CCPiSurvey

From Viz Matters
Revision as of 13:08, 28 January 2015 by Martin Turner (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

CCPi Survey results.

This survey was carried out in March-June 2014 to influence the panel during the Summer Working Group meeting. The key aim was to discuss how limited CCP core SLA effort could be better utilised by focussing on API development for specific platforms. Secondary aim was to consider which tools would be implementable within a new framework for the CCP, and another secondary aim was to ask for feedback on not programming development work for example training, advice etc.

CCPiWG.jpg

On 17 June 2014 the CCPi Working Group Meeting was held at the Atlas Visualisation Facility in RAL.

Executive Summary

Presentation

Respondence came from a range of users through the 300+ names on hte list but only 9 responded completely. The second question asked “What aspects of imaging are you involved with?” and gave a fixed set of responses.

File:CCPiSlide2.jpg

This showed a predominance for user based needs rather than development needs; and also national facilities rather than lab based (often university type facilities) users.

Q3 "What software do you use for tomgraphic analysis and visualization?" With fixed list of tools.

File:CCPiSlide3.jpg

This showed that there were a few key favoured packages that would be candidates for API links for fuure development.

Q4 "What image processing techniques do you use?" Choice of commercial/open source/own software.

File:CCPiSlide4.jpg

This was interesting and significant, as it showed that users were developing their own software for reconstruction and some filtering techniques but mainly using commercial software for segmentation and quantification.

Q5: "What are your current and future computational requirements? Please detail your current needs in terms e.g. of image size and number of images. What computer hardware is typically required to process your data and is fast turn around important to your experiments?" Comments given were:

File:CCPiSlide5.jpg

As expected scale and size of object was important although these values can be represented within large (1/2 TB RAM) fat nodes so extreme cluster implementations were not necessarily there to be developed.

Q6 "Are there any algorithms in tomographic image reconstruction, analysis or quantification that you believe CCPi should consider providing an efficient open source implementation of?" Comments given were:

File:CCPiSlide6.jpg

This gave a starting point for a list of potential new objectives for the SLA team to address.

Q7 "CCPi is involved in a range of activities to support the research community (see http://www.cpi.ac.uk). Of the current CCPi activities which do you believe to be the most benifical to the research community? Please rate each area on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being most important."

File:CCPiSlide7.jpg

The obvious priority was training requirements - and discussion in the WG involved ways to set up cross training facilities and access to data.

Q8 "Do you have any other comments on the CCPi project?" Comments given were:

File:CCPiSlide8.jpg


Results from Survey: July-December 2014

TO DO