Hi Maria, I would suggest to start with the joint session. Finishing earlier is not such a big problem I think. Cheers, Heidi Quoting Maria Vittoria Garzelli <garzelli(a)mail.desy.de&gt;: > Yes, proceeding like this looks reasonable. > But Nestor can probably easily give to both WG3 and WG4 the permission > on the full session. > > One question is: at what time of wednesday afternoon to start ? > The point is that the joint session does not use the whole afternoon. > So, either one starts with other talks (e.g. continuation of the > morning sessions), and then start the top WG3+WG4 session, or one starts > with the top WG3+WG4 joint session, and then add other talks later. > > Please, express your point of view/preference on this. > > If agreement is reached, then one can ufficialize the WG3+WG4 joint > session with Nestor and ask him to upgrade the indico permission > of both WG3 and WG4 on it. > > > > On Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Heidi Rzehak wrote: > >> Dear Olga, dear all, >> >> I don't see a possibility to implement a joint session. Does anyone know? >> >> Otherwise, we need to ask Nestor. If we had the session, it probably is >> the simplest, if WG3 implements the WG 3 talks and WG4 the WG4 talks. If >> we want to move them around, I would assume that we can still do that >> afterwards without big problems. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Heidi >> >> I guess we first need >> Quoting "Evdokimov, Olga" <evdolga(a)uic.edu&gt;: >> >>> Dear Maria, All, >>> >>> To me Thursday or Wednesday are both good options; I have no objections >>> Wednesday; Maria please feel free to implement it. >>> >>> Heidi, do you (or anyone on your team) has a "super user" privileges on >>> Indico? I don't see the WG3 talks as available for us to schedule; also, >>> I don't know how to make the joint session block. Is this something you >>> know how to do, or should I contact Nestor for help? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Olga >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Maria Vittoria Garzelli <garzelli(a)mail.desy.de&gt; >>> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 5:23 AM >>> To: Heidi Rzehak <heidi.rzehak(a)itp.uni-tuebingen.de&gt; >>> Cc: dis2022_wg4(a)igfae.usc.es; heather.gray(a)berkeley.edu; amarti41(a)nd.edu >>> Subject: [DIS2022_wg4] Re: DIS 2022: Combined session of WG 3 and WG 4? >>> >>> To me it looka great. >>> The Wg4 coconveners Olga and Xuan >>> should just confirm (or not) >>> if it is fine for them as well. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Heidi Rzehak wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Maria, >>>> >>>> so far, speakers only contacted us, >>>> since they were worried about not >>>> finding their talks but we have not >>>> yet contacted anybody. >>>> >>>> So we could still shift the early >>>> Wednesday afternoon session. We would have no parallel session aside >>>> the joint session in the first top session but in the second so that >>>> the plan would be >>>> >>>> Wednesday 15:00 - 16:40 WG 3 + 4: >>>> >>>> 1) Latest top quark measurements with the CMS detector (CMS speaker, >>>> accepted by WG4) >>>> >>>> 2) Measurement of pair and single >>>> top-quark production cross-sections >>>> with ATLAS at LHC (ATLAS speaker, >>>> accepted by WG3) >>>> >>>> 3) Other ATLAS talk on rare processes etc. (ATLAS speaker, accepted by >>>> WG3) >>>> >>>> 4) Evidence for top quark production >>>> in AA collisions with CMS experiment >>>> (CMS speaker, accepted by WG4) >>>> >>>> 5) Non-factorisable QCD corrections to t-channel single-top production >>>> at NNLO (WG 3) >>>> >>>> Wednesday 17:10 - 18:50 WG 3+ 4: >>>> >>>> 6) Higher-order corrections in 𝑡𝑞𝛾 >>>> production (also Kidonakis) (WG 3) >>>> >>>> 7) Top-antitop cross-sections at high energies (Kidonakig from US, >>>> accepted by WG4) >>>> >>>> 8) Projected transverse momentum >>>> resummation in the top-antitop pair >>>> production at the LHC (W. Ju, accepted `by WG 4) >>>> >>>> 9) Impact of top quark pair production on CTEQ PDFs (Guzzi from US, >>>> accepted by WG4) >>>> >>>> >>>> We certainly would need to have a >>>> parallel session parallel two the >>>> second part otherwise we do not fit >>>> our talks. >>>> >>>> Finetuning issues that one could still think about: Ideally, the WG 3 >>>> would be in the first session, since we do not have a parallel then - >>>> and at the moment we have Kidonakis talking twice directly after each >>>> other. And we separated the session into first experimental and then >>>> theory talks. >>>> Maybe we could also mix both type of >>>> talks, if we do not have the US issue anymore. >>>> >>>> But most important, can we fix the >>>> slots now? (Moving the talks within >>>> the two sessions should be less >>>> problematic.) >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> >>>> Heidi >>>> >>>> >>>> Quoting Maria Vittoria Garzelli >>>> <garzelli(a)mail.desy.de&gt;: >>>> >>>>> The point is that this WG4+WG3 >>>>> session would better fit wednesday >>>>> afternoon (with no issue for >>>>> speakers from US), where the >>>>> "additional" room does not look as >>>>> used by anybody according to the >>>>> program. >>>>> In that case, one could use the >>>>> "additional" room to book there some of the WG3 and WG4 additional >>>>> talks and use e.g. the WG4 room for the >>>>> WG3+WG4 top quark session. >>>>> >>>>> Have you already contacted all your >>>>> WG3 speakers of wednesday, or is the >>>>> previous solution still feasible ? >>>>> >>>>> If it is not feasible, and one has >>>>> really to adapt to Thursday morning, >>>>> than there is not so much choice. In that case one could do the >>>>> WG3+WG4 in WG4 room (supposing it is larger than the WG3 one, but >>>>> this has to be understood with Nestor, otherwise one goes to the WG3 >>>>> room). >>>>> Additionally WG4 might make a >>>>> parallel of some other talks in the >>>>> WG3 room or in the additional room, >>>>> followed by a parallel of some other talks by WG3 in the WG3 room. >>>>> >>>>> The order of talks should stay as >>>>> already discussed. >>>>> (exp. mixed, theory talks by WG3, >>>>> theory talks by WG4). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022, Heidi Rzehak >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear Maria, >>>>>> >>>>>> just to be sure that I understand >>>>>> your suggestion correctly: We plan >>>>>> >>>>>> Thursday morning: 9:00 - 11:00 >>>>>> >>>>>> session WG 3+4 (top) and session >>>>>> WG 4 (other topic) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thursday morning: 11:30 -13:30 >>>>>> >>>>>> session WG (3+)4 (top continued) >>>>>> and session WG 3 (other topic) >>>>>> >>>>>> Would that fit to what you >>>>>> suggested? In this case, if you >>>>>> like I can ask Nestor about the >>>>>> rooms, which should however be no >>>>>> too big problem, since we are not >>>>>> using more rooms than when we were >>>>>> just doing our own sessions. >>>>>> Certainly it is better to ask so >>>>>> that the top session can continue >>>>>> in the same room. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>> >>>>>> Heidi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Quoting Maria Vittoria Garzelli >>>>>> <garzelli(a)mail.desy.de&gt;: >>>>>> >>>>>>> It seems that using another, >>>>>>> dedicated, room for all this top >>>>>>> stuff would still be best >>>>>>> solution. Maybe you can ask Nestor ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In case this is not feasible, the >>>>>>> easiest is the following: >>>>>>> name all top quarks as "WG3+WG4 >>>>>>> top quark session", indipendently >>>>>>> of how many talks are from WG3 and how many from WG4. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The morning part, do in WG3 room. >>>>>>> For the experimental talks all the >>>>>>> WG3+WG4 conveners can probably be >>>>>>> present. >>>>>>> For the following theory talks of >>>>>>> WG3 all WG3 conveners and one WG4 >>>>>>> convener, because, it might be >>>>>>> that WG4 in the meanwhile has to >>>>>>> use its own room for other talks >>>>>>> (not top-quark related) in >>>>>>> parallel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The afternoon part, with the >>>>>>> theory talks of WG4 do in WG4 >>>>>>> room. All WG4 conveners present >>>>>>> and one WG3 convener, because it >>>>>>> might >>>>>>> be that WG3 wants to do in >>>>>>> parallel in its own room other >>>>>>> talks >>>>>>> not top-quark related as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This way all top quark stuff will >>>>>>> look like a joint session. There >>>>>>> should always be some WG3 and some >>>>>>> WG4 conveners for each >>>>>>> talk, so the session is >>>>>>> representative of both groups, >>>>>>> even if >>>>>>> it might be that, in parallel, one has to run other WG3 and WG4 >>>>>>> sessions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does this sound as an >>>>>>> implementable reasonable enough >>>>>>> solution ? >>>>>>> (Alternatively Nestor should >>>>>>> provide a dedicated room.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022, Heidi Rzehak >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear Maria, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> sorry for the confusion with the >>>>>>>> Thursday afternoon session - >>>>>>>> there is of course no afternoon >>>>>>>> session. I definitely meant the >>>>>>>> session from 9:00 to 11:00, which would fit six talks. Since in >>>>>>>> the late session there is already the joint WG1+WG6 and parallel >>>>>>>> WG1 session, I think we will have a room problem if we try that >>>>>>>> one. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But we could of course start in >>>>>>>> the first session as you suggest >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Latest top quark measurements >>>>>>>>> with the CMS detector (CMS >>>>>>>>> speaker, accepted by WG4) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Measurement of pair and single >>>>>>>>> top-quark production >>>>>>>>> cross-sections with ATLAS at LHC (ATLAS speaker, accepted by WG3) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Other ATLAS talk on rare >>>>>>>>> processes etc. (ATLAS speaker, >>>>>>>>> accepted by WG3) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Evidence for top quark >>>>>>>>> production in AA collisions with CMS experiment (CMS speaker, >>>>>>>>> accepted by WG4) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Non-factorisable QCD corrections >>>>>>>> to t-channel single-top >>>>>>>> production at NNLO (WG 3) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Higher-order corrections in >>>>>>>> 𝑡𝑞𝛾 production (also >>>>>>>> Kidonakis) (WG 3) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And move these to a next WG4 >>>>>>>> session >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Top-antitop cross-sections at >>>>>>>>> high energies (Kidonakig from >>>>>>>>> US, accepted by WG4) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Projected transverse momentum >>>>>>>>> resummation in the top-antitop >>>>>>>>> pair production at the LHC (W. >>>>>>>>> Ju, accepted `by WG 4) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Impact of top quark pair >>>>>>>>> production on CTEQ PDFs (Guzzi >>>>>>>>> from US, accepted by WG4) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, it might be a bit tough for >>>>>>>> Nikolaos Kidonakis but given the >>>>>>>> constraints I am afraid that it >>>>>>>> might be the best solution for >>>>>>>> the moment. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Heidi >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>