Dear Vera,
Both times are fine for me. I will be at CERN and will join the group
there. Please let me know where the phonemeeting will take place.
Best regards, Hans-Ake
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004, Luth, Vera G. wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> At our first phone meeting we discussed various tasks that will help us to
> assess the question of authorship in large collaborations. We agreed that
> we meet again in January and report on various finding.
> I would like to propose Tuesday, January 11th, for the next phone conference,
> again at 6:00am California time, which translates to
> 9:00 US Eastern Time
> 15:00 Central European Time
> 23:00 Japan Time
> Please let me know whether you can attend the conference on that day.
> As a fall back I suggest Wednesday, January 12th at the same time.
> I am planning to be at CERN, January 10th (afternoon) to 11th, and then in Paris from
> January 12th (afternoon) to Saturday, January 15th.
> I am prepared to set up the conference, but would like to ask Pippa Wells
> to reserve a room at CERN with a speaker phone and a beamer projector
> so several us can join the meeting from there.
>
> Based on the preliminary discussions in Beijing and then at the phone meeting
> I have suggested some home work in preparation for a report on the assessment of
> the past and current situation. Some of you have volunteered to take one
> or the other task, I hope others will take up these assignments and
> give a preliminary report during the next meeting. The best would be
> that you post your notesto yjr hypernews so everybody can follow your
> presentation at the next meeting.
>
> Sorry, the time is short, but this might focus the effort.
>
> 1) Overview of past publications for existing collaborations
>
> To obtain an overview of various types of publications and how
> individuals get recognition as authors, it would be useful
> for a few experiments to summarize the publication record,
> differentiating at least two phases of the experiments
> i) design, construction and commissioning
> ii) steady operation
> There are three different types of publications, journal articles,
> preprints including conference contributions, and invited talks
> at conferences and workshops that are published.
>
> We should list the number of papers/year and the average number
> of authors in each of the three types and distinguish between
> A: physics results
> B: physics notes on analysis techniques
> C: software and computing
> D: electronics and DAQ
> E: instrumentation
>
> Who is volunteering to collect this information for past and current experiments:
> OPAL: Pippa Wells
> BABAR: Jacques Chauveau
> CDF : Daniel Whiteson ?
> H1/ZEUS Max Klein ?
>
>
>
> 2) Selection of Authors by Belle:
>
> While the tradition has been to list all members of the collaboration
> as authors, Belle has chosen a sign-up for each paper.
> The question was posed:
> What is the distribution of the number of papers signed by individual
> members of the Belle Collaboration? Are there individuals who sign
> all papers, or have most members signed about half the papers?
> Hiro Aihara, could you provide us with this distribution?
> Possibly for the early period when this sign-up procedure was
> first introduced and more recently?
> Can you also report on how many papers have authors listed in
> alphabetical order, and how many papers have selected primary authors first.
> Do you allow for more than on primary author? If yes, how many?
>
> 3) Authorship in other fields of research requiring large teams
>
> Can we explore practices in other fields with large teams?
> Who is volunteering to collect this information?
> Astronomy or astrophysics Dimitri Denisov? Anybody else?
> Nuclear Physics Jack Sandweiss?? Hans-Ake Gustafson?
> Genetics? ??
> Other fields?
>
>
> 4) Importance of authorship and potential impact of reduced author lists
>
> Somehow we need to examine the pros- and cons, practicality and impact of
> the current practice in comparison to schemes that might lead to
> shorter authorlists?
>
> Can I call on Lorenzo Foa, Taku Yamanaka and Steinar Stapnes to
> develop some discussion points based on past deliberations?
> We need to get some factual statements rather than hear say!
>
>
> So, please let me know whether you will be able to attend the meeting on Jan. 11th,
> and whether you can make a brief presentation related to the tasks listed.
> If there is anything else you would like to present, please let me also know!
>
> Best wishes for a productive and hopefully more peaceful New Year,
>
> Vera
>
>
> Remember, we have set-up a hypernews for these meetings: The url is: http://hypernews.slac.stanford.edu/HyperNews/slacsite/get/C11Authorship.html
>
> You will need to become a member AND subscribe to C11 Authors to see
> these HyperNews postings. The instructions to become a member
> and subscribe are at the bottom of the main page.
> Then you will be able to read and receive all messages or respond to others.
> The e-mail address for the hypernews is: C11Authorship-ss@slac.stanford.edu
>
>
> --
> This message was scanned for spam and viruses by BitDefender.
> For more information please visit http://linux.bitdefender.com/
>
>
--
Hans-Ake Gustafsson
Division of Experimental High Energy Physics
Physics Department
Lund University
Box 118
SE 221 00 LUND
SWEDEN
E-mail: hans-ake.gustafsson@hep.lu.se
phone: +46 46 222 7709
fax: +46 46 222 4015
--
This message was scanned for spam and viruses by BitDefender.
For more information please visit http://linux.bitdefender.com/
|
Re: WG on Authorship: Next Mtg Jan. 11th 
Search
|
Feedback
]
icon
and there is no indentation. 
