Changes between Version 92 and Version 93 of DevelopersCommittee/Agenda/2013-06-18
- Timestamp:
- 2013-06-12T09:35:37+02:00 (11 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
DevelopersCommittee/Agenda/2013-06-18
v92 v93 13 13 10:30 - 10:45 Opening of the meeting (S. Joussaume) 14 14 15 10:45 – 12:00 '''Brief presentation of available documents, '''10 mn for each: 15 10:45 – 12:00 '''Brief presentation of available documents, '''10 mn for each: 16 16 17 CMCC (S. Dobricic) , CNRS (G. Madec), INGV (P. Oddo), Mercator (Y. Drillet), !MetOffice & NERC-NOC (J. Holt), 17 CMCC (S. Dobricic) , CNRS (G. Madec), INGV (P. Oddo), Mercator (Y. Drillet), !MetOffice & NERC-NOC (J. Holt), 18 18 19 19 others: CONCEPTS & CCCma, Canada (Y. Drillet), EC-EARTH & ECMWF(K. Mogensen) … … 25 25 2:00 – 3:30 '''Discussion on the five white papers and additional contributions''' 26 26 27 3:30 – 4:15 Thematic discussions:[[BR]][[BR]]'''Session 1: NEMO platform: seamless to what extend? (Leaders: J. Holt and P. Marsaleix)''' 27 3:30 – 4:15 Thematic discussions:[[BR]][[BR]]'''Session 1: NEMO platform: seamless to what extend? (Leaders: J. Holt and P. Marsaleix)''' 28 28 29 29 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) … … 37 37 '''Session 3: Sea-ice and biogeochemical components (Leaders: O. Aumont & M. Vancoppenolle)''' 38 38 39 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…)? 39 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…)? 40 40 41 41 6:30 Cocktail at Peniche Marcounet Pont Marie, Voie Georges Pompidou, 75004 Paris 06 60 47 38 52, see map in attached document below … … 45 45 9:00 – 11:00 Thematic discussions (cont’): 46 46 47 '''Session 4: Is AGRIF a major feature of NEMO? (Leaders: L. Debreu & D. Iovino)''' 47 '''Session 4: Is AGRIF a major feature of NEMO? (Leaders: L. Debreu & D. Iovino)''' 48 48 49 49 If answer is yes, what is needed in mid-term to have it as a reliable component? … … 51 51 '''Session 5: Contours and limits of the assimilation component of NEMO''' '''(Leaders: P. Brasseur & S. Dobricic)''' 52 52 53 '''Session 6: NEMO validation and contours of user support 53 '''Session 6: NEMO validation and contours of user support (Leaders : P. Oddo & J. Siddorn)''' 54 54 55 55 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)''' … … 96 96 || Aumont || Olivier || yes || yes || yes || DevCom (L. Bopp) || 97 97 || New || Adrian || yes || yes || yes || Steering Committee || 98 || || || || || ||||99 || || || || || ||||98 || Dobricic || Srdjan || yes || yes || yes || Devcom - Systeam || 99 || Eldin || Gérard || yes || yes || yes || Steering Committee (P. Bertrand) || 100 100 || || || || || || || 101 101 || || || || || || ||
