Legend: Bold face encodes 'need more information'; italics encodes issues that are (semi)settled in the sense that they are the basis for future discussions.

• What fidelity of mission design are we expected to deliver? Two weeks of TeamX is hardly enough to give high fidelity design. Keith: Sufficiently credible for the ICA process to proceed; Length of final report is TBD. With a shorter report not much information is required.
• What is the overarching goal: consensus that it is to persuade the decadal to establish a funding wedge. Keith says that the previous decadal was not convinced that there was good science to be done within this funding wedge.
• The Decadal panel is mandated by congress to solicit an ICA, hence the Cost and Technical Evaluation (CATE) process. They contracted with Aerospace Corp. to do the CATE. 2010 was the first time Aerospace was involved. Since then process refined.
• Question: do the JPL (TeamX), SOMA, and Aerospace cost models agree? TeamX and Aerospace use different models but produce similar results, although Aerospace not the same. Aerospace CATEs include threats that are Team X does not include. Keith doesn't know much about SOMA's; will check.
• General guidelines:
  • build mission around a known marker (e.g. Planck). Keith gives the examples of EXO-C, which was built around Kepler.
  • watch out for new technologies. They tend to increase the costs.
  • stay close to JPL cost guidelines. Aerospace generally agrees with them.
  • if you get closer than 10% of mass and power limits, you incur penalty in cost.
• Consensus: Space mission will do full sky, and have broad frequency coverage
• No appetite for V Stokes measurements
• Agreement that resolution and the role of a super-spectrometer are two issues to tackle.
• Began discussion about resolution. Consensus: space mission can not depend on other measurements, e.g. ground measurements for delivering it's main science targets. If delensing is required to reach the r target, it should be self-delensing.
• What is the scaling of cost and aperture? SH to discuss more with Amy
• Report must address ground, sub-orbital complementarity
• We have funding for a workshop to discuss such complementarity. When should that take place? Some opinions are 'after the CDT completes its report', 'late in the study when we know the probe and S4 designs', 'perhaps earlier, to influence the design of one or both'. Workshop timing Needs more discussion.
• International participation: participation in the study activities are welcome. Partnership in the mission increases costs and adds complexity.