Prepare the Formal Review presentations #222

Closed
nthiery opened this Issue Mar 2, 2017 · 90 comments

Comments

@nthiery
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 2, 2017

This issue is to prepare the presentations for the formal review.

Demonstrations

  • Math-In-The-Middle demonstration? (@kohlhase, @alex-konovalov, ...)
  • Jupyter-OOMMF: Using the notebook to drive a micromagnetic simulation (Hans)
  • ???

Posters

  • Jupyter-OOMMF (Hans)
  • ???

References on the review content

From the official letter from EU:

``The review will cover the project activities that you have carried out
during the first reporting period. It will examine:

  • the degree to which the work plan has been carried out and whether all deliverables were completed
  • whether the objectives are still relevant and provide scientific or industrial breakthrough potential
  • how resources were planned and used in relation to the achieved progress, and if their use respects the principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness
  • the management procedures and methods of the project
  • the beneficiaries’ contributions and their integration within the project
  • the expected potential scientific, technological, economic, competitive and social impact, and plans for using and disseminating results
  • eligibility of the costs claimed
  • compliance with other grant agreement obligations.

It will also cover the work of third parties involved in the project (e.g. linked third parties, third parties giving in-kind contributions, subcontractors, etc).''

Additional tip from our PO: ``Please make sure that all presentations are to the point and do not unnecessarily repeat the information given in the deliverables and reporting. Make sur there is sufficiently time for Q&A in each session.''

REMINDER: HAVE TO BE PRESENT: All WP leaders + Coordinator + project manager AND at least one representative per site

Faciliies

Monday Morning: small (10 people) meeting room with beamer
Monday Afternoon: medium (20 people) meeting room + small (10 people) meeting room Closing of rooms: 8:30 pm

Tuesday: All day medium (20 people) meeting room + small (10 people) meeting room Closing of rooms: 8:30 pm

Wednesday: All day big (40 sitting people, max 60) meeting room

NB: from the looks of photos, the maximum amount of persons per room is most probably underestimated

@nthiery nthiery changed the title from Prepare the Formal Review presentation to Prepare the Formal Review presentations Mar 2, 2017

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

Let's start with the constraints: we have a whole day (from when to when?) and how many rooms (@bpilorget?) at the same time to show what we have done.

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 9, 2017

Let's start with the constraints: we have a whole day (from when to when?) and how many rooms (@bpilorget?) at the same time to show what we have done.

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

I really liked the suggestion of having posters or (probably better:) demonstrators where reviewers can quiz some of us in greater detail - this allows them to follow their interests. I also think - at least for the parts of the project I know - that a life demonstration (or ability of the reviewer to run a demonstrations themselves) can show important aspects of the work that we cannot communicate well in talks.

It would actually also be interesting for us to see code in action that has been developed in various places.

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 9, 2017

I really liked the suggestion of having posters or (probably better:) demonstrators where reviewers can quiz some of us in greater detail - this allows them to follow their interests. I also think - at least for the parts of the project I know - that a life demonstration (or ability of the reviewer to run a demonstrations themselves) can show important aspects of the work that we cannot communicate well in talks.

It would actually also be interesting for us to see code in action that has been developed in various places.

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

Here is a first draft an agenda, based on the idea that we have some talks and some demonstrations. I think brief talks first, then the demonstrator session is best.

9:00 arrival and coffee
9:30 Welcome and overview of the day, maybe quick overview of project (Nicolas)
Various talks [needs to be discussed]
11:00 Coffee break
11:30 demonstrator and poster session
13:00 lunch
14:15 Reviewers private meeting (if that is the normal thing)
15:00 Coffee
15:30 Feedback and discussion with reviewers
16:00 Closing comments

We could push the demonstrators into the afternoon, giving more time for talks in the morning.

Or do something completely different. Might also be worth asking the project officer for advice?

@wdecker - what do you recommend, based on your experience?

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 9, 2017

Here is a first draft an agenda, based on the idea that we have some talks and some demonstrations. I think brief talks first, then the demonstrator session is best.

9:00 arrival and coffee
9:30 Welcome and overview of the day, maybe quick overview of project (Nicolas)
Various talks [needs to be discussed]
11:00 Coffee break
11:30 demonstrator and poster session
13:00 lunch
14:15 Reviewers private meeting (if that is the normal thing)
15:00 Coffee
15:30 Feedback and discussion with reviewers
16:00 Closing comments

We could push the demonstrators into the afternoon, giving more time for talks in the morning.

Or do something completely different. Might also be worth asking the project officer for advice?

@wdecker - what do you recommend, based on your experience?

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

Hans for the rooms see #223

Contributor

bpilorget commented Mar 9, 2017

Hans for the rooms see #223

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

Dear Hans, thank you for drafting this agenda. I think presentations deserve more time, especially since 1 presentation per WP will be needed. Maybe we can plan to end the meeting at 5:30 pm / 6pm?

Contributor

bpilorget commented Mar 9, 2017

Dear Hans, thank you for drafting this agenda. I think presentations deserve more time, especially since 1 presentation per WP will be needed. Maybe we can plan to end the meeting at 5:30 pm / 6pm?

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

Sure, just wanted to get the discussion going ;)

We could also have one or a few talks that are 'orthogonal' to the work packages and present one or two or three activities that extends over multiple work packages. The talk I gave in Edinburgh about the micro magnetic demonstrator is a possible candidate for this: it explains some of the motivation for the project (i.e. what is not ideal at the moment), then touches on Component Architecture, User Interfaces and Dissemination WorkPackages. This may make it easier to tell a story to the reviewers, rather than presenting one aspect (i.e. one WorkPackage) in great details, without much context.

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 9, 2017

Sure, just wanted to get the discussion going ;)

We could also have one or a few talks that are 'orthogonal' to the work packages and present one or two or three activities that extends over multiple work packages. The talk I gave in Edinburgh about the micro magnetic demonstrator is a possible candidate for this: it explains some of the motivation for the project (i.e. what is not ideal at the moment), then touches on Component Architecture, User Interfaces and Dissemination WorkPackages. This may make it easier to tell a story to the reviewers, rather than presenting one aspect (i.e. one WorkPackage) in great details, without much context.

@JohnCremona

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JohnCremona

JohnCremona Mar 9, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

JohnCremona commented Mar 9, 2017

@dimpase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dimpase

dimpase Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

surely, 40+ years of shameless local anti-EU propaganda must have left a mark on John...

Contributor

dimpase commented Mar 9, 2017

surely, 40+ years of shameless local anti-EU propaganda must have left a mark on John...

@dimpase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dimpase

dimpase Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

In case anyone wonders, working days in sessions of the EU Parliament last for about 14 hours.
See e.g. here.

Contributor

dimpase commented Mar 9, 2017

In case anyone wonders, working days in sessions of the EU Parliament last for about 14 hours.
See e.g. here.

@JohnCremona

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JohnCremona

JohnCremona Mar 9, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

JohnCremona commented Mar 9, 2017

@dimpase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dimpase

dimpase Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

@JohnCremona MEPs are paid 38.5% of the basic salary of a judge in the European Court of Justice. About 6200 euro p.m. after tax.

Contributor

dimpase commented Mar 9, 2017

@JohnCremona MEPs are paid 38.5% of the basic salary of a judge in the European Court of Justice. About 6200 euro p.m. after tax.

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 9, 2017

Contributor

Thanks @fangohr for getting the ball rolling. I am about to copy your initial draft of schedule to the first comment and will do some edits.

Cross-work package presentation(s) would be nice indeed. In fact, I already asked @mikecroucher if he could prepare a short (20min?) version of his talk Is your research software correct?. I believe it sets up the stage very nicely, highlighting the challenges faced by researchers and the type of solutions needed. And then many of our actions come naturally as leveraging these solutions. E.g:

  • Automate (aka learn to program): our focus on REPL/programming
    interaction with the software rather than clic-clic-clic
  • Write code in a (very) high-level language: ?
  • Get some training: all our dissemination actions
  • Use version control: nbdime, ...
  • Get a code buddy (Maybe an RSE!): ?
  • Share your code and data openly: that's at the core of our approach and we foster it further in our communities; also collaborative tools, ...
  • Use literate computing technologies: notebooks!
  • Write tests: nbval, ...

I like your talk too for highlighting the range of applicability of our work outside of the pure math world.

At the same time, we will also need some more down to earth WP by WP presentations; the trick will be to strike the right balance.

Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 9, 2017

Thanks @fangohr for getting the ball rolling. I am about to copy your initial draft of schedule to the first comment and will do some edits.

Cross-work package presentation(s) would be nice indeed. In fact, I already asked @mikecroucher if he could prepare a short (20min?) version of his talk Is your research software correct?. I believe it sets up the stage very nicely, highlighting the challenges faced by researchers and the type of solutions needed. And then many of our actions come naturally as leveraging these solutions. E.g:

  • Automate (aka learn to program): our focus on REPL/programming
    interaction with the software rather than clic-clic-clic
  • Write code in a (very) high-level language: ?
  • Get some training: all our dissemination actions
  • Use version control: nbdime, ...
  • Get a code buddy (Maybe an RSE!): ?
  • Share your code and data openly: that's at the core of our approach and we foster it further in our communities; also collaborative tools, ...
  • Use literate computing technologies: notebooks!
  • Write tests: nbval, ...

I like your talk too for highlighting the range of applicability of our work outside of the pure math world.

At the same time, we will also need some more down to earth WP by WP presentations; the trick will be to strike the right balance.

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Mar 10, 2017

Contributor

@JohnCremona Actually the agenda is up to the project. It can be organised and last as long as we want

Contributor

bpilorget commented Mar 10, 2017

@JohnCremona Actually the agenda is up to the project. It can be organised and last as long as we want

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 21, 2017

Contributor

Hi,
I have reworked a tiny bit the tentative agenda for the review meeting (adding 1/2 hour for the WP presentations). With that, we have 1.5 hours for "2-3 story telling presentations" and three hours for the WP presentations. This means:

  • about 25 minutes per story telling presentation
  • 30 minutes per WP presentation, including questions and transitions (WP1 and WP2 should be quite short; so I counted them as a single WP).
  • two hours (including coffee breaks) for posters and live demonstrations

WP leaders: does this sound right? The idea is to give the big picture for each WP, with an overview of the aims and progress, mentionning briefly deliverables, but not diving into their details.

Everyone: does this sound right?

I am wondering whether we would want to allocate a specific time for a Q&A session, where we would let the reviewers lead the discussion with questions, and dig in points of interests to them (e.g. about a specific deliverable, or partner, or ...).

Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 21, 2017

Hi,
I have reworked a tiny bit the tentative agenda for the review meeting (adding 1/2 hour for the WP presentations). With that, we have 1.5 hours for "2-3 story telling presentations" and three hours for the WP presentations. This means:

  • about 25 minutes per story telling presentation
  • 30 minutes per WP presentation, including questions and transitions (WP1 and WP2 should be quite short; so I counted them as a single WP).
  • two hours (including coffee breaks) for posters and live demonstrations

WP leaders: does this sound right? The idea is to give the big picture for each WP, with an overview of the aims and progress, mentionning briefly deliverables, but not diving into their details.

Everyone: does this sound right?

I am wondering whether we would want to allocate a specific time for a Q&A session, where we would let the reviewers lead the discussion with questions, and dig in points of interests to them (e.g. about a specific deliverable, or partner, or ...).

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Mar 21, 2017

Contributor

Considering I will need to present the use of resources-/KPIs, , and that many many dissemination events are organised that could last a bit more than 30 min for both of them.

Contributor

bpilorget commented Mar 21, 2017

Considering I will need to present the use of resources-/KPIs, , and that many many dissemination events are organised that could last a bit more than 30 min for both of them.

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 21, 2017

Contributor

Hi Nicolas,

the agenda looks very reasonable to me.

Just two comments/questions; none of them major:

  1. I would possibly skip the demonstrations at 9:00, and instead get project partners to set up posters / demonstrations in that time, and use the 30 minutes for a leisurely arrival of reviewers, informal introductions etc. As we haven't been in the particular room yet (if I recall correctly), we may need some time to sort ourselves out with the prensetations. Alternatively, we need to have project partners there by 8:30 or 8:45 the latest for a start at 9:00. That's also an option, but it seems a little bit odd to have the presentations before we had any introduction, and also spreading the presentations over 3 slots might be quite fractured? I think the 11:00 to 12:00 presentation slot is great and should be seen as the main activity, with an option to come back to one or two in the later coffee break.

  2. The wrap up at 16:00 is presumably to catch up if we have overrun, or to address any immediate concerns, but really could be a very brief thank you statement? Or can we (you?) say something that pulls together the presentations from the work packages to make the whole project look coherent (again, after the WP will have focussed on details in quite different topic areas). That might be quite useful.

In response to the length of time for each WP: @bpilorget, not sure what exactly you have to present but if there is a long list of events that takes 15 minutes to explain, maybe we should short cut this (mentioning a few of them in detail, then display a list?).

I am sure more thoughts will emerge over time.

Any other ideas/suggestions/concerns?

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 21, 2017

Hi Nicolas,

the agenda looks very reasonable to me.

Just two comments/questions; none of them major:

  1. I would possibly skip the demonstrations at 9:00, and instead get project partners to set up posters / demonstrations in that time, and use the 30 minutes for a leisurely arrival of reviewers, informal introductions etc. As we haven't been in the particular room yet (if I recall correctly), we may need some time to sort ourselves out with the prensetations. Alternatively, we need to have project partners there by 8:30 or 8:45 the latest for a start at 9:00. That's also an option, but it seems a little bit odd to have the presentations before we had any introduction, and also spreading the presentations over 3 slots might be quite fractured? I think the 11:00 to 12:00 presentation slot is great and should be seen as the main activity, with an option to come back to one or two in the later coffee break.

  2. The wrap up at 16:00 is presumably to catch up if we have overrun, or to address any immediate concerns, but really could be a very brief thank you statement? Or can we (you?) say something that pulls together the presentations from the work packages to make the whole project look coherent (again, after the WP will have focussed on details in quite different topic areas). That might be quite useful.

In response to the length of time for each WP: @bpilorget, not sure what exactly you have to present but if there is a long list of events that takes 15 minutes to explain, maybe we should short cut this (mentioning a few of them in detail, then display a list?).

I am sure more thoughts will emerge over time.

Any other ideas/suggestions/concerns?

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 21, 2017

Contributor

Forgot to respond to the idea of the Q&A session: I wouldn't schedule anything on this. This is the kind of questioning that the reviewers can either conduct informally during the poster sessions, or at the end of each talk (where I expect we invite questions - in fact I would suggest to encourage questions throughout all presentations, while at the same time we will not overrun ...).

Finally, the feedback and discussion with reviewers is another opportunity for this kind of exchange. So my personal preference would be for ongoing exchange of ideas/concerns/questions, and not to schedule an extra time slot for this.

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 21, 2017

Forgot to respond to the idea of the Q&A session: I wouldn't schedule anything on this. This is the kind of questioning that the reviewers can either conduct informally during the poster sessions, or at the end of each talk (where I expect we invite questions - in fact I would suggest to encourage questions throughout all presentations, while at the same time we will not overrun ...).

Finally, the feedback and discussion with reviewers is another opportunity for this kind of exchange. So my personal preference would be for ongoing exchange of ideas/concerns/questions, and not to schedule an extra time slot for this.

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Mar 22, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

VivianePons commented Mar 22, 2017

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor

We need a good concise title for the 9:45 session, which is about short cross work-package presentations telling a story to set up the stage. Here are some I came up with, but am not happy about:

  • Cross work-package presentations
  • User stories
  • Overview presentations
  • Needs and applications
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

We need a good concise title for the 9:45 session, which is about short cross work-package presentations telling a story to set up the stage. Here are some I came up with, but am not happy about:

  • Cross work-package presentations
  • User stories
  • Overview presentations
  • Needs and applications
@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor

Also: in this session, we would need a mathematics-centered story. Ideas?

Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

Also: in this session, we would need a mathematics-centered story. Ideas?

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor

Feedback from our PO:

  • Start at 9 am sharp with a welcome (remove the 20 mins arrival)
  • Move the session 1 at the end – I’d prefer to have all the all technical work presented as a priority
  • Closed reviewers + PO meeting at 16-17:00 parallel with the coffee break
  • Feedback and discussion at 17:00
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

Feedback from our PO:

  • Start at 9 am sharp with a welcome (remove the 20 mins arrival)
  • Move the session 1 at the end – I’d prefer to have all the all technical work presented as a priority
  • Closed reviewers + PO meeting at 16-17:00 parallel with the coffee break
  • Feedback and discussion at 17:00
@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor

With @bpilorget, we refactored the agenda according to our PO suggestions. Please check. Now the poster and demonstrations will be during the morning coffee break and lunch break.

Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

With @bpilorget, we refactored the agenda according to our PO suggestions. Please check. Now the poster and demonstrations will be during the morning coffee break and lunch break.

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 22, 2017

Contributor

Would it make sense to Mike Croucher's talk first, and then the Jupyter show case? Mike's talk basically outlines all the things that can go wrong, and in in the Jupyter-OOMMF story we start to address that with solutions, so it would be natural to outline the problems first? (@mikecroucher)

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 22, 2017

Would it make sense to Mike Croucher's talk first, and then the Jupyter show case? Mike's talk basically outlines all the things that can go wrong, and in in the Jupyter-OOMMF story we start to address that with solutions, so it would be natural to outline the problems first? (@mikecroucher)

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 22, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 22, 2017

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Mar 24, 2017

Contributor

@nthiery The agenda is good to go?

Contributor

bpilorget commented Mar 24, 2017

@nthiery The agenda is good to go?

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 24, 2017

Contributor

I would not mind having a good title for the "cross workpackage presentation session". And a third presentation title. Other than that, it's good to go. So go ahead if need me.

Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 24, 2017

I would not mind having a good title for the "cross workpackage presentation session". And a third presentation title. Other than that, it's good to go. So go ahead if need me.

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Mar 24, 2017

Contributor

Words like 'context' and 'motivation' would be good to refer to Mike's talk as he outlines what the challenges are. It's not so clear how we capture the first results we include, that these go across work packages but are also not at all an exhaustive representation of the project (other than through 'case study'). Maybe 'Context and case study'? I think we can improve on this, input is welcome, but we also need to move on with this.

Contributor

fangohr commented Mar 24, 2017

Words like 'context' and 'motivation' would be good to refer to Mike's talk as he outlines what the challenges are. It's not so clear how we capture the first results we include, that these go across work packages but are also not at all an exhaustive representation of the project (other than through 'case study'). Maybe 'Context and case study'? I think we can improve on this, input is welcome, but we also need to move on with this.

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Mar 24, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Mar 24, 2017

@wbhart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wbhart

wbhart Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

wbhart commented Apr 18, 2017

@wbhart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wbhart

wbhart Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

wbhart commented Apr 18, 2017

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Apr 18, 2017

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Apr 18, 2017

@wbhart

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wbhart

wbhart Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

wbhart commented Apr 18, 2017

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Apr 18, 2017

Contributor

Exactly Bill +1

Contributor

bpilorget commented Apr 18, 2017

Exactly Bill +1

@ClementPernet

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ClementPernet

ClementPernet Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

ClementPernet commented Apr 18, 2017

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Apr 18, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

VivianePons commented Apr 18, 2017

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 19, 2017

Member

I am starting the presentations, but I cannot include images. The docu says ![alt](url), but that does not work for me. Can anyone help?

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 19, 2017

I am starting the presentations, but I cannot include images. The docu says ![alt](url), but that does not work for me. Can anyone help?

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Apr 19, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

VivianePons commented Apr 19, 2017

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Apr 19, 2017

Contributor

Regarding demonstrators: we need a few more I reckon'. I have added Jupyter- OOMMF to the list at the top of this issue.

@bpilorget - do we know what kind of room layout and facilities we expect? Have we got tables where we can put a laptop on top for the demonstrator? Can we have a poster next to it to attract some attention to the laptop? (This setup would work well I think, and is also what @wdecker reported to have used I believe.

Contributor

fangohr commented Apr 19, 2017

Regarding demonstrators: we need a few more I reckon'. I have added Jupyter- OOMMF to the list at the top of this issue.

@bpilorget - do we know what kind of room layout and facilities we expect? Have we got tables where we can put a laptop on top for the demonstrator? Can we have a poster next to it to attract some attention to the laptop? (This setup would work well I think, and is also what @wdecker reported to have used I believe.

@fangohr

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fangohr

fangohr Apr 19, 2017

Contributor

There is a bit of a discussion on the talks in the morning of Wednesday 26 April taking place on Slack between those giving the talks (Nicolas, Viviane, Mike, Hans), to coordinate content, order, timings, etc. If anybody else wants to engage, join us at https://opendreamkit.slack.com/messages/C51ASH3V3 (I can invite people to Slack if required).

9:00 Welcome
  Overview of the day by Project Officer
  Go around the table
  Brief overview of the project @nthiery
9:30 Some context and case studies
  1: Is your research software correct? @mikecroucher?
  2: A case study of computational science in Jupyter notebooks: JOOMMF @fangohr
  3: SageMathCloud for teaching and research @vivianepons
10:45 Coffee break
Contributor

fangohr commented Apr 19, 2017

There is a bit of a discussion on the talks in the morning of Wednesday 26 April taking place on Slack between those giving the talks (Nicolas, Viviane, Mike, Hans), to coordinate content, order, timings, etc. If anybody else wants to engage, join us at https://opendreamkit.slack.com/messages/C51ASH3V3 (I can invite people to Slack if required).

9:00 Welcome
  Overview of the day by Project Officer
  Go around the table
  Brief overview of the project @nthiery
9:30 Some context and case studies
  1: Is your research software correct? @mikecroucher?
  2: A case study of computational science in Jupyter notebooks: JOOMMF @fangohr
  3: SageMathCloud for teaching and research @vivianepons
10:45 Coffee break
@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 19, 2017

Member

I guess WP6 has not talked about the demos yet. Mostly because we are still working on this. But here is what we are planning

  • In-Document computation demo (for D4.9)
  • The MitM, GAP, Sage and LFMDB Theory graph (with first interview alignments) for D6.2/3
  • MathWebSearch on OEIS and arXiv (for D6.1)
  • the WP6 interoperability example (looking up transitive groups in LMFDB, letting MMT send them between SAGE? and GAP).
    All of these should be showable on @Jazzpirate's laptop (but only if we access to our various servers in Bremen).
Member

kohlhase commented Apr 19, 2017

I guess WP6 has not talked about the demos yet. Mostly because we are still working on this. But here is what we are planning

  • In-Document computation demo (for D4.9)
  • The MitM, GAP, Sage and LFMDB Theory graph (with first interview alignments) for D6.2/3
  • MathWebSearch on OEIS and arXiv (for D6.1)
  • the WP6 interoperability example (looking up transitive groups in LMFDB, letting MMT send them between SAGE? and GAP).
    All of these should be showable on @Jazzpirate's laptop (but only if we access to our various servers in Bremen).
@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 19, 2017

Member

QUESTIONS: (I only realize them now that I am really thinking about demos)

  • Will we have Internet on Wednesday?
  • Will we be able to print posters in Brussels (if we can make PDFs?)
    The first is extremely important for our demos, and the second one would make it much more likely that we will have posters.
Member

kohlhase commented Apr 19, 2017

QUESTIONS: (I only realize them now that I am really thinking about demos)

  • Will we have Internet on Wednesday?
  • Will we be able to print posters in Brussels (if we can make PDFs?)
    The first is extremely important for our demos, and the second one would make it much more likely that we will have posters.
@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Apr 19, 2017

Contributor

Of course there will be internet all three days. It will be in the same building.
There will be no printer for posters per se, no. Were you planning do build the posters next week?

Contributor

bpilorget commented Apr 19, 2017

Of course there will be internet all three days. It will be in the same building.
There will be no printer for posters per se, no. Were you planning do build the posters next week?

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 19, 2017

Member

Of course there will be internet all three days. It will be in the same building.

very good.

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 19, 2017

Of course there will be internet all three days. It will be in the same building.

very good.

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 19, 2017

Member

There will be no printer for posters per se, no. Were you planning do build the posters next week?

I was contemplating my options. The demos will probably be last-minute, and if the posters are going to be useful, they need to be last-minute as well.
And if I have to decide between a poster and a demo, the latter has priority for me.
So being able to print posters on tuesday would be quite helpful.

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 19, 2017

There will be no printer for posters per se, no. Were you planning do build the posters next week?

I was contemplating my options. The demos will probably be last-minute, and if the posters are going to be useful, they need to be last-minute as well.
And if I have to decide between a poster and a demo, the latter has priority for me.
So being able to print posters on tuesday would be quite helpful.

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Apr 19, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Apr 19, 2017

@pdehaye

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pdehaye

pdehaye Apr 19, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

pdehaye commented Apr 19, 2017

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Apr 19, 2017

Contributor

But for posters? It is quite specific and can require some time for the printing...

Contributor

bpilorget commented Apr 19, 2017

But for posters? It is quite specific and can require some time for the printing...

@pdehaye

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@pdehaye

pdehaye Apr 20, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

pdehaye commented Apr 20, 2017

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 20, 2017

Member

Thanks for this. I will have a look at what I can do here and keep this in mind if If this does not work out.

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 20, 2017

Thanks for this. I will have a look at what I can do here and keep this in mind if If this does not work out.

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 20, 2017

Member

I have given up on the metadata slides for the moment and I will prepare my talk in beamer (more efficient, and maybe I can transfer the talk to md style in Brussels).
For that I am working on a beamer ODK theme. Can someone tell me where I can find the new watermark picture? So that we can use it in the theme?

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 20, 2017

I have given up on the metadata slides for the moment and I will prepare my talk in beamer (more efficient, and maybe I can transfer the talk to md style in Brussels).
For that I am working on a beamer ODK theme. Can someone tell me where I can find the new watermark picture? So that we can use it in the theme?

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Apr 20, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

VivianePons commented Apr 20, 2017

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 20, 2017

Member

thanks, beamer is good at watermarking, so that is not a problem.

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 20, 2017

thanks, beamer is good at watermarking, so that is not a problem.

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Apr 20, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

VivianePons commented Apr 20, 2017

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 20, 2017

Member

OK, then I will try to make a good ODK theme for beamer and put it somewhere for everyone to use (and improve).

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 20, 2017

OK, then I will try to make a good ODK theme for beamer and put it somewhere for everyone to use (and improve).

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 20, 2017

Member

I just committed OpenDreamKit/lib/sty/beamerthemeODK.sty
So if you add OpenDreamKit/lib/sty// to TEXINPUTS, then you can just use \usetheme{ODK} in your beamer slides.

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 20, 2017

I just committed OpenDreamKit/lib/sty/beamerthemeODK.sty
So if you add OpenDreamKit/lib/sty// to TEXINPUTS, then you can just use \usetheme{ODK} in your beamer slides.

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Apr 20, 2017

Contributor

@kohlhase Thank you! That will be very useful for everyone who wish to use beamer

Contributor

VivianePons commented Apr 20, 2017

@kohlhase Thank you! That will be very useful for everyone who wish to use beamer

@VivianePons

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@VivianePons

VivianePons Apr 20, 2017

Contributor

I just pushed a first draft of my WP2 presentation

http://opendreamkit.org/meetings/2017-04-26-ProjectReviewPresentations/WP2/

For those using markdown, it will maybe give you a more concrete example that the current models.

@alex-konovalov Could you please fill out 1 our 2 slides on the Computational Mathematics with Jupyter event? (who was there, what we talked about, pictures, whatever)

@fangohr Could you describe a bit more what you do with JOOMF and micromagnetic VRE (2-3 slides)? I left a section on the slides for you to fill

Contributor

VivianePons commented Apr 20, 2017

I just pushed a first draft of my WP2 presentation

http://opendreamkit.org/meetings/2017-04-26-ProjectReviewPresentations/WP2/

For those using markdown, it will maybe give you a more concrete example that the current models.

@alex-konovalov Could you please fill out 1 our 2 slides on the Computational Mathematics with Jupyter event? (who was there, what we talked about, pictures, whatever)

@fangohr Could you describe a bit more what you do with JOOMF and micromagnetic VRE (2-3 slides)? I left a section on the slides for you to fill

@kohlhase

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@kohlhase

kohlhase Apr 20, 2017

Member

I found out about printing posters at FAU, ... and maybe I can make some before tomorrow, ...
Please tell me: what size of posters do we want?
I have a demo for WP4 and two for WP6, should I make two posters? Or combine them (there is only one laptop to demo in any case).
Please advise soon, then I can probably make a poster here.

Member

kohlhase commented Apr 20, 2017

I found out about printing posters at FAU, ... and maybe I can make some before tomorrow, ...
Please tell me: what size of posters do we want?
I have a demo for WP4 and two for WP6, should I make two posters? Or combine them (there is only one laptop to demo in any case).
Please advise soon, then I can probably make a poster here.

@bpilorget

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bpilorget

bpilorget Apr 20, 2017

Contributor

I guess what Nicolas had in mind was an A0 poster. As for how many to print... That would be good to have one for WP4 and one for WP6 if they both make sense.

Please don't forget to include acknowledgement http://opendreamkit.org/acknowledge/

Contributor

bpilorget commented Apr 20, 2017

I guess what Nicolas had in mind was an A0 poster. As for how many to print... That would be good to have one for WP4 and one for WP6 if they both make sense.

Please don't forget to include acknowledgement http://opendreamkit.org/acknowledge/

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Apr 20, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Apr 20, 2017

@jdemeyer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jdemeyer

jdemeyer Apr 20, 2017

Contributor

@mikecroucher: I seem to recall from Edinburgh that you had some demonstrations for interacts. Could some of those be used for a demonstrator?

Or do other people have cool interacts?

There is some ODK relevance because part of D4.5 is porting SgaeNB interacts to Jupyter.

Contributor

jdemeyer commented Apr 20, 2017

@mikecroucher: I seem to recall from Edinburgh that you had some demonstrations for interacts. Could some of those be used for a demonstrator?

Or do other people have cool interacts?

There is some ODK relevance because part of D4.5 is porting SgaeNB interacts to Jupyter.

@nthiery

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nthiery

nthiery Apr 20, 2017

Contributor
Contributor

nthiery commented Apr 20, 2017

@jdemeyer

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jdemeyer

jdemeyer Apr 20, 2017

Contributor

Do you want me to check some shop in Gent for the posters?

Contributor

jdemeyer commented Apr 20, 2017

Do you want me to check some shop in Gent for the posters?

@mikecroucher

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mikecroucher

mikecroucher Apr 22, 2017

Member

The interacts that we did for Edinburgh are rather basic.

The effort at Edinburgh was focused on getting started and putting something in place for others to contribute to. Finishing this work is one of our future deliverables but we don't have much to show for this review I'm afraid.

If anyone would like to contribute a notebook, the template is at

https://github.com/mikecroucher/jupyter-interactions/blob/master/template.ipynb

Rename the template, use it to write your interaction and submit a PR.
The template needs to be strictly adhered to in order for things to work.

The website https://mikecroucher.github.io/jupyter-interactions/ is automatically built from this repo once the PR is accepted. Currently only notebooks that produce an image are supported. This means that, for example, this notebook doesn't get added to the website https://github.com/mikecroucher/jupyter-interactions/blob/master/fractions.ipynb

Member

mikecroucher commented Apr 22, 2017

The interacts that we did for Edinburgh are rather basic.

The effort at Edinburgh was focused on getting started and putting something in place for others to contribute to. Finishing this work is one of our future deliverables but we don't have much to show for this review I'm afraid.

If anyone would like to contribute a notebook, the template is at

https://github.com/mikecroucher/jupyter-interactions/blob/master/template.ipynb

Rename the template, use it to write your interaction and submit a PR.
The template needs to be strictly adhered to in order for things to work.

The website https://mikecroucher.github.io/jupyter-interactions/ is automatically built from this repo once the PR is accepted. Currently only notebooks that produce an image are supported. This means that, for example, this notebook doesn't get added to the website https://github.com/mikecroucher/jupyter-interactions/blob/master/fractions.ipynb

@minrk

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@minrk

minrk Apr 22, 2017

Contributor

I'll have demos prepared for nbval and nbdime (D4.6, D4.8).

Contributor

minrk commented Apr 22, 2017

I'll have demos prepared for nbval and nbdime (D4.6, D4.8).

@alex-konovalov

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

@bpilorget bpilorget closed this May 19, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment