UCSD-2019: Flowdown: Science to Measurement Requirements

From CMB-S4 wiki
Revision as of 17:22, 17 October 2019 by Lknox (talk | contribs) (Notes)
Jump to: navigation, search

Link back to agenda

Charge

Charge from SOC

  • Define what simulations, and other forecasting tools, are still needed before CD-1, the schedule and plan for these simulations and other forecasting tools, and when any inputs are needed to achieve a complete connection between science and measurement for CD-1.
  • Coordinate carefully with science and analysis working groups to understand the assumptions they are making and inputs they are using.

Additional tips for making this session maximally useful

  • People listed below are being asked to prepare for this discussion by outlining, as well as they can, their response to the charge, and highlighting the questions they have about completing a response to the charge, and more generally, questions they have that will help them have a productive meeting in their Friday afternoon parallel session.
  • List systematic effects and suggest plan for writing down appropriate requirements, or questions that may need communication with the Technical Council and coordination with them.
  • Read the Science to Measurement Requirements chapter of the DSR in advance to know current state of our art, if you have not already.

Agenda

Remote attendance

Zoom link

Notes

  • Lawrence
    • We need requirements specified so people can build without consulting with eachother constantly. Too many people for that consultation to be possible.
    • "Good enough" is! "Better" costs more.
    • science goals --> measurement reqs --> instrument reqs --> mission reqs, plus feasibility and cost loop back.
    • Pryke: we've got foregrounds and we don't know what they are. HOw do we deal with thsi fundamental degree of uncertainty?
    • Lawrence: I'm in complete agreement with that point. We have to make some allowances for the fact we don't know. One way we do that is to have a substantial margin on science requirements: a factor of two in some cases.
    • Ed Wollack: It's not a new problem.
    • Clem Pryke: but split bands for conservatism was not judged to be a valid argument. We needed to demonstrate it led to improvements, when we don't know what the foregrounds are like!
  • Knox