We will be holding an in-depth review of triggering operations associated
with the Run 1 Level II system on Wednesday May 22 1-5pm in the 9th Circle.
The goal of this workshop will be to try to get down on paper (or plastic) what
we think we learned from the first run, and what lessons we wish to carry
forward to Run II for the Level 2 and Level 3 systems.  These lessons might be
of the form
 
    things that were well done, are important, and should be done next time
    things that were not done very well, and should be rethought or attacked
        with more manpower next time
    things that were done that aren't worth doing next time
    things that never got done and should have
    things that might be an issue for Run II which weren't for Run I
 
    This afternoon's discussions are in preparation for the beginning of
planning for Level 3 and trigger simulations at the June workshop.  I should
here empatically state that I do not plan to be doing Level 3 in Run II, and
would welcome organizational help from anyone interested in these ventures.
 
    Areas we wish to consider are:
 
    - Level 2 and Level 1.5 triggering
        did they achieve their physics goals of sufficient(ly)
            freedom from error
            efficiency for physics signals
            rejection to get physics to tape
            small deadtime
            fast response to new conditions
            stability and record keeping to be able to analyze data
            ability to monitor the system
 
    - Simulation for physics analyses
        flexibility, speed, accuracy, timeliness, usefulness, useablilty
            of trigger simulations for physics analyses
 
    - Verification successes and failures
        offline pre-release verification
        online monitoring via TRIGGER EXAMINE
        online monitoring via MON stream
 
    - Code Development environment
        flexibility of framework
        special algorithms vs pieces of offline
        stability of production releases for code development
 
    We are interesting in reviewing these questions from the point of view of
implementors of the system and of algorithms, from trigger meisters and shifters
having to interact with the system, and from physics users of the system and of
the simulations.  In particular, I will be looking for comments from at least
one person from each of the physics groups.
 
    We are looking for people who would like to offer their views on this
subject.  Please contact Jim Linnemann if you would like to speak or otherwise
have your views represented.  Also contact him if you cannot make this
proposed date.