, BFM, MEDUSA…)? (Leader: O. Aumont & M. Vancoppenolle)
+'''Session 3: Sea-ice and biogeochemical components (Leaders: O. Aumont & M. Vancoppenolle)'''
+
+Which level of  flexibility should we target to take efficiently in account the panel of  available and used components for sea-ice (NEMO-LIM, CICE, GELATO…) and  for biogeochemistry (NEMO-TOP, BFM, MEDUSA…)? 
 
 6:30 Cocktail at Peniche Marcounet Pont Marie, Voie Georges Pompidou, 75004 Paris 06 60 47 38 52, see map in attached document below
@@ -37 +45 @@
 9:00 – 11:00             Thematic discussions (cont’):
 
-'''Session 4: Is AGRIF a major feature of NEMO? '''(Leader: L. Debreu & D. Iovino) If answer is yes, what is needed in mid-term to have it as a reliable component?
+'''Session 4: Is AGRIF a major feature of NEMO? (Leaders: L. Debreu & D. Iovino)''' 
 
-'''Session 5: Contours and limits of the assimilation component of NEMO''' (Leader: P. Brasseur & S. Dobricic)
+If answer is yes, what is needed in mid-term to have it as a reliable component?
 
-'''Session 6: NEMO validation and contours of user support: '''Although  having all possible options working all the time is the NEMO user's  dream, it is not possible. What is needed and where does the System Team  stops? How many reference configurations should be supported by the System Team and what should they be? (Leader : P. Oddo & J. Siddorn)
+'''Session 5: Contours and limits of the assimilation component of NEMO''' '''(Leaders: P. Brasseur & S. Dobricic)'''
 
-11:00 – 11:20            Coffee break[[BR]][[BR]]11:20 -12:00 '''           Conclusions “on the fly” '''by a group including CMCC(S. Dobricic), CNRS(tbd), INGV(P. Oddo), Mercator(Y. Drillet), Met-Office(R. Wood), NERC-NOC(tbd):Suggestions of the committee: for the summary of final document, how to build NEMO’s roadmap for the next 10 years?[[BR]]Suggestions to Steering Committee for next steps (writing and discussing the final document)
+'''Session 6: NEMO validation and contours of user support  (Leaders : P. Oddo & J. Siddorn)'''
+
+Although  having all possible options working all the time is the NEMO user's  dream, it is not possible. What is needed and where does the System Team  stops? How many reference configurations should be supported by the System Team and what should they be? 11:00 – 11:20            Coffee break[[BR]][[BR]]11:20 -12:00 '''           Conclusions “on the fly” by a group including: for CMCC(S. Dobricic), for CNRS(tbd), for INGV(P. Oddo), for Mercator(Y. Drillet), for Met-Office(R. Wood), for NERC-NOC(tbd)'''
+
+Suggestions of the committee: for the summary of final document, how to build NEMO’s roadmap for the next 10 years?[[BR]]Suggestions to Steering Committee for next steps (writing and discussing the final document)
 
 12:30                        End of the meeting