2006 IEEE Nuclear and Plasma Sciences Society (NPSS)
Nuclear and Medical Imaging Sciences Council (NMISC) Meeting

Meeting Date: 12:00 November 2, 2006

Meeting Location: Windsor Rose Room, Town and Country Resort, San Diego

Attendees: Anna Celler, Dimitris Visvikis, Ramsey Badawi, Craig Woody, Ron Jaszczak, Joel Karp, Magnus Dahlbom, Tom Lewellen, Todd Peterson, Paul Kinahan, Yuan-Chuan Tai, Richard Lanza, Eric Frey, James Hugg, Ron Huesman, Grant Gullberg, John Aarsvold, Martin Tornai, Ron Keyser, Ben Tsui, Uwe Bratzler, Charles Watson

Tom Lewellen, current chairman of the NMISC, presided.

1. Welcome and preliminary business

   • Tom opened the meeting and introduced the agenda.

   • A motion was made to adopt the agenda - carried unanimously.

   • A motion was made to accept the 2005 minutes - carried unanimously.

2. Report on 2005 NSS/MIC (Tom Lewellen, General Chair)

   • The meeting was very successful overall.

   • Total submissions were similar to this year (> 1200), but booked room nights (6333) were much higher than anticipated. This was the biggest problem faced. The lesson for future meetings is to allow for adequate surge space.

   • Food costs were also an issue with some attendees.

   • Companion program was well received. Thanks to Barbara Lewellen and Carolyn Hoffman.

   • Short course attendance was lower than expected.

   • Approval rating from feedback form was good (> 80%).

   • Income: $840k; Costs: $690k; Net to IEEE: $150k.

3. Report on 2005 MIC (Ramsey Badawi, MIC Deputy Chair)

   • A full report was distributed electronically prior to the meeting.

   • The main issue was the high rejection rate (142 papers = 27%). This was forced by space restrictions. Several complaints were received by the Chairs from rejected authors, a few were seriously upset with the review process. (Some discussion ensued on whether the rejection rate was appropriate and how additional posters could be accommodated.)

   • Poster boards provided were smaller and thinner than expected, leading to some problems. The lesson for future meetings is to triple check the poster specifications.

   • Premium poster designation was well received, although not used this year.

   • The afternoon breaks between sessions were good for those attendees at the conference hotel, but inconvenient for those in overflow hotels. In the future, such issues should be considered carefully before adopting this structure.

4. Report on 2006 NSS/MIC (John Aarsvold, MIC Chair)

   • A full report was distributed electronically prior to the meeting.

   • Number of registered attendees = 1620.

   • The NIH grant sought for funding young investigators was not received. A primary concern was lack of information on gender and ethnicity demographics. A revised proposal addressing these and other concerns could be successful in the future. Additional information is available from John.

   • Considerable effort was spent seeking corporate sponsorship with good success ($45,500). John recommends initiating requests for support earlier in the process of planning for the meeting so that corporations can budget for their contributions.

   • John reviewed the process for accepting submissions. Papers with 2 or more reject recommendations from reviewers were rejected. Papers with 1 reject recommendation were reviewed by John and Bruce, and some were accepted. Is there a better way to select papers?

   • There are 96 oral presentations. Orals were selected primarily on the basis of high review scores, although the last 16 were a difficult choice. John feels that essentially all submissions deserving to be orals were so designated.

   • Anna expressed concern about how much the MIC should grow - whether there should be a limit. Tom suggested that the meeting should self-limit based on the science being performed.

   • Joel recommended that poster authors be encouraged to prepare a one-page handout of their presentation for distribution, to facilitate dissemination of their work.

   • Martin suggested considering whether TNS publications (of MIC papers) were growing in proportion to the MIC.

5. Report on 2007 NSS/MIC (Eric Frey, MIC Chair)

   • A full report was distributed electronically prior to the meeting.

   • Abstract deadline is slightly earlier than this year, but somewhat soft (don't advertise this).

   • Program booklet is targeted to be ready Sept. 1.

   • There is some issue with poster space (about 600 spaces).

   • There are adequate hotel backups.

   • The possibility of parallel sessions is under consideration.

   • Eric's goal is to do at least as well as John in securing external funding.

   • Anna suggested considering color-coding posters by subject, as done at some other meetings, to help improve poster session efficiency.

   • An exhibitor prospectus is available from Ron Keyser.

6. Report on 2008 NSS/MIC (Ron Keyser, Oversight Committee)

   • The meeting location is the International Conference Centre, Dresden.

   • The conference hotel (Maritim) is new but will not hold everyone. Other hotels are within walking distance. Negotiated room rates range from 70 - 149 Euros including breakfast. Individuals may request rates without breakfast.

   • Student funding is being sought.

   • Poster swapping will be necessary if there are more than 800.

   • Martin inquired if there may be any security issues associated with holding the meeting in Germany. It was generally agreed that this was not likely to be a problem in view of our experience in Rome.

   • Dick noted that the Department of Homeland Security had in the past been unwilling to fund student travel to the NSS.

7. Report on 2009-10 NSS/MIC site selection (Craig Woody, Oversight Committee Chair)

   • Craig reviewed the new Oversight Committee organization: a joint RISC/NMISC Executive committee appoints the Chair, who selects its members. Its purpose is to provide long-term planning for the NSS/MIC conference.

   • Current membership: Craig Woody (Chair), Ron Keyser, Roger Gearhart, Magnus Dahlbom, Alberto Del Guerra, Ramsey Badawi, Paul Lecoq, Dick Lanza (ex-officio) and Tom Lewellen (ex-officio).

   • Current plans are: 2009 - East coast US; 2010 - West coast US; 2011 - open.

   • Criteria for site choice:

1. Location (East coast US)

2. Space: need > 75k sq. ft. meeting space; 750 rooms peak.

3. Total cost to attendees

4. Accessibility (direct flights)

• Sites considered for 2009: Orlando, Knoxville, Atlanta, St. Louis, with some thought to Boston and Baltimore. Atlanta too expensive, St. Louis not a good size match.

• Semi-finalists: Orlando and Knoxville.

• Knoxville has a new convention center the right size for the meeting, and lowest hotel costs ($110-$120/night). It is close to ORNL, UT and Siemens, who could be expected to provide local support. Its higher transportation costs cancel the hotel cost advantage, however. A significant issue is that rooms would have to be spread over 6 hotels with individual contracts for each. Knoxville could be an attractive site for a future meeting especially if a local entity could be found to provide single-source contracting of hotel rooms to the conference.

• The final choice is between two hotels in Orlando: Disney's Coronado Springs and the Hilton near Downtown Disney, although it is recognized that Disney World is polarizing to many attendees.

• The Hilton is a good fit for space and rooms. The conference would use the entire hotel. It would possibly be preferable to those who are negative on the Disney culture. They are asking $175/night. Tom is still negotiating.

• Coronado Springs is bigger (2000 rooms) and we would likely be sharing the hotel with some other meeting. $150/night plus free airport transportation. Rooms at other, cheaper, Disney properties can count toward room block commitment. Full Disney experience.

• Final decision hinges somewhat on whether Tom can bring Hilton price down close to $150/night.

• Martin suggested considering whether attendees were satisfied with the resort location in Puerto Rico. Tom said < 20% expressed dissatisfaction, mainly with food costs.

• Anna expressed concern that these meetings are becoming too expensive. Tom said it would cost at least $120-$150/night just about anywhere. The question was raised whether attendees could save money at one of the numerous other hotels in the area. Tom cautioned against encouraging this due to financial penalties if room block commitments are not met.

• The primary sites under consideration for 2010 are Reno, Las Vegas, and Anchorage. Secondary consideration is being given to Salt Lake City, San Antonio, Denver and Knoxville. If Anchorage were chosen, the meeting would have to be moved to the end of September to avoid bad weather. There was discussion of the relative merits of these sites. (Anchorage is exotic but remote. Las Vegas' culture may be polarizing.)

• A European site is being considered for 2011 or 2012. Possibilities include Spain, Monaco, Poland, The Netherlands, and Greece. The possibility of holding the meeting in Beijing, Japan, Korea or Australia has also been suggested.

• The US-Europe-Asia rotation cycle needs to be discussed.

• The question then arose of how a site's consideration is initiated. Craig said the process should begin with an interested group putting together a few slides with pertinent information as their initial proposal, and presenting this to him.

1. Communications (Web) Sub-Committee Report (Ron Huesman, Chair)

   • Anyone desiring changes should contact Ron.

2. Awards Sub-Committee Report (Paul Kinahan)

   • A full report was distributed electronically prior to the meeting.

   • As recommended by NMISC last year and approved by AdCom, a major change starting this year is that both the Hoffman MIS and Young Investigator awards will be given annually, instead of in alternating years.

   • There were about 5 nominees for the Young Investigator award.

   • The YI award this year goes to Suleman Surti, University of Pennsylvania.

   • The Hoffman Medical Imaging Scientist award this year goes to Ron Jaszczak. (The meeting expressed its congratulations to Ron.)

   • Paul expressed his thanks to the awards committee for their efforts.

3. Meeting adjourned at 13:23.