canSAS-XI/Software: Difference between revisions
From canSAS
No edit summary |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
== Session Notes == | == Session Notes == | ||
The session began with a presentation by on DEPTAK | |||
Highlights from the discussion include: | |||
* It seems that there are a number of packages that are being developed with similar plugin architectures in python | |||
** Noted that more than one is important | |||
** But there does seem to be an insatiable and unstoppable need to re-invent the wheel myself: | |||
*** question is what drives that? | |||
**** Need to have access | |||
**** Desire to do "better" and get recognized? | |||
**** Lack of "advertising" - Dissemination should work on reaching instrument scientists and potential developers about what is already there | |||
* Lots of “advertising needs” | |||
* Youtube for users but also beamline scientists | |||
* Add citations and activity etc for packages on canSAS portal page | |||
* Being able to respond to ones users | |||
* Scriptable packages in python gives first go at correlation | |||
* Software as Infrastructure | |||
** PANOSC and OSC | |||
* Facilities? Would require getting everyone with any effort in SAS analysis software identified and together to discuss “infrastructure” support models | |||
* 3D pictures needed or our community becomes road kill | |||
* Use molecular simulation and correlation analysis. ML could also help | |||
* Get packages to take “STEP files” and convert to scattering | |||
* Workflows for focused problems that give you the 3 parameters that you want | |||
* Networking grants a great idea and some effort since last canSAS but need grants to do actual work. | |||
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/11IW87UsSOT9_eCTwgOd5Sn3GDbqH5zGzwdG31ZyPnUM/edit?usp=sharing Google Doc With Notes] | [https://docs.google.com/document/d/11IW87UsSOT9_eCTwgOd5Sn3GDbqH5zGzwdG31ZyPnUM/edit?usp=sharing Google Doc With Notes] |
Revision as of 10:32, 11 July 2019
Discussion session on Software
Chair : Paul Butler
<<upload introductory presentation from plenary as PDF and link here >>
Session Notes
The session began with a presentation by on DEPTAK
Highlights from the discussion include:
- It seems that there are a number of packages that are being developed with similar plugin architectures in python
- Noted that more than one is important
- But there does seem to be an insatiable and unstoppable need to re-invent the wheel myself:
- question is what drives that?
- Need to have access
- Desire to do "better" and get recognized?
- Lack of "advertising" - Dissemination should work on reaching instrument scientists and potential developers about what is already there
- question is what drives that?
- Lots of “advertising needs”
- Youtube for users but also beamline scientists
- Add citations and activity etc for packages on canSAS portal page
- Being able to respond to ones users
- Scriptable packages in python gives first go at correlation
- Software as Infrastructure
- PANOSC and OSC
- Facilities? Would require getting everyone with any effort in SAS analysis software identified and together to discuss “infrastructure” support models
- 3D pictures needed or our community becomes road kill
- Use molecular simulation and correlation analysis. ML could also help
- Get packages to take “STEP files” and convert to scattering
- Workflows for focused problems that give you the 3 parameters that you want
- Networking grants a great idea and some effort since last canSAS but need grants to do actual work.
Actions
- Video tutorials for selecting software program(s) - Assigned to: TBD
- Smallangle.org: Separate out highly used software and mark supported vs unsupported - Assigned to: TBD
- Software usage across different facilities - Assigned to: TBD