Dear WG2 conveners,

I am emailing to ask if you have had time to consider this yet? I am asking as we will need to cooperate somewhat on the abstract acceptances where they are shared and we wish to conclude this as soon as possible.

Many thanks,

Tom (for WG1 conveners)

From: Cridge, Tom <t.cridge@ucl.ac.uk>
Sent: 06 March 2022 18:03
To: dis2022_wg2@igfae.usc.es <dis2022_wg2@igfae.usc.es>
Cc: dis2022_wg1@igfae.usc.es <dis2022_wg1@igfae.usc.es>
Subject: [DIS2022_wg1] Abstracts submitted to WG2 and WG1 for DIS 2022
 

⚠ Caution: External sender


Dear WG2 conveners,

We wanted to contact you regarding shared abstracts between our two WGs. We believe there are 6 abstracts shared between our WGs (two of which are also shared with WG4).

In terms of these shared abstracts we felt 104, 126, 162 and 350 all would fit better in your session than ours, with 162 and 350 specifically considering small x whilst for 126 we already have a couple of talks from STAR. There are also abstracts 174 and 270 shared also with WG4 which we do not intend to take in WG1 given the tight constraints we all have.

We also had abstract 149 submitted only to our WG1, which we are currently not intending to consider but may be of interest to your group, therefore I attach it to this email.

Please let us know if you are taking any of these abstracts for talks and feel free to contact us with your thoughts on this or if you have any queries.

Many thanks,
Tom for WG1 conveners (Tom, Klaus, Barak)


From: Cridge, Tom <t.cridge@ucl.ac.uk>
Sent: 06 March 2022 18:03
To: dis2022_wg2@igfae.usc.es <dis2022_wg2@igfae.usc.es>
Cc: dis2022_wg1@igfae.usc.es <dis2022_wg1@igfae.usc.es>
Subject: [DIS2022_wg1] Abstracts submitted to WG2 and WG1 for DIS 2022
 

⚠ Caution: External sender


Dear WG2 conveners,

We wanted to contact you regarding shared abstracts between our two WGs. We believe there are 6 abstracts shared between our WGs (two of which are also shared with WG4).

In terms of these shared abstracts we felt 104, 126, 162 and 350 all would fit better in your session than ours, with 162 and 350 specifically considering small x whilst for 126 we already have a couple of talks from STAR. There are also abstracts 174 and 270 shared also with WG4 which we do not intend to take in WG1 given the tight constraints we all have.

We also had abstract 149 submitted only to our WG1, which we are currently not intending to consider but may be of interest to your group, therefore I attach it to this email.

Please let us know if you are taking any of these abstracts for talks and feel free to contact us with your thoughts on this or if you have any queries.

Many thanks,
Tom for WG1 conveners (Tom, Klaus, Barak)