Changes between Version 4 and Version 5 of Scientific Advisory Board/Agenda/2020-01-08


Ignore:
Timestamp:
2020-01-09T16:26:27+01:00 (9 months ago)
Author:
clevy
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Scientific Advisory Board/Agenda/2020-01-08

    v4 v5  
    1414 
    1515== Discuss draft Terms of Reference for Scientific Advisory Committee 
    16 The [attachment:TORs_NEMO_SAC_v0.3.pdf proposed Terms of Reference elaborated by the NDC subgroup] is presented by Mike Bell.[[br]] 
    17 Discussion and comments: 
    18 * In the proposed document, the biogeochemsitry is suggested to possibly be considered as out of scope of SAC. Olivier Aumont states the importance and specificity of ocean modeling using this component, the interactions of biogeochemistry with other components of the system for developments so as the fact that the transport part (TOP) is indeed shared between differents source and sinks models (PISCES, MEDUSA...). [[br]] 
    19   Consensus is agreed to at least have experts on biogeochemical modeling in the SAC. The discussion should be forwarded to Steering Committee for final decision. 
    20 * Frequency of SAC meetings and of renewal of members 
    21 == Summary of progress in 2019 (Claire)   
     16Mike Bell invited comments on the [attachment:TORs_NEMO_SAC_v0.3.pdf proposed Terms of Reference (ToR) drafted by elaborated by the NDC subgroup] for the NEMO Scientific Advisory Committee that will be distinct from the Developers Committee (subject to Steering Committee approval). [[br]] 
     17Questions arose on why biogeochemistry is declared out of scope? Consensus was that the interface to biogeochemistry (i.e. TOP) is firmly within scope. The PISCES component itself is not used by all projects using NEMO, but is part of NEMO scope as stated in the Consortium Agreement. Olivier Aumont raises the point that there are some important interactions of biogeochemistry with other components of the system for developments.[[br]] 
     18Data Assimilation remains out of scope of NEMO and its SAC for now but perhaps the ToR should include a mechanism for reviewing what is in and out of scope in case needs change.[[br]] 
     19Similarly, other components such as stochastic closures may increase in importance and the ToRs should provide some flexibility or risk excluding new areas.[[br]] 
     20Being overly proscriptive on the length and number of terms members can serve was considered unnecessary. A limited number of terms is a good idea to ensure fresh input but it may be better to offer more shorter terms. Varying lengths of appointment is recommended, especially for initial appointments, so that not too many members change at the same future stage.[[br]] 
     21'''Action: NDC subgroup to revise ToRs accordingly before sending it to Steering Committee endorsement.''' 
     22 
     23 
     24== Summary of progress in 2019 
     25Claire Lévy presents a summary of NEMO development progress in 2019. Highlights include: 
     26* Significant preparatory work for the Kernel evolution towards a 2-level time-stepping scheme. 
     27* Work on vertical interpolation with AGRIF to allow AGRIF nests to use different vertical coordinates. 
     28* Implementation of the Atmospheric Boundary Layer model and work on Air-sea fluxes and bulk formulae 
     29* Reworking of tidal harmonics and tidal forcing options 
     30 
     31In all 39 development branches were created in 2019.[[br]] 
     32The system team successfully closed at least as many tickets as were opened.[[br]] 
     336 papers were published in the NEMO GMD special edition[[br]] 
     34Developments remain on track for a 4.2 release end 2020/early 2021[[br]] 
     35 
     36Lessons learned should mean a realistic workplan for 2020 
     37  
    2238== Comments on the NEMO 2020 work plan: Working Group leaders then other members of the committee 
    2339== Update from the verification and validation group (Mike; short item)