Report from IPAC’10 LOC

M. Fukuda, K. Furukawa, S. Hayashi, Y. Hayashi, R. Kato, T. Kii,E. Kikutani, T. Kosuge, A. Mizuno, Y. Nagashio, E. Nakamura,

A. Noda, K. Oide, T. Shirai, A. Shirakawa, H. SoudaIPAC’10 Local Organizing Committee

August 30, 2010

Abstract

The First International Particle Accelerator Conference, IPAC’10, was held on Sunday,May 23 through Friday, May 28 in 2010 at Kyoto International Conference Center (KICC).This is a collection of reports on various aspects of IPAC’10 by the members of IPAC’10Local Organizing Committee (LOC). The topics are ordered roughly in time.We hope thisreport will provide some information and experience to help future IPAC conferences.

1

Contents

1 Local Organizing Committee: T. Shirai 3

2 Web Page Preparation: K. Furukawa and E. Nakamura 3

3 SPMS Server: T. Kosuge 4

4 Scientific Program Committee: A. Noda 4

5 Visa and Grant: Y. Hayashi 65.1 Providing Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.2 Student Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

6 Registration: H. Souda, K. Furukawa, Y. Hayashi, T. Kosuge 76.1 Registration via SPMS and KNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76.2 On-Site Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96.3 Accommodations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

7 Session Management: A. Mizuno 11

8 Presentation Management: T. Kosuge 12

9 Poster Session: R. Kato 129.1 Student Poster Session (May 23) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129.2 Poster Sessions (May 24 – 27) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

10 Industrial Exhibition: S. Hayashi and E. Kikutani 1310.1 Overview of Industrial Exhibition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1310.2 Inviting activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1410.3 Exhibition Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1410.4 Exhibition Fee etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

11 IT & JACoW: A. Shirakawa 1511.1 Computers and Printers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1511.2 Network at the Conference Venue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1611.3 Proceedings Office . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1611.4 History of Paper Submission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

12 Logistics for Coffee Break, etc.: Y. Nagashio 1712.1 Coffee Break . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1712.2 Beverages and sweets for JACoW team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1812.3 Items for registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

13 Hospitality: T. Kii 1813.1 Get-Together Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1813.2 Coffee Break . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1813.3 Chairman’s Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1913.4 Banquet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

14 Laboratoty Tour: M. Fukuda 1914.1 Courses and participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2014.2 Registration and payment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2214.3 Changes and cancellations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2

1 Local Organizing Committee: T. Shirai

The LOC of IPAC10 consists of Advisory Board and Executive Board. The former gaveadvices to the latter about practical operation of conference. The members of ExecutiveBoard and support stuff were 20 researchers and 8 secretaries. The roles of secretarieswere scientific secretary (Christine Petit-Jean-Genaz, CERN), local secretary (Y. Hayashi,KEK), industrial exhibition secretary (S. Hayashi, WORDS Pub. House), web designer(E. Nakamura, KEK), various arrangement (Y. Nagashio, KEK), social program manage-ment (M. Takemon, Kyoto U.), registration and VISA support (Y. Tomita, KEK), creditcard and bank transfer transaction (H. Azuma, Kinki Nippon Tourist, Co., Ltd.: KNT ).

The researchers in the Executive Board shared the roles of the conference such as a pre-sentation manager (T. Kosuge, KEK), oral session managers (K. Furukawa, KEK, O. Kami-gaito, RIKEN, M. Fukuda, RCNP, A. Mizuno, JASRI/SPring-8), poster session managers(R. Kato, J. Yang, Osaka U.), a social program manager (T. Kii, Kyoto U.), an industrialexhibition manager (E. Kikutani, KEK), a JACOW editor (A. Shirakawa, KEK), a SPMSmanager (T. Kosuge), a registration manager (H. Souda, Kyoto U.), publicity managers(A. Mizuno, K. Masuda, A. Noda, Kyoto U.), a financing manager (T. Shirai, NIRS), a website manager (K. Furukawa). laboratory tour managers (M. Fukuda, T. Inagaki, RIKEN),and conference items (H. Tongu, A. Noda, Kyoto U.).

2 Web Page Preparation: K. Furukawa and E. Nakamura

The web page http://ipac10.org/ was published just before the PAC09 conference inApril 2009 when the first conference poster was distributed. The web site was based on theEPAC08’s Wiki framework, which was kindly provided by Stefano Deiuri of Elettra.

The web site information was sent to about 20 scientific institutes and organizations inSeptember 2009 to make the site appearance at the top in the search engines. The Twitterservice was also utilized later to inform the event. The access counts to the web site inMarch, April and May 2010 were 346,002, 464,092, and 1,251,770, respectively.

The Wiki (Pmwiki) server was arranged on KEK’s internal server in order not to exposeall the interactive features on to the public Internet. The external server of ipac10.org wasprovided as a virtualhost service on an existing server, www-linac.kek.jp. The web contentswere automatically transferred from the internal server to the external server as html files.As we ask contributors outside of KEK to apply to KEK’s VPN accounts, they could updatethe contents even from outside of KEK. For some contributors who didn’t use Wiki features,we receive the web contents via emails and we put them on to the server.

Pmwiki software was very flexible, and sometimes we modified the behavior addingPHP scripts. Some of the mechanisms prepared for EPAC08 by Stefano worked. However,some others did not work mainly because the SPMS software changed. In some automaticscripts, we had to put the SPMS password in order to extract information out of SPMSserver, spms.kek.jp, while the password was not necessary two years ago. This should beexamined.

Nevertheless, some statistical plots, the list of registrations, and the scientific programcontents including abstracts were generated automatically based on the SPMS server ev-ery hour in order to meet frequent modifications to the database. While we wanted toadd cleaner statistical plots to the web, such statistical information was not publicly avail-able or was only partially available on the SPMS server. This can be improved in the future.

The domain name ipac10.org is allocated until 2018 in order to preserve the conferenceinformation.

3

The following is not directly the web page issue. In the scientific program schedule page,it was very helpful for the participants to have posters arranged by projects. However, theroom name parts the session names were sometimes one character (A, D, E) and sometimestwo characters (MH, EA, EB, EC), which was slightly confusing.

3 SPMS Server: T. Kosuge

The SPMS server at Asian Regional Support Center was installed at KEK in autumn 2008aiming at IPAC’10 as the first large target. It consists of two computers as follows:

Table 1: SPMS Servers at Asian Regional Support Center

SPMS DB Server OS: Windows 2003 Server (64bit)CPU: Core 2 Duo 2.4GHzMemory: 8GBHDD: 500GB x 2 (RAID1)ORACLE Database 11g (Standard Edition)

SPMS Web Server OS: Windows 2003 Server (64bit)CPU: Core 2 Duo 2.4GHzMemory: 8GBHDD: 500GB x 2 (RAID1)ORACLE Application Server 10g (Standard Edition)

It served COOL2009 and ICALEPCS2009 in 2009, in which the SPMS functionalitieswere verified.

The SPMS service for IPAC’10 was provided successfully. However, the web server wasrebooted during the conference as it was found that the CPU load became 100%. It wastriggered by Internet attack tests performed once a week in the security measures at KEK.The problem was resolved later when the application server software was updated.

It was said that a few (student) poster presentations did not appear on the SPMSdatabase. It will be described in the section of “Poster Session” below.

4 Scientific Program Committee: A. Noda

From the 23rd to the 28th, May, the first International Particle Accelerator Conference,IPAC’10, was held in the Kyoto International Conference Center, which has been unifiedas a global one combining Particle Accelerator Conference, PAC, in North America since1965, European Particle Accelerator Conference, EPAC, since 1988 and Asian Particle Ac-celerator Conference, APAC, since 1998. Before the conference, total 3 scientific programcommittee meetings have been held. The first one held in Kyoto on the 13th and 14th ,November in 2008, determined compositions of the Scientific Program Committee (SPC)and Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) and main framework of the program including thetime table, industry session and relation with PRST-AB together with the schedule of forcecoming meetings. The poster sessions are to be held separately from oral presentation in thelate afternoon from Tuesday to Thursday and the numbers of parallel sessions are limitedup to 2. So as to keep time frames for oral presentations, starting time of the morningsessions was determined to be 8:30. The main and sub-classifications for EPAC’08 will beused for IPAC’10 with a small modification as to add A16 Energy Recovery Linac (ERLs)under Main Classification 3. The second SPC held in Shanghai on the 3rd and 4th , Junein 2009, mainly discussed on the invited talks, while the 3rd SPC held in KEK, Tsukuba on

4

the 21st and 22nd, January in 2010 mainly determined the contributed orals.

Totally 50 invited talks are selected together with an additional special invited talk on“Spirit of Tea”, to which 3 talks of ACFA prizes are added. Regional balance of the invitedtalks are very good, 17, 19 and 17 invited talks are presented from Asia, Europe ad NorthAmerica, respectively including one talk of ACFA prize in each region. As the contributedorals, total 45 talks, 17, 16 and 12 talks from Asia, Europe and North America, respectively,are selected, which also seems well regionally balanced. Until the deadline of the papersubmission on the 9th, December, 2009, abstracts of 2055 papers were submitted, amongwhich, 241 and 177 papers were withdrawn before and after fixing the program, respectively.Regretfully, 100 posters were withdrawn without any notice and 61 papers among presentedwere not submitted to the proceedings, resulting the net posters presented with proceedingspaper to be 1476. Fortunately we can accept 1244 registered participants, which amountedto 1330 including the representatives from 75 industries presenting exhibitions (87 boothsare provided). These numbers well give us expectation of developing future of our IPAC likea fan included in the conference bag, which extends at its furthest part.

The scientific program of IPAC’10 was opened with the talk by Dr. A. Wagner on “In-ternational Collaboration with High Energy Accelerators” followed by its typical realizationwith the title of “LHC Commissioning and First Operation” by Dr. S. Myers. In the fol-lowing plenary session, the first Oscillation results of LCLS at SLAC were presented byDr. J.N. Galayda with the title of “The First Angstrom X-Ray Free-Electron Laser”, whichcontinued to the world-wide review of rare isotope and radioactive beams by Dr. O. Kami-gaito and human cancer therapy with relativistic ion beams by Dr. W. Chu. After a lot ofattractive presentations in all the 8 classifications during parallel sessions, in the afternoonof the 27th, May, Thursday, ACFA prize session was performed and (a)An AchievementPrize for outstanding work in the accelerator field with no age limit, (b) A Prize for anindividual, having made significant, original contributions to the accelerator field with noage limit and (c) A Prize for an individual, in the early part of his or her career, havingmade a recent significant, original contribution to the accelerator field, were awarded to Dr.Steve Myers, CERN, (for his numerous outstanding contributions to the design, construc-tion, commissioning, performance optimization, and upgrade of energy-frontier colliders -in particular ISR, LEP, and LHC and to the wider development of accelerator science), Dr.Jie Wei, Tsinghua University in Beijing (for his exceptionally creative contributions to thedesign, construction and commissioning of circular accelerators, in particular RHIC, SNS,LHC, as well as the design of CSNS, and for numerous significant developments in the fieldof beam dynamics) and Dr. Mei Bai, BNL (for her significant contributions to spin dynamicsand polarized proton acceleration in circular accelerators - in particular AGS and RHIC,and to successful polarized proton beam collisions at 500 GeV centre of mass), respectively,selected by a special selection committee leaded by Prof. W. Namkung. After the memorialprize talks by three winners, two successful student poster session winners, Mr. Houjun Qian,BNL and Tsinghua University in Beijing for the contribution with the title of “ExperimentalStudies of Thermal Emittance of the Mg Cathode at the NSLS SDL” and Mr. Marcel Ruf,University of Erlangen-Nurnberg LHFT, in Erlangen for the contribution with the title of“Beam Position Monitoring Based on Higher Beam Harmonics for Application in CompactMedical and Industrial Linear Electron Accelerators”, received cash prizes. Next to theprize session, a special talk on “The Spirit of Tea” by Dr. Genshitsu Sen gave the audienceadditional information on Japanese culture. On the last day, following the talk by Prof. M.Kobayashi on “CP Violation and B-Factory Experiments”, Dr. M. Masuzawa introduced thestatus of “Next Generation B-Factories”. After two talks on future development, “TowardCLIC Feasibility” by Dr. J.P. Delahaye and “Plasma Accelerators for Future Colliders” byDr. C. Joshi, situations of adjacent fields related to accelerator field, “International EnergyRelated Developments, ITER & IFMIF”, and “Cloud Project: Climate Research with Ac-celerators” are introduced by Drs. N. Holtkamp and J. Kirkby, respectively. Our IPAC’10was closed with the talk by Dr. J. Bluemer on “The Pierre Auger Observatory: CosmicAccelerators and the Most Energetic Particles in the Universe”. I hope these programs havewell covered the present status and future prospects in the accelerator and its related fieldsfrom the global point of view owing to the enormous efforts by session coordinators and

5

theirs shadows and the support from the editorial board and nice suggestion from SAB.Finally the warm supports to the activity above mentioned throughout the whole processesfrom all the OC members are greatly appreciated.

5 Visa and Grant: Y. Hayashi

5.1 Providing Visas

The number of requests for invitation letters and identity certification to obtain visas fromJapan was 234. About the half were from china and 60 from Russia, Ukraine, Armenia, andPoland, 15 from India, 10 from Middle East, and 20 from others. It was easier for residentsoutside of their countries than inside. It was often happened for Chinese researchers underChinese Academy of Science needed permissions by the Academy before approaching theembassy. For instance, two researchers at IHEP who applied an exhibition booth had tocancel it as the permission from the Academy was not ready even they had got the identitycertifications. Two weeks were not enough for Chinese people and one month was necessaryafter they prepared the required documents. It was a little bit easier for Russians as theyobtained visas in 3 days after the application at the embassy.

As more difficulties were expected to Indians and Iranians, we prepared letters fromthe Conference Chair besides the identity certifications. The letter stated the participant’sname, affiliation, and the title of presentation, then guaranteed nothing was relevant tomilitary activity. We sent them to ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan at the same time wesent the document to the participant. Actually no troubles have been reported related thisissue until now, hopefully owing to the effort.

It was too lucky to us that the volcano simultaneously happened in Iceland did not affectthe process of visa preparation. The person who could not attend the conference from thebegining was only one because of late application of visa.

We must notice that there were people who pretended participants to request necessarydocuments just to obtain visas. It was not easy to distinguish such unwelcome people.

5.2 Student Grant

The numbers of supported grants are shown in Table 5.2.

Table 2: Supported grants in IPAC’10Region Number Supported byEurope 36 EPS

11 IPAC’10Americas 8 APS

4 IPAC’10Asia 10

13 IPAC’10Russia 9 (incl. Ukraine 1) IPAC’10Young researchers 4 (Armenia, India, Russia, Ukraine) IPAC’10Total 95

As Korea had restriction to support only Korean students, they declined the grant fromthe Conference. The number of Asian students above does not include Korea.

The procedure for the student grant was as follows:

6

1. Students register application form via SPMS, as well as sending recommendation lettersof their advisors to the conference office.

2. Selection was made in each region. Russia was treated as a region including Armeniaand Ukraine.

3. Nominated students were notified the upper limit of the support, which depends onthe region.

4. Each student sent estimation of airfare within the limit to the conference office.

5. The office confirmed the estimation was appropriate, then gave permission for purchase.If it sounded too expensive asked to look for lower fare.

6. Notified students the payable amount calculated at the best rate of currencies for thestudents within 2 months.

7. Students responded to the office to accept the amount or not.

8. Paid as early as possible during the conference.

As the fee of money transfer at Japanese banks are unreasonably expensive, we paidcash. Thus for security reason, we started payment on Monday when the bank opened,instead of Sunday, May 23. As the amount had been noticed to each student, and whatwe needed was a sign on the receipt, the payment was almost competed in 2 hours. Thepreparation before the conference needed some efforts than expected, but it ensured smoothpayment process at the conference.

6 Registration: H. Souda, K. Furukawa, Y. Hayashi, T. Kosuge

6.1 Registration via SPMS and KNT

IPAC’10 adopted the SPMS Registration Module and the payment system of KNT. Thetotal number of registration was 1,233, including unpaid ones. At the conference site, wedivided the registered participants into paid and unpaid on the basis of our registration databefore the conference. We prepared registration desks in an alphabetical order, mainly onMay 23 and 24. The final count of registrations in SPMS was 1,155. The on-site registra-tions were 89, and the total number of participants was 1,244. The number of accompanyingpersons were 98. The statistics, countries and regions are shown in Table 3,4.

Table 3: Statistics of IPAC’10

Participants 1,244Accompanying person 98Payment status:Registration and payment completed before Conf. 1,121Registration completed before Conf., on-site payment 34On-site registration 89Registration and payment completed, but no show 22Types of participants:Regular 1,020

Early registration 719Late registration 272JACoW members 29

Students 224Granted 97

7

Table 4: Countries and Regions (Am=Americas, As=Asia, E=Europe)

Armenia 2 E Australia 10 AsBrazil 7 Am Canada 10 AmDenmark 8 E Finland 1 EFrance 51 E Germany 117 EIndia 11 A Iran 2 AsIsrael 1 As Italy 47 EJapan 395 As New Zealand 1 AsNorway 1 E China 67 AsPoland 3 E Korea 26 AsRomania 1 E Russia 31 ESlovenia 5 E Spain 13 ESweden 8 E Switzerland 94 ETaiwan 15 As Thailand 1 AsTurkey 2 As Ukraine 5 EUK 80 E USA 229 AmAmericas 246Asia 531Europe 467

Before registration starts, the LOC decided to subcontract the payment clearance of theregistration fee with KNT.

At the first OC/SPC/LOC meeting in November 2008, any specific registration systemhad not been adopted yet. Then the SPMS registration module which has been used byEPAC was explained by the scientific secretary.

After the meeting, the LOC discussed with KNT and Right House Co., Ltd., which hadbeen engaged in the development of all conference registration systems by KNT. Right Househas a system combining abstract submission, registration, and registration fee payment clear-ance. Although we had already decided to adopt SPMS for abstract submission, we couldnot make a decision whether we should use both systems of SPMS and the KNT/RightHouse system, or just use KNT/Right House system, and we inclined to use KNT/RightHouse system only.

At a TV meeting on June 2009, the scientific secretary suggested to use SPMS for reg-istration, because SPMS had all participants accurate data (name, affiliation, etc.), and byusing this system, we would be able to recognize all information of presentations, papersand registrations, and also it should be easy for us to know the registration fee paymentcompletion or unpaid information.

According to the suggestion we moved to check again whether the KNT payment clear-ance system could be used together with SPMS. Finally, It became clear that it was possibleto use SPMS for the registration and KNT the payment system. When a participant com-pletes his/her registration, he/she can go ahead to a payment HTML form of KNT (hiddenfield) with the registration data. Then, we ordered KNT to prepare a system to use it withSPMS.

The official start date of registration was set to November 1, 2009. It took, however, along time to manage the data transportation from SPMS to the KNT payment system. Westarted the modification of the system on October 14. It was finalized on October 31, whichwas almost at the last minute.

8

After the early registration started, the following two bugs in the KNT system werefound:

• In case a participant selected a bank transfer for the payment of registration fee, thebank account information was sent by an e-mail to the participant, but the same e-mailwas also sent to a participant who chose a credit card payment.

• In case there was a particular Latin character in his/her name, such as an umlaut oran acute, the system server program recognized it as an error, then the payment couldnot be input. This was because the system accepted only ASCII characters. We askedKNT to fix it to accept the character set of ISO-8859-1(Latin-1).

At the same time, SPMSs bugs were found:

• Due to a SPMSs parameter of the deadline for early registration, after the deadline,all registrations were treated as late registrations even completed before the deadline.Although the official deadline of early registration was at 24:00 on March 23 in JapanStandard Time, we were going to extend it by one more day considering the time dif-ferences. However as SPMS changed all registration rates immediately at the officialdeadline, we had to correspond the participants who had completed the registrationbefore the deadline one by one. And also on the web page of payment, the paymentDue was set to the late fee, so some participants who completed registration beforethe deadline actually paid then late fee.

We should have clarified the word Deadline to mean the payment, not just the registra-tion.

• There was another bug that once a participant had registered the number of accom-panying persons or laboratory tour tickets, it was impossible to change the numberand to pay the additional ticket fee. This bug required the participants to pay theincrement fee at the conference site. And also SPMS could not accept any cancellationof payment, even for the accompanying persons or the lab. tour. This problem madeus to ask KNT to refund each participant.

On the lab. tour on the registration page, although the number of tour tickets had to beentered, but some participants misunderstood that they had to put the ticket price, 5,000JPY, and entered 5000 instead of 1 in the entry box. At the completion of registration, evenif they had noticed the mistake, they could not correct the number, then resulted in a hugedue of payment.

There were some requests on replacements of participants who had paid the registrationfee but cancelled participation. They requested to transfer their payments to the replicantswho had not paid yet. As it had been accepted such cases at EPAC, we followed it. Toavoid a possible problem whether the replicant had paid or not, we required a document onthe replacement signed by both persons.

6.2 On-Site Registration

To make the registration easy and smooth, we prepared an envelope for each participant,and the preparation was started five days earlier, on Tuesday, May 18. The contents of theenvelope were a receipt, a name tag, a drink ticket for the reception on May 23, and aninvitation letter for the banquet. Tickets for the Lab Tour and an invitation letter for theChairmans Reception were included if necessity. The biggest problem of the preparationwas that it had been done using data as of May 18, and the new participants after May18 were not included. Therefore, we had to add new envelopes everyday. Even so, someparticipants who had registered at very late moments could not receive their envelope at

9

the registration desk, then had to visit the Inquiry desk described below.

The conference bag was not given at the registration desk when they received the en-velope. After the registration, participants were supposed to visit Bag Desk to pick up thebag by showing their own envelope. There had been some discussion on how to pass thebag, but the above procedure actually worked very well.

On Saturday, May 22, about twenty of the LOC members and assistants prepared theconference bags. We packet a conference booklet, a map of Kyoto City, a memory stickcontaining the abstracts, a notepad, a ballpoint pen, and leaflets by companies into a bag.Packing 1,500 bags took four hours. Also see Sect. 12.3 for related issues.

Expected that many participants would register from the afternoon on Sunday, May 23to the morning on Monday, May 24, we prepared five registration desks (A–E, F–J, K–M,N–S, T–Z), a on-site registration desk, a credit card payment desk operated by KNT, andan Inquiry Desk. The Inquiry Desk was for participants who could not get their envelops orcould not confirm their payment of the registration fees at the normal registration desks.

In fact, most participants came to the registration desk at 15:00 on Sunday. This time,about ten people made a line in front of each registration desk. After that, we did not havea long line of participants at the desks, even at the time of before the welcome party, or theopening remarks on Monday, May 24.

After Tuesday, May 25, we squeezed the size of the registration desks to one registrationdesk and one Inquiry Desk. The payment desk by KNT moved to Room C-1/C-2 whereis the second site of the Industrial exhibition. This desk was not only for card paymentas well as serving all kinds of tour information, so to say, Tour Desk. This was an idea toattract many participants to the industrial exhibition site. However, due to the separationof this desk from the registration desk, those who would pay the registration fee by creditcard had to visit the Tour Desk and come back to the registration with the receipt to pickup the conference materials, such as a receipt of registration fee, name tag and conferencebag, etc. It was quite complicated and troublesome for participants. If we did not need toworry about the industrial exhibition of the second site, of course, the payment or tour deskshould be beside the registration desk.

The biggest trouble at the registration or inquiry desk was: we could not confirm pay-ments of two participants by bank transfer which had been done just before the conference.Fortunately we confirmed it during the conference. Others were quite small, such as questionabout an ATM, a public phone on the site, or the KEK Tour, etc.

6.3 Accommodations

The LOC left up the management of accommodations to KNT. They pre-reserved 360 hotelrooms. This was about 45% of 800 participants, which we expected in 2008. At that time,we thought that if we needed more hotel rooms, it was not difficult to add the number ofhotel rooms as much as possible, and if the opposite case happened, we would release thehotel rooms as early as possible to avoid for the conference to pay cancellation charge.

KNT started the hotel room reservation application on December 7, 2009 first via e-mail,then from December 25, the application form was ready on the web site, too. The applica-tion was officially closed on April 28, but KNT corresponded some requirements after thedeadline.

Grand Prince Hotel Kyoto, the closest hotel to the conference site, became full on May23, and after that, cheaper hotels gradually became sold out. The final numbers of eachhotel reservation by KNT are as shown in Table 5.

10

Table 5: Accommodations reserved by KNT.

# Hotel Single Twin Twin for single Subtotal1 Westin Miyako Hotel Kyoto - 4 2 62 Rehga Royal Hotel Kyoto 29 7 1 373 Kyoto Shin-Hankyu Hotel 18 5 - 234 The second Kyoto Tower Hotel 16 5 - 215 Hotel Keihan Kyoto 22 4 - 266 Apa Hotel Kyoto Horikawa 14 - - 147 Kyoto Okura Hotel 15 4 1 208 Kyoto Royal HotelSpa 24 11 1 369 Hotel Gimmond Kyoto 25 10 - 3510 Kyoto ANA Hotel - 2 1 311 Kyoto Garden Hotel 46 7 - 5312 Hotel Alpha Kyoto 10 - - 1013 Mitsui Garden Hotel Kyoto Sanjo 5 5 - 1014 Hotel Oaks 21 - - 2115 Hart-in Hotel Kyoto 21 10 - 3116 Mitsui Garden Hotel Kyoto Shijo 23 - - 2317 Grand Prince Hotel Kyoto (w bf) - 5 39 4418 Grand Prince Hotel Kyoto (w/o bf) - 1 7 8

Total 289 80 52 421

7 Session Management: A. Mizuno

Session management was supposed to be done by chair persons with assistance by grant stu-dents. As these people were not very familiar with details, we assigned two session managers(Furukawa and Kamigaito) and two vice session managers (Fukuda and Mizuno). Besidesthem, staffs of KICC handled the projectors.

To assign students for assistance was not only intended for a consideration of the grant,but experiencing the international conference through the task. We had an orientation forthe students at 14:00 on Sunday, May 23. Four students are assigned to each session, fora time keeper, a PC operator, and two microphone carriers. The orientation was done forsmall groups with showing the actual devices.

Before starting each session, the session manager or the vice session manager explainedthe procedure to both the chair person and the students, then left them afterwards. Therewas almost no serious delay in the program, and no trouble on the projectors and the audiosystems. The overall performance were nearly satisfactory, except for some detailed issuesas below:

• Some chair person did not make announce at the beginning of the session. Thussome presenters had misunderstood the allocated time. Although the session managerssurely explained it to the chairs, the necessity of announce was not perfectly recognized.Later we paid attention on the announce, it was not done sometimes.

• The operation of PC for the presentation was once planned to ask students, but actuallydone by the KICC staffs. It was actually natural, as these staffs had been much moregot used to their operation than students who came just once. The operation bystudents resulted in a burden for the KICC staffs.

• As there prepared a number of standing microphones, the microphone students becamecompletely unnecessary. Thus the only effective student was the timekeeper.

• Sometimes the mineral water for the speaker was forgotten to bring.• Although the booklet listed the mail addresses of the session managers, there were no

query to these addresses.

11

8 Presentation Management: T. Kosuge

The presentation manager stayed at the presentation office throughout the conference andmanaged all oral presentation files in Microsoft PowerPoint, OpenOffice Impress, or PDFcreated by Windows or Macintosh. The workflow was as follows:

1. Download the presentation file from the SPMS file server.

2. Make sure that the file works without problem, otherwise send an email to the author.

3. Upload the file to the presentation file server, from which staff in venue would down-load the file.

Other tasks were:

• Make sure that the file exists on the SPMS file server, if the author brought the file ina USB memory.

• Help speakers who verify their presentations by themselves in the presentation office.

Four PCs were arranged to verify the presentation files, two with Windows and two withMacintosh operating systems. One of the presentation files worked fine on a PC in thepresentation office, however, it didnt work on the PC in the venue. In order to resolve theproblem, one of the PCs in the office was moved to the venue.

One speaker requested to replace his presentation file just 10 minutes before his/her talkto fix several movies.

9 Poster Session: R. Kato

9.1 Student Poster Session (May 23)

Special student poster session took place in Rooms C-1 and C-2 at KICC during delegateregistration on Sunday, May 23.

Table 6: Student Posters

Submitted 130Canceled 7Presented 123

Issues:

• Two of 123 students presented 2 posters on one panel using upper and lower parts.

• There could have been some system failure in the ported SPMS, or students mighthave confused on the application procedure due to unclearness of the system.

• It was not clearly stated how a student apply two or more posters. It was not explicitlyinhibited either.

How did it happen?

1. The number of applicants was 110 on SPMS at the deadline.

2. Then a student appeared claiming the abstract of his/her poster had not appeared onSPMS.

3. As the student insisted he/she surely applied, then we thought of a possible issue onthe ported system.

12

4. To correspond this situation, we had to accept additional applications if claimed bystudents. Then the applications increased to 117.

5. As it was not possible to fix the number of panels, we asked students to confirm theabstracts.

6. Then 9 more students appeared, and total became 126. We arranged 136 panelsincluding spares.

7. At the day of session, 4 more students appeared as saying they had not read e-mails.

8. Two students came with two posters each as they had applied so.

9. As there was one record for each of them on SPMS, each of them presented two posterson the allocated panel.

9.2 Poster Sessions (May 24 – 27)

Poster Sessions took place each afternoon from Monday to Thursday, May 24 to 27, from16:00 to 18:00 in the Event Hall, Room D and Room E at KICC.

!

Table 7: Poster Statistics

Submitted at the deadline 2,055 incl. tests and duplicationsWithdrawals before Program Code 241 removed tests and duplicationsProgram Codes (C) 1,814Withdrawals before conference 177Withdrawals without notice 100Presented Posters (P ) 1,537 incl. 61 which lack papersPosters on Proceedings 1,476Presentation Ratio (≡ P/C) 84.7%

Issues:

• As there were 277 withdrawals after the program code was issued, vacant panels werefrequently seen, about 3 out of 20 panels were vacant. It may be useful to have asystem to let withdraw before the program code.

• The total withdrawals were about 25% of the initial submitted number. This affectedthe choice of session rooms and the arrangement of panels.

• There were people who presented multiple posters. It may be reasonable that 2 or 3posters per person, but there was a person with 8 posters presented in a single session.We may need some restriction in future.

• There were 3 presenters who posted only copies of the manuscripts of proceedings.They were warned by the SPC Secretary.

10 Industrial Exhibition: S. Hayashi and E. Kikutani

10.1 Overview of Industrial Exhibition

The Industrial exhibition of IPAC’10 started just after the lunch time of the first day ofthe Conference, and closed in the evening of the third day, i.e. 2.5 days were used. Theexhibition was held in Event Hall of Kyoto International Conference Center and in therooms C1 and C2 in Main Hall. It takes approximately 5 minutes from Main Hall to EventHall on foot. In order to make a flow of delegates, poster sessions were held in Event Hall.Additionally, coffee-break tables were prepared also in Event Hall.

13

10.2 Inviting activities

In EPAC08 and in PAC09, the Exhibition Manager (E.K.) together with S. Kurokawa (Hon-orary Chair of IPAC’10) visited each booth in Industrial Exhibition of these conferences anddistributed an invitation to IPAC’10 Industrial Exhibition.

Several months before the Conference, we made the application page public on our website. However, the application procedure was not simple, we prepared instruction both inEnglish and in Japanese.

10.3 Exhibition Space

The area of one booth was 2× 3 m2, which is the standard of the Kyoto International Con-ference Center. Space between the rows of the booths was 4 meters in width. The boothsare surrounded by poster panels, so the many delegates walked through this area. Alsocoffee was served in this building except for the morning session of the first day.

Originally, we prepared 72 booths in Event Hall. However, more companies (includingJapanese companies) than we expected were applying to the exhibition. Then we extendedthe exhibition space and the total number of the booths was 90. (Actually, 87 booths wereused for industrial exhibition and the rest was used for ”tour desk”)

10.4 Exhibition Fee etc.

The fee was JPY 300,000/booth, which includes one representative person (attending thesessions and the Banquet) and two assistant persons. Payment was done by Japanese Yenand bank transfer only. Assistants had a chance of attending the Banquet by buying thetickets sold in Main Hall.

The number of the booths occupied was 87(= 72+15), in total. The number of companiesattending the exhibition was 76 and several companies occupied a few booths, as shownbelow.

Table 8: Exhibition booths

no. of booths no. companies1 652 103 1

In addition, one company held a private seminar. A room in Main Hall (for ∼50 people)was prepared and the fee was JPY500,000, which includes chairs, tables and projectors etc.

The Industrial Exhibition team accepted the contribution from companies for coffee,conference bags etc. A number of companies contributed them as shown in Table 9.

Table 9: Additional contributions from companies

item coffee conf. bags USB memories lanyard pens# of campanies 6 2 1 1 1

Booking of the booth position by each company was, in principle, by the order of ap-plication. But it was a little troublesome, since we were not able to manage the booking

14

Figure 1: Countries of the companies.

system equipped in SPMS web system. Then, the booth occupation status was updatedmanually and it caused some troubles, but it was not serious.

11 IT & JACoW: A. Shirakawa

11.1 Computers and Printers

All the computers, printers and other IT devices for IPAC’10 were rented from the confer-ence venue and they were set up by the Venue staff. What we did was, to check the hardwaresettings and configure software for all the computers. Table shows the number of the devicesused. We prepared both Windows and Macintosh for oral session, and this worked very wellto avoid trivial errors which happen in interchanging OS. ‘Others’ includes a PC for theelectrical dotting board which was set in front of Main Hall. We provided Internet Cafe andPaper Cafe for participants. Paper Cafe was intended for the convenience of writing/fixingproceedings. A total of 1,864 pages were printed there, although we are not sure whetherthey were proceedings. At proceedings office, 10,170 pages were printed for editorial work.The cost for printing, especially for color pages, is not negligible and should be taken intoaccount in conference budget.

Table 10: Numbers of computers and printers prepared.

Windows PC Macintosh PrinterDesktop Laptop MacBook

Proceedings Office 26 3 2Author Reception 5Speaker Presentation Office 3 2Auditoria 2 2Internet Cafe 20Paper Cafe 15 1IPAC’10 Office 2 1Others 4 1Total 46 31 7 5

15

11.2 Network at the Conference Venue

Multiple external network lines with the speed of 100 Mbps were available at the confer-ence venue. ‘Multiple lines’ means that there are connections with different Internet ServiceProviders (ISPs). We used three lines of them. Internal Giga-bit lines were configured cor-responding to each ISP connections.

Thus three network segments were formed in the Venue: the segment for proceedingsoffice, for oral presentation managements, and for others including wireless network.

For participants, wireless connection was available in the lobby, Internet Cafe, and PaperCafe. It was not available in the Auditoria by our organizing policy. There were alsocomputers with wired LAN in two Cafes.

• Multiple 100 Mbps lines (ISPs) for outgoing (Internet).

• Independent Gigabit lines inside the Venue, which can be configured corresponding toeach ISP.

• For participants:

– Wireless access was available in the lobby, but not in the Auditoria.– Internet Cafe was in 2nd floor near Room A (the parallel session auditorium).– Paper Cafe was next to Internet Cafe.

11.3 Proceedings Office

Proceedings office comprises a room for editorial work and a half room for author reception.We had a powerful team of 29 people from JACoW collaboration: 26 of them are for edito-rial work and 3 for author reception. In the latter days of IPAC’10 some of editors helpedthe author reception by turns.

As for working days, we started our job on Thursday before the conference, which is asusual in past PAC and EPAC. We had processed about 80% of papers by the beginningof the conference and started final QA on Monday. We opened Pre-Press proceedings onIPAC’10 Web at the end of conference and published the final proceedings three weeks later.

Figure shows the history of paper file submission. The line in the graph is not propor-tional to the number of papers submitted, as it includes processed files created by editors.Nevertheless we can know the trend of the paper submission. We had over 2000 abstractsat maximum and the number reduced to 1568 at final phase.

Figure 2: Editor’s Room (left) and Author Reception (right) accommodated 26 ed-itors and 4 people, respectively.

16

THU FRI SAT SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Processing Paper

Paper Final QA

Author Reception

Figure 3: The working days of the JACoW Team.

11.4 History of Paper Submission

The number of submitted papers grew as shown in Fig. 4 around the deadline, May 19.

Number of Uploaded Files

1305/1780

1455/1752

1547/1735

1568/1577

Figure 4: The history of paper submission. Total 1568 papers are in the proceedings.

12 Logistics for Coffee Break, etc.: Y. Nagashio

12.1 Coffee Break

• All beverages were ordered to KICC. The charges: 200 JPY per paper cup, 400 JPYper a pottery cup.

• Three kinds of cakes, Japanese, European, and breads were ordered to confectioneriesand a bakery.

• Cakes were provided at three spaces of KICC, with large trays and wrapping papers.Additions were stored under the tables and supplied to vacant trays. Three staffs wereneeded. It was not easy to negotiate the bakery to borrow the large tray.

• About 2,000 to 3,000 cakes were provided for each coffee break, and nothing remainedexcept the last day.

• As Japanese cakes were not very popular to foreigners, some wrapped cakes werediscarded after a small bite. To improve the situation, we opened some wraps assamples to show the contents.

• Small trays were not necessary because of the individual wrapping, which might havereduced the amount of garbage. On the other hand, it was not easy to open whendrink was in hand.

• Paper napkins were prepared.

17

12.2 Beverages and sweets for JACoW team

• All drinks and fruits were ordered to KICC.

• Sweets are provided from both KICC and others. Some were overlapped, but wellconsumed.

• Efforts were made to bring good choices with varieties, as the JACoW members couldconcentrate on their work.

12.3 Items for registration

• It was Sunday evening, May 23, to find out a mistake in delivery of notepads, duringpackaging into the conference bag. It was terrible confusion to remember. See Sect. 6.2.

• The number of each item must be double-checked before packaging.

13 Hospitality: T. Kii

13.1 Get-Together Reception

The get-together reception is summarized in Table 11. There was a comment that the foodswere consumed faster than expected.

Table 11: Summary of the get-together reception of IPAC’10

Date & time Sunday, May 23, 18:00 – 20:00Place Lounge “Swan” and “Sakura”, 1F, KICC1

Participants prepared: 1,000Expenses 4.15 MJPY, incl. foods, drinks, setup, rental fee of the place

13.2 Coffee Break

The coffee breaks of IPAC’10 are summarized in Table 12.

Table 12: Summary of coffee breaks of IPAC’10

Date Time CupsMon. May 24 10:30– 1,700

16:00– 1,300Tue. May 25 10:30– 1,600

16:00- 1,900Wed. May 26 10:30– 1,600

16:00– 1,300Thu. May 27 10:30– 1,300

16:00– 1,300Fri. May 28 10:30– 1,300Place Event Hall and Main Lounge, KICCExpenses 1.65 MJPY for drinks

18

Table 13: Summary of Chairman’s Reception of IPAC’10

Date & time Tuesday, May 24, 19:00 – 21:00Place Hotel Granvia KyotoParticipants 200Expenses 2 MJPY

13.3 Chairman’s Reception

Chairman’s Reception of IPAC’10 is summarized in Table 13.

13.4 Banquet

The banquet of IPAC’10 and its preparation process, and the layout are summarized inTables 14, 15, and Fig. 5.

Table 14: Summary of Banquet of IPAC’10

Date & time Thursday, May 27, 19:30 – 21:30Place The Third Exhibition Hall, 3F, Miyako Messe, 4,000 m2

Access 45 minutes from KICC via subway and walkSeats prepared: 1,400, attended: 1,350.Expenses 19 MJPYStyle Seated BuffetEntertainments Japanese instruments and drums, opening of sake barrels

Table 15: Preparation of Banquet

Sept. 2008 Site selection started.Dec. 2008 The site was decided.June 2009 The management company was chosen.Mar. 2010 The layout of finalized.May 19, 2010 Meeting for the final arrangements at the site.

Although we believe the banquet was basically successful, a few issues were reported:

• The site was the only one choice in Kyoto City to seat the entire participants in asingle hall.

• The foods were consumed faster than expectation.

• The indication of vegetarian food was not perfect.

• Some complained on the grade of wine.

14 Laboratoty Tour: M. Fukuda

Optional lab tours were held on Saturday, May 29th, 2010. Three lab tour courses wereorganized in cooperation with eight accelerator facilities of two institutes and three universi-ties. The tours included bus transportation on Saturday morning, lunch and transportation

19

Figure 5: The layout of banquet at Miyako Messe.

back in the evening. In total, 209 people participated in the lab tours. Unfortunately,nearly 30% of the applicants were absent. Everything was going roughly according to sched-ule, and there was no serious trouble during the lab tours. Splendid weather favored thelab tours all day, and most of the participants spent a highly enjoyable time during the tours.

14.1 Courses and participants

The courses and visted places of Laboratory Tour were as follows. Detailed schedules areshown later.

Course A:

• Departure: 8:00 AM KICC parking lot beside the Event Hall

• SPring-8 http://www.spring8.or.jp/en/

• XFEL http://www.riken.jp/XFEL/eng/

• New SUBARUhttp://www.spring8.or.jp/en/facilities/accelerators/new subaru/publicfolder view

• Himeji Castle http://www.himeji-kanko.jp/en/spot/ss001.html

Course B:

• Departure: 8:30 AM West area of the Hachijo-Guchi, Kyoto Station

• ICR, Kyoto University http://wwwal.kuicr.kyoto-u.ac.jp/∼souda/ipac10/

• IAE, Kyoto University http://wonda.iae.kyoto-u.ac.jp/index-e.html

• RCNP, Osaka Universityhttp://www.rcnp.osaka-u.ac.jp/eng/activities/accelerator.html

• ISIR, Osaka University http://www.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/index e.html

• Byodo-in Temple http://www.kiis.or.jp/kansaida/uji/uji01-e.html

20

Figure 6: IPAC’10 Laboratory Tours

• Gekkeikan Okura Sake Museumhttp://www.gekkeikan.co.jp/english/products/museum/index.html

Course C:

• Departure: 8:30 AM KICC parking lot beside the Event Hall

• KURRI, Kyoto University http://www.rri.kyoto-u.ac.jp/KART/en/

• RCNP, Osaka Universityhttp://www.rcnp.osaka-u.ac.jp/eng/activities/accelerator.html

• ISIR, Osaka University http://www.sanken.osaka-u.ac.jp/index e.html

• Osaka Castle http://www.osakacastle.net/english/

The number of participants and buses are shown in Table 16.

Table 16: Participants of Laboratory Tours

Course Applicants Payers Participants BusesA 197 158 144 5B 49 40 37 2C 39 31 28 1Total 285 229 209 8

21

14.2 Registration and payment

The fee for the lab tours was not included in the conference registration fee. The tour feewas 5,000 yen JPY per person, which covers the bus transportation, lunch, drinks, snacksand entrance fees for the castle, temple and museum. The tour was free of charge for ac-companying persons under 18 years old.

Online registration for the lab tours took place beforehand via the web page of theconference registration. The payment for the lab tour fee was also made online. The labtour ticket, prepaid by the applicant in advance, was enclosed with other conference tickets.On-site registration and payment were accepted at the lab tour desk during the conference,which was open in the Room C1 from May 23rd to 26th and at the registration desk fromMay 27th to 28th.

14.3 Changes and cancellations

Any changes and cancellations were accepted by an e-mail in writing to the Registrationand Organizing Secretariat and at the lab tour desk. Refund was fully made for cancellations.

Figure 7: An example of Laboratory Tour ticket

22

Figure 8: The Schedule of Laboratory Tour A

23

Figure 9: The Schedule of Laboratory Tour B

24

Figure 10: The Schedule of Laboratory Tour C

25