James Dunlop
Mission Statement from James Dunlop for STAR spokesperson
Introduction
Dear STAR collaborators,
Following is my statement about why I am running for Spokesperson. I have decided to structure this in response to the fine questions asked by the Spokesperson nominating committee, followed by a short summary. I hope for your support. Sincerely,
James Dunlop
Answer to questions
- Why do you want to be spokesperson?
STAR has had resounding success under the previous Spokesperson, but we are entering into a new, more difficult phase over the next decade. There are strong plans for world-leading science from the upgrades both to the accelerator and the experiment. Making these plans into reality will take dedicated work. External pressures are increasing, both internationally and intellectually from the upcoming LHC heavy ion program and nationally from the resource needs of other portions of the U.S. Nuclear Physics program. I bring to the table the experience that will be necessary to successfully navigate these waters.
I have been Physics Analysis Coordinator for nearly six years now, and have been a close observer of what is needed to manage the experiment successfully. I am fully engaged in STAR as the sole experiment with which I am associated. Located at BNL, I have the ability to interact on a daily basis with the BNL management, which is a necessity for the success of the experiment. On the wider issue of conflicts within the collaboration, I believe I have shown myself to be effective in resolving issues so that the collaboration can move forward. Over the next decade, with the growing external pressures, we cannot afford to circle the wagons and shoot in.
That said, I am also young, which brings the advantage of energy and enthusiasm, but can have its disadvantages. I expect to make full use of our more seasoned colleagues on matters that benefit from their experience in areas to which I might have had less exposure. I plan to actively engage the Council and the Advisory Board, especially on challenges, examples of which are outlined below, that require full and active participation from broad segments of the Collaboration.
- What do you see are the major goals for STAR for the next 3 years?
The major challenge to STAR is to bring the midterm upgrades to completion, and use them to full advantage to produce physics results that are complementary, competitive, and in many ways superior to that of our competition. We also need to keep an eye on the future past three years, and create a path forward for the next decade.
The Time of Flight and DAQ1000 projects need to be delivered during the early years of the next Spokesperson's tenure. The Spokesperson plays a critical role in making sure that this happens, both through oversight and funding discussions. Beyond the delivery of these systems, the Spokesperson needs to lead the collaboration towards the best use of these systems to realize the first-class physics results they can provide. These systems can lead to qualitative advances in the physics that STAR can produce, but for this to happen they need support beyond just delivery of the detector. In the case of DAQ1000, the limitation on dataset sizes moves to the backend, into the computing resources necessary to analyze large datasets quickly. A critical need for the next Spokesperson is to creatively identify and obtain additional computing resources to handle these large datasets.
Polarized protons will be collided at a center of mass energy of 500 GeV at RHIC in this time period. A challenge for the next Spokesperson is to make sure that when this happens we are in a position to take full, and competitive, advantage of these beams. The Forward Gem Tracker project, which is necessary for STAR to be competitive in the W program at 500 GeV, needs to move quickly. We will also need to find a balance between needs at 200 GeV, both for spin and for heavy ion reference data, and needs at 500 GeV.
The critical point search, with a low energy scan in RHIC tentatively scheduled for run 10, is a unique opportunity for STAR, one that has generated a great amount of interest in our collaboration. The Spokesperson needs to make sure that the necessary groundwork is laid to make this scan a success, both in plans for the detector configuration and with studies from the collider. With the full TOF barrel and the advantages of a collider geometry, STAR is simply the best detector to make this search, but we need to be sure that we are fully prepared and that the detector is in its optimal state.
We also need to lay the groundwork for success past these three years.
We need to be prepared to take full advantage of the high luminosity of RHIC II, which should come online towards the end of the next Spokesperson's term. The Heavy Flavor Tracker is a major, large-scale project, and is central to our longer term physics goals. It is natural for high luminosity programs to evolve towards charm and beauty, and so we are not without competition in this field, both from PHENIX and the LHC. This project needs to be put on as rapid a track as it can for success.
We also need to start thinking about upgrades past the ones directly in the pipeline. We have promising R+D in a number of longer term detector concepts, but the future path for these concepts needs to be fleshed out. I would also actively solicit other ideas for future detector systems. The increased luminosity of RHIC II can provide a watershed in the precision with which we probe the matter created at RHIC energies. We need to keep thinking creatively about using these real opportunities for STAR to stay at the global cutting edge in heavy ion and spin physics.
- What do you consider STAR's primary accomplishments to date?
STAR has been a resounding success to date. Among our beautiful results, we were the first to measure the large level of elliptic flow that have led to claims of perfect liquidity, and we discovered the new phenomenon of jet quenching. We were the first to find that sizeable transverse spin asymmetries persist into the perturbative regime, and are well on our way towards definitively measuring the contribution of gluon polarization to the spin of the proton. We have an excellent publication record, with the most papers and citations of any experiment at RHIC. We have had impacts outside our field, and pictures from our experiment appear as icons in textbooks and the popular press.
Now, I have heard criticisms that our impact outside our field is not as great as it could be, given the high quality of our science, and that sometimes we are not as rapid, or, somewhat oppositely, as critical, in our publication process as we could be. I hear these criticisms and would work hard, both with the Physics Working Groups and with the Publication Policy committee, to make our publication process the best it can be.
I enjoyed the whitepaper process, and believe that this kind of focused discussion of our results has its place and time in our scientific process. I also believe that our bottoms-up scientific process, in which the choice of how to publish and the pace towards publication is driven largely by those who actually do the analysis, is one of our strengths.
I'd use the bully pulpit of the Spokesperson's office to push for those changes in the publication policy that help. I'd also keep an eye out for results that could be communicated better to the wider community, and would solicit and welcome help from the collaboration on this.
- What will you do to help ensure that our upgrades are successfully implemented?
On the shorter term upgrades, such as the TOF and DAQ1000, one issue is to ensure that funding gets channeled to STAR upgrades rather than other initiatives. Here, my plan is to use a close working relationship with the BNL management to ensure this happens. Beyond that, a Spokesperson can pay close attention to progress and intervene when issues come up that need him. I do not intend to micromanage projects, but will keep a close eye on them to make sure that they are progressing sufficiently.
On the longer term upgrades, beyond what I outlined above, a Spokesperson can ensure that physics arguments are cleanly and clearly articulated, and make sure that experts, both within and outside the collaboration, have fully vetted proposals at the earliest possible stage. As with analysis, it's always most efficient to identify, and address, major issues sooner rather than later.
- Are there changes required to keep STAR at the forefront of heavy ion and spin physics in the world?
I believe that we are on a good path, but, as I said before, we have major challenges ahead of us. We need to evolve to match these challenges.
We should revisit our Physics Working Group structure, with an eye towards making it more effective and efficient. I've heard worries from a large enough component of the collaboration that my plan, should I be elected Spokesperson, would be to gather a representative group from the collaboration to look at this issue, and make a considered recommendation, which I would implement. Drastic change in an organization the size of STAR can cause a loss in productivity, if not done in a considered way. We need to be sure that a disruptive change produces effective change.
As stated in the answer to question 6 below, we have major challenges in the operation of the detector.
Beyond this, I think that we need to recognize a bit more that we live in a world that is not just RHIC. We need to take opportunities to increase our profile in the wider scientific community, and communicate the exciting and precise science that we are doing and that we plan to do.
- What are the major problems you see with STAR operations currently? How will you solve them?
First, there are major problems: there is not sufficient support.
Frankly, we have been drifting towards a model that is not sustainable, in which many detectors are on the margin of being unsupported. Addressing this will be one of the major challenges of the next Spokesperson, and he will not be successful without the participation of broad segments of the Collaboration. One of the first things I would like to do as Spokesperson would be to have a frank discussion with STAR institutions and the Council about this issue. I believe that part of the issue is structural, and needs to be discussed with funding agencies to obtain the resources needed to sustain the program. If we are to go to these agencies, we need to have a well laid out plan, fully discussed within the Collaboration, that identifies the problem and proposes concrete solutions.
- How would you change the STAR management structure, if at all?
The Spokesperson has a huge job, with responsibilities that can become overwhelming if not addressed rapidly and efficiently. Success requires delegation, and I plan to rely heavily on my deputies, the Advisory Board, and ad-hoc committees to address in a timely, and transparent, manner the issues that will come up in the next term. I agree with Rene that three deputies provide effective and efficient leadership. Beyond this, as outlined in the answer to the two previous questions, I believe that some changes are in order in the Physics Working Group structure, and would attempt to engage the Council more to address issues that require broad Collaboration support.
- What other professional commitments do you have that might interfere with your concentrating on the Spokesperson position?
- What is the level of commitment of your institution to STAR?
Personally, I am fully committed to STAR as the sole experiment with which I am associated. I feel strongly that STAR is the best place to do heavy ion and spin physics over the next decade, and am staking my career on this. I think it goes without saying that BNL is strongly commited to STAR.
- How do you view the relations with non-US institutes? Do you think present levels of participation are OK or do you have any plan to suggest changes to that?
STAR is an international experiment. It's difficult to find a detector in STAR that was not greatly dependent on, or in some cases produced exclusively by, our international colleagues. A large fraction of our most important workforce, the graduate students and post-docs, are international, as are almost half of our Physics Working Group convenors.
That said, there are always opportunities to increase participation from non-US institutes. We need to support travel, and come up with inventive ways for people outside the country to participate more locally. It's an unfortunate fact that U.S. budget uncertainty, along with increased issues with visas, have caused problems with the participation of our international colleagues, most notably recently in the shift responsibilities around the Christmas holidays. In Tim's first term, there were a number of regional meetings, which have not happened for a number of years: I would like to see these revived. I would also like to see the ways in which we welcome participation widened. The recent attempts to find and devote to STAR significant computing resources outside the United States are an example of an inventive contribution that both creates local centers for participation and can solve the real issues that DAQ1000 brings.
We are not alone in competing for the resources from any institution, and especially from non-US institutions. The place that I see for a Spokesperson is to articulate cleanly and clearly the great opportunities that STAR provides, and what institutions can bring to the table to make these opportunities into a reality.
Summary
In summary, I believe strongly that STAR is the best place in the world to do heavy ion and spin physics over the next decade. There are, however, a number of challenges that the next Spokesperson will face from increasing competition for resources, both internationally and within the U.S. Nuclear Physics community. Should I be elected Spokesperson, I believe that my combination of experience in resolving conflict within the collaboration, my full commitment to STAR, and my ability to interact regularly with BNL management will lead to the best chances of success for STAR. I hope for your support.