ANU: A. Searle
CIT: R. Drever, P. Lindquist, B. Mours, P. Shawhan, A. Vicere, S. Whitcomb,
        H. Yamamoto, J. Zweizig
Fermilab: T. Nash
Florida: S. Klimenko
LHO: W. Butler, G. Gonzalez, M. Landry, F. Raab, T. Summerscales
LLO: M. Coles, E. Daw, W. Johnson, J. Kern, J. Kovalik, R. Riesen, A. Rizzi, G. Stapfer
Louisiana Tech: D. Greenwood
Michigan: K. Riles
MIT: R. Adhikari, P. Fritschel, M. Zucker
Nashville: S. Marka
Oregon: R. Schofield, D. Strom
PSU: G. Gonzalez
Syracuse: S. Penn
Wisconsin: D. Brown

• The E3 run will begin at noon CST Friday March 9 (10 a.m. at Hanford) and end at noon CST Monday March 12.
• The Hanford 2-km interferometer will be in a full, recycled configuration. The Livingston 4-km IFO configuration is not yet certain, but may be in recombination (both arms, but no recycling - see below).
• Running will be in 24-hour mode, with one IFO operator on shift at Hanford and two at Livingston, in addition to scientific monitoring shifts manned by one expert and one trainee (see below).
• Physicists have signed up for 13 suggested investigations similar to the ones carried for E2 (see below).
• One purpose of this meeting is to field requests from investigators for special running conditions or for data channels to be included in the reduced data set (RDS). Comments for improving E2 procedures that didn't work well are also welcome.
• The followup teleconference will be the regularly scheduled detector characterization meeting on Friday March 2 at 11:00 a.m. EST (8:00 PST). At that meeting, each investigation leader should present a (brief) plan of investigation and make any final special requests. Requests that are difficult to satisfy should be made sooner than that!
• DMT software writers are reminded that Monday February 26 is the deadline for giving final DMT monitor code to John Zweizig for official E3 running.

• The Hanford 2K now runs stably in fully recycled mode, with lock stretches of half an hour to an hour. The incident power on the recycling mirror is 100 mW and gives about 100 W in the arms. The best sensitivity is at about 1 kHz: 2 * 10^-16 m/sqrt(Hz).
• Each of the Livingston 4k arms has been locked individually for up to 40 minutes, but recombining the beams from the arms has not yet worked. There is a high probability of achieving stable recombination by E3, but single-arm locks will be used for the run if recombination locked stretches don't consistently last 20 minutes or longer.

• The shift schedule is in good shape, with nearly every scientific monitoring slot filled (present shift list). One more person is needed for the last Livingston owl trainee shift.
• The shifts will be synchronized at the sites, with day shifts starting at 6 a.m. at Hanford and 8 a.m. at Livingston. Although one expert and two trainees were present for scientific monitoring shifts during E2, it was felt that only one trainee was necessary/appropriate for E3.
• Shift duties for E3 will be quite similar to those for E2. There was some discussion of how software bugs found on shift should be reported. In E2 the shift takers included bug reports in an end-of-shift online questionairre. John suggested adopting the GNATS bug reporting system used by LDAS in which bug reports in different software categories can be automatically directed to the right person.

• All tasks have at least one volunteer, but some could probably use more help. In particular, the following tasks seem a little short-handed:
• Fraction of noise in 5-50 Hz due to seismic motion. Phil Charlton is leading this, with help from Dick Greenwood and Neven Simicevic. Phil plans to attack this problem using the data conditioning API of LDAS. KR would like to see someone with DMT experience lend a hand too. It would be natural for this team to work with the correlations investigation team led by Nelson Christensen.
• Data merging. Only Peter Shawhan was signed up for this at the start of the meeting, and there is much to be done. Gaby Gonzalez volunteered to help. Others are welcome. See below for discussion of existing merging options.
• Frequency noise.  Only Rana Adhikari and Andrea Vicere are signed up for this comprehensive and important investigation. Others are strongly urged to join in.
• The largest investigation team is for environmental disturbances (led by Robert Schofield). This represents a consolidation of several E2 investigations that seem in hindsight to have been split artifically. There are many disturbances and many existing tools with which to study them. A more coordinated approach seems appropriate here.
• There was some discussion of how line monitoring for E3 should differ from what was done for E2. Stan Whitcomb stressed the importance of looking at correlations between the sites in the power mains. In addition to looking in the GW channel for 60 Hz contamination, one can look at dedicated power line monitors available at Hanford and soon to be available at Livingston. Looking for correlations in glitches, drifts, etc. may require producing trend or similar outputs at each site separately for later comparison (see below).
• Sergey Klimenko estimated he would need to look at about 200 GB of data for line monitoring and wondered how best to go about it, since he doesn't have that much free disk space at Florida. John said that running programs on fortress at LHO and on decatur at LLO would probably be best. Sergey wondered what other E2 teams had done to look at large data samples. KR agreed to carry out a poll of E2 team leaders. Tom Nash expressed interest in seeing the poll results, in order to help revise the part of the LSC data analysis white paper dealing with computers and architecture.
• John  suggested that the various data serving programs should log data requests to give us a better measure of what data samples people find most useful. Peter reported that CACR already logs all such requests, and any data passed to the Hanford general computing machines is also logged. But internal CDS transfers are not presenlty logged. John volunteered to speak with Dave Barker and/or Alex Ivanov to see if logging can be implemented for the network data server.
• The only investigation team to make a special request was the calibration stability group (led by Mike Landry), which would like four hours of dedicated time at the beginning and end of the run. KR suggested starting that effort somewhat before the official Friday noon  starting time for the run. Mike wondered whether each investigation team was expected to station one or more persons at each site during the run. KR suggested that small groups focus on one site or the other for analysis to be done in real-time. The calibration group does need to carry out work at both sites, however. Szabi offered to help out at Livingston and said he believed Luca Matone would be available to help too. Mike and Benoit will be at the Hanford site during E3.
• More on data merging and access:
• Peter reported that there are two methods of data merging from Hanford and Livingston available now, both somewhat cumbersome. One can read data online but separately into two matlab programs for side by side comparision (e.g. of seismic transients). Or one can transfer RDS frame files from one site to the other and merge the files together (or transfer both to a third location). The same data can also be obtained from the CACR archive in a slightly different form.
• Ed Daw pointed out that currently only the decatur workstation at LLO has access to the Livingston RDS and that given the troubles experienced by fortress during E2, we should not plan for physicists to be logging in to decatur to get at the data. It's possible that NFS sharing will be available at LLO by the time of E3 to allow other computers to see the data. At Hanford, it's now possible to see the RDS data from both fortress and stone.
• Analysis of data merged at CACR must wait for about a week after the run. Stan pointed out that doing a merged-data analysis correctly is more important than doing it in real-time.
• Peter reported that the data viewer and diagnostic test tool have near-real-time access to Hanford data from general computing machines outside the control room.

• A list of RDS channels recorded during E2 was posted on the agenda page. E3 investigators are asked to look over the list and request any additions needed for E3 no later than the March 2 telecon. The question was raised whether the corresponding channels are present at Livingston. Szabi agreed to look into this; he knows of at least a few differences in channel names.

• Szabi urged all DMT software writers to test their code soon on Livingston computers. Ed pointed out that only one dedicated dmt computer (delaronde) is available at LLO, in contrast to the two dmt computers (sand & stone) at LHO. A dual-processor linux machine on order is unlikely to be installed and commissioned in time for E3 to spread the load.
• John mentioned that with a fix to the framecpp api he's working on, the cpu demand on dmt machines might diminish considerably. He hopes to have the fix ready by E3. If not, it may be necessary to perform triage on E3 monitors at LLO to avoid cpu saturation. The heaviest dmt loads come from the data set summary generator (dss - Benoit Mours) and the transient identifier (tid - Julien Sylvestre) which each requires roughly 1 cpu of the four available on the sun-450 dmt machines. Benoit mentioned that he is speeding up the dss program, but it will still require a large fraction of one cpu.
• Szabi and John plan to run a test of all dmt monitors in the week leading up to E3 to verify that the monitors run and keep up with the real-time data.
• Szabi mentioned that Livingston may be swamped with curious, pre-LSC-meeting visitors. He was urged to be ruthless in ejecting idle hands from the control room.
• Szabi also mentioned that all disks at LLO will be backed up the day before the run begins.