Telecon Notes Dec. 19, 2018

Attendance: Tim P., Jamie B., Jacques D., Amy T., Raphael F., Nick B., Bill J., Charles L.

Notes by: Karl

• Schedule: Report due on January 14.
• Report Mechanics
  • Re-release of engineering document scheduled for tomorrow
  • From now on, limited *and coordinated* editing, please.
• Authorships/Endorsements - plan to release another version Friday, and a reminder after the beginning of the year.
• Status of writing current version
  • Executive Summary in progress
  • Introduction will be replaced with 'Preliminaries'; 80% complete.
  • Fundamental Physics
    • Inflation - 95% complete. F_nl requires work.
    • Other 95% complete - but DM improvements (including axions) relative to Simons are ~x2. Include?
    • Other - OK
  • Extragalactic
    • 'First Luminous Source' - complete
    • Other (lensing, halo lensing, compton-Y) being rearranged - text tomorrow noon Central?
  • Galactic - 100%
  • Legacy - 98% complete.
    • Table 2.3 is a question enlarge or delete?
    • SO (and S4 source counts)
  • Foregrounds - Needs review (SH) but Interesting Progress from Mathieu
    • Mathieu plot:
  • Systematics - Done
  • Requirements - Needs review (SH)
  • Engineering - 98% done (SH to review)
• Cover page
  • Samples:
  • New iterations:
• Parameter Constraints
  • Beyond LCDM constraints from Eleonora di Valentino
• Taglines
  • Seeing the entire Universe
  • Exploring our history, from the Big Bang to the Milky Way

Schedule: Report due on January 14.

Report Mechanics

• Re-release of engineering document scheduled for tomorrow. We're back on standard PICO repot.
• From now on, limited and coordinated editing, please. Talk with Shaul before editing.

Authorships/Endorsements - plan to release another version Friday, and a reminder after the beginning of the year.

• at 73 authors and 60 endorsers currently
• Add affiliations? Requested by JPL for release process. Past decision was no affiliations.
  • No objections from EC. Will proceed to add affiliations

Status of writing

• Updated version goal of this weekend. Monday 12/24 at latest.
• Executive Summary in progress
• Introduction will be replaced with 'Preliminaries'; 80% complete.
  • give general definitions like EE, BB, CBE, Baseline etc. Talks about comparisons to things like S3 and SO.
  • Idea is to give the reader the background they need.
  • JB: Is S4 comparison discussed? SH: No direct quantitative comparisons. Some qualitative comparisons are mentioned. General ground complementarity is discussed.
  • AT: May consider introducing what the subsections of Chapt 2 are. Some guidance to readers.
    • SH: Good idea. Will work on this
  • AT: Science chapter starts with sentence on instrument. This is odd for the science section. Ideally document would flow science –> instrument to do that science.
    • SH: Makes sense. What about separating the 'Preliminaries' into its own section. And Science is chapter 3.
    • AT: I recommend 1 is EC that has highlights on science and instrument. 2 is science and focuses on that. Avoid saying “here's the instrument we designed, look at the science we can do.”
• Fundamental Physics
  • Inflation - 95% complete. F_nl requires work.
    • RF and SH will discuss. Figure unclear. Dash is without LSST below 20. RF has some doubts about figure. May need to talk with Marcel Schmittful.
    • Currently sentences about n_s and n_run. A factor of ~3 better than Planck (or Planck + SO). Should we keep things like this that are marginal improvements over known/funded? Or not mention those?
      • JB: Should only include things that are significant improvements. Too many modest improvements don't look like you need $1B when SO is $100M.
      • JD: But these small things add up. Maybe each of these factors of 2 are put together in one section. Like the parameter constraints beyond LCDM.
      • CL: We should discuss what PICO can do. Our predictions. Not talk about what others did or think they can do or may have done wrong.
  • Other 95% complete - but DM improvements (including axions) relative to Simons are ~x2. Include?
    • This may move into a paragraph with LCDM extensions and other marginal improvements over Planck, SO, etc.
  • Other - OK
• Extragalactic
  • 'First Luminous Source' - complete
  • Other (lensing, halo lensing, compton-Y) being rearranged - text tomorrow noon Central?
    • Colin uploaded a new version today. Nick will do his best to look at before tomorrow noon. Will confirm schedule this evening.
• Galactic - 100%
• Legacy - 98% complete.
  • Table 2.3 is a question enlarge or delete?
    • This material (and more) is in the text. Table is not exhaustive. Is it worth the time investment to make this? Not clear that we can do so in next few weeks.
    • JD: Mentioned CIB. We could say CIB is/can be involved in delensing.
      • SH: This is a good example. CIB is mentioned in text, but is not in table. Work is needed to add this to table along the lines of 'current knowledge' for CIB in table.
      • JD: Will check if I can add information on CIB give update tonight if not.
  • SO (and S4 source counts)
    • Our calculations for what SO/S4 can do don't agree with their predictions. SO predicts many more sources than we predict.
    • Example: We predict 50,000 clusters found. SO predicts many more than we expect they would when scaling from Planck. Gianfranco could resolve by communication with SO.
• Foregrounds - Needs review (SH) but Interesting Progress from Mathieu
  • GNILC removal on 50% of sky. input r = 0. Dot line at r = 10^-4. Shows debiased CMB all the way to low ells. Similar figure will go in foregrounds sections.
• Systematics - Done
• Requirements - Needs review (SH)
• Engineering - 98% done (SH to review)

Cover page

• Most people prefer top left figure.
• AT: these updates don't have new ideas from EC members.
• AT: None of these are final. Hopefully these provide all the elements we want. Opinions?
• AT: Just a comment. Having text on the cover is uncommon. But it seems we have decided to go in this direction.
  • JB: No text on cover isn't hard rule. Like the one with line of science points. Scattered science topics is just cluttered. AT: true, text on cover is ok.
• SH: One concern was if the text on cover is obviously science goals. Or people might think we were just describing the universe.
  • JB/JD: as long as the same language is in EC they will get it.
• JB: Like version 1 because it shows spacecraft. Like version 2 because it is new/different and looks cool.
• JD: Don't like science topics scattered around. Keeping the line is better. No inflation in science topics?
  • SH: my task to rewrite topics. Anyone want that task? . . . no response . . .
• AT: imagining 2 new versions. 1st, Top left but with some maturing. 2nd, eye with spacecraft at center. PICO text moves.

Parameter Constraints

• Beyond LCDM constraints from Eleonora di Valentino
• JD: Stronger model testing of LCDM.
• SH: Maybe we put all the factor of 2's like n_s, n_run.
• AvE: Important to distinguish between completed experiments (Planck) and planned experiments (SO or S4). Need to do much better than Planck, but marginally better than SO is more defensible.
• SH: Jacques, can you write a paragraph on a broad view of this? JD: Yes, will do as soon as possible