Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Attendees:



Canonical Meeting Template (as a reminder):

...

  • Previous discussion archived: SMT Meeting - January 4, 2018
  • (1/4) Karla - end of January is the end of a quarter. February 1st begins IPR5 and due 2/15. Then will move into PY8 Planning through the Quarterly Meeting draft due to XAB 4/10 (meet 4/17). Starting May write RY2 annual report
  • (1/18) Karla - IPR5 is coming up and due 2/15 to NSF. Monday 1/22 email will go out, so work with your area PM. Risk review also underway, see email from Kandace. Planning will begin immediately after reporting. Will write mid-year review panel response document as well.
    • (1/18) John - Bob hopes to get us the document by 1/19; might be good to get that done early to prevent overlap
  • (2/1) Karla - IPR 5 begins today, work with your PM. 100% of risks reviewed. PY8 planning email coming soon.
  • (2/15) Karla - IPR w/John and should be submitted soon. PY8 Planning is next in preparation for the Quarterly presentations
  • (2/15) Lizanne - ACTION meeting with John needed
  • (3/1) Ron - detailed update at the Quarterly. Updated 5% template for Planning slides
  • (3/29) Karla - PY8 Planning Process in motion in preparation for the XAB meeting. Also getting feedback from SPF and UAC

Discussion:

  • Note(4/20) Karla - XAB reviewing PY8 Plan; feedback due 4/20. April 30th is the end of the quarter and May 1st begins reporting; email with details going out 4/23. Final report due May 17th.
    • Ron - on the PY8 plan, the SPF providing feedback; when should we expect that? 
    • J Ray or Shawn Strande - ACTION provide feedback to Karla; Sergiu will ping J Ray as well

Decisions:

  • note

Actions:

  • Maytal requested a Quarterly Leadership Radar identifying major project level activities, new tools/functionality released, etc. - Ron to proposal options to serve the need

...

  • (3/1) John - call to vote at next SMT in 2 weeks, so that everyone can review. Would be good if this had a DRAFT watermark. Considerations for alternate list and guidance for what to send will be discussed at the Quarterly
  • (3/1) J Ray - SPF meeting next week and will have review of this on agenda
  • (3/1) Nancy - reference to COI appendix that is off (E vs. F). What about using NSF COI rules?
  • (3/29) Ron - John provided feedback; conversations with Bob as well. Getting feedback from XRAC by next week.

Discussion:

...

  • (4/12) Dave - have incorporated all feedback from XRAC, John, and SPF into document and ready for final approval in 1.0 form. Vote and final comments by next Thursday. Documenting current practice, not policy; that would be next steps. Will be on a schedule for regular review and updating
    • ACTION Ron send reminder on Tuesday requesting affirmative responses

Decisions:

Actions:

 

4. Process for Publishing Data Sets (David Hart

...

  • (4/10) Draft process for publishing data sets, emailed for provisional SMT review. Evaluation team and Security team have reviewed and provided feedback. Intent isto work through this once with an actual data set (allocation awards), update the process as wrinkles are found and ironed out, then seek formal SMT approval. For now it's an FYI and a chance for comment and/or to raise red flags as we forge ahead.

Discussion:

  • Note(4/12) Dave - related to quarterly presentation, have turned into a formal document. Lorna has reviewed for IRB approval. Plan to work through it while publishing a data set to check the document. Will send final review for SMT consideration
    • John - with IRIS tracking dollars and measures against allocations. They are able to provide an IRB letter if needed. 
    • Ron - ACTION set up meeting with Heidi
    • Shawn - if the document is regarding publishing data generated on systems, happy to carry that foroward. More about data XSEDE collects as part of the data management plan

Decisions:

Actions:


5. XSEDE Staff Code of Conduct (Ron Payne

...

Discussion:

  • (4/20) Kelly - recall conversation with Ralph who balked at having anything other than institution's. We wanted something specific to XSEDE and Linda and company worked on that. This is separate from the one shared on the SMT. But would still default to the HR of the institution. Linda's version was discussed at a quarterly. Is Code of Conduct separate from HR? Do we want to have something specific for the project?
    • John - communications mix up perhaps due to both of them being referred to as Code of Conduct
      • External: Linda's version was for XSEDE-sponsored events. This would be on the website
      • Internal:

...

  • Note
      • the version above was for XSEDE staff with a reminder that you have institutional policies. This would be on the wiki
    • Ombudspersons on both; suggestions agreed upon Lizanne, Linda, Chris
    • Expected conduct shouldn't be different; consequences are different
    • ACTION Ron send out both for approval via email
    • Sergiu - documentation for what happens next, what is the flow of action

Decisions:

Actions:



6. XSEDE Science Stories  (Kristin Williamson

Previously:

  • Carry over topic from March Quarterly ER sessions

Discussion:

  • Example Science Stoy to be reviewed during call: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L5XUhNDaaQiOh9ENuIbcQgS5H-V9b0H9trVF0Di46hk
  • Kelly - cross over between where SP or XSEDE contribution begins and ends and quantifying that
  • Sergiu - qualitative vs. quantitative contribution
  • Kelly - want to paint a good picture of why XSEDE exists if work done at one institution. Point out what makes the success unique
  • John - be careful to have delieniation between IPR story and web science story. Value that XSEDE brings could be that we have a coordinated single allocation process. Proving the negative is impossible.
  • Sergiu - select stories that have a clear XSEDE-wide element to report on
  • John - working with individuals...describe who those individuals are and how they are part of the national team addressing these needs 
  • Shawn - site-written vs. XSEDE-written perspective (day-to-day grind of keeping code running, improved usage, etc.)
  • Karla - remember the audience we are writing to and tailor the message that assumes knowledge
  • John - opening paragraph expands on accronymns, not necessary in IPR

Decisions:


Actions:



7. Website Showing "Scientific Value of XSEDE"  (John Towns

Previously:

  • Topic of discussion is based on comments to John summarized as, "XSEDE website does not relate the scientific value of XSEDE."

Discussion:

Note

  • (4/20) John - casual conversation about website doesn't really relate the scienctific value of XSEDE...is that what our website should be relaying? Someone likely from NSF has stated this, are we projecting the right message?
    • Kelly - would that appear to be novel or innovative? There's a reason it has the current message.
    • Kristin - could they have been referencing the portal? There's an opportunity to tell a story on the Portal
    • Value vs. Impact
    • ACTION John review NSF Review Introduction slides
  • Kelly - mid-year review revealed that we kinda suck at taking credit for our work. Historically, we've been careful to not, and the latest review suggested we toot our horn more. Suggest using an infographic to share some data on the front page of the web and on John's slides
  • Kristin - value of XSEDE and how a user walks through the program vs. an SP illustrations and animations
  • Kelly - would be good to have a broader discussion about what we want to achieve on the front page

Decisions:


Actions:



Status updates

...

Updates from SMT members:

  • PI (John/Ron) - 
    • Bob talks to L2s, etc. Are those helpful?
    • PY8 Plan - would be good to provide labels
    • XAB face-to-face scheduled for 17 & 18 April in Rosemont (Chicagoland). Main topics will be PY8 Plan review and preparation topics for June NSF Review. Brief discussion also about terms for XAB
  • CEE (Kelly) - https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3093391
  • ECSS (Nancy/Sergiu) -  PY8 priorities and skills development for staff. Will unveil schedule soon for PEARC18
  • XCI (Dave L/Craig) - 
  • Ops (Greg/Victor) -  SPF talk about PY8 plans was good
  • RAS (Dave H/Ken) -  collecting final reports of allocations have gotten more than 200 submissions
  • Program Office (Ron/Laura) - 
    • The XSEDE Document template, on the wiki has been updated to include a "DRAFT" watermark. Please remember to include a "draft" watermark to all documents that are sent around for review to ensure there is no cofusion, internally or externally, that the content is not final.
    • 15 of 18 PY7 Part 2 Amendments fully executed. Remaining 3 are being worked with the sub-award partners.
    • Reminder: Record improvements: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19YRAPeAForh5I9Xvhj8nKjROe3-JN7a1caLYbNamPaw
    • Reminder: Enter Publications in XUP
  • SP Forum (J Ray) -Shawn) - J Ray moving on from PSC and will be inheriting his role. Will talk transition and keep everyone informed. 
  • UAC (Emre) -  next meeting in a couple weeks. New members spreadsheet circulating and expect feedback from John soon
  • PM&R (Karla/Scott) - 
  • NSF (Bob) - 

...