V. 1. August 19, 2017
Outputs of Tephra 2017 workshop 

Naming of process/what are we doing/producing:
•	Idea 1: Universal Computer Support  System for Tephrochronology UCoSST

Purpose:
List major research goals that system will help to address

Goal: allowing use of data, data products, analysis tools by others; making data, code available.  Linking tephrastratigraphers (distal) with one another, but also tephrastratigraphers with volcanologists.  How to make geochemical data potentially usable by all.  How to allow proximal data and models to inform distal interpretations, and interpretations in other, related domains, e.g., climate change.  How to allow distal data, e.g., from maps of extent, to inform interpretation of proximal deposits.  

Consensus paper: BV (or other)

Other workshop products: best practices: examples, templates and code web links, which can be built on checklists from Tephra2014 that Kristi will talk about in certificate session 

Future directions: translate checklists into templates; build on our current collection of known databases; begin to collect links to analysis tools together into one place; work more on motivations for linking proximal and distal datasets

Notes
Distribution of templates: begin by putting in supplement to paper
Make sure in paper that scientific rationale is clear
In earthchem, there is a template for different communities that can be adapted
In geochron, there are also example templates

Big picture philosophy
•	Every detail or core of the system?
•	Question/Answer based?

Motivation
•	Bridging the gap between tephra communities
o	What can proximal (volcanology) community bring to distal (tephrastratigraphy, CC, etc) communities, and vice versa

Building the system
What’s important to YOU?
Work flow-disipline specific?
Standard practices/protocols

Regional Datasets – how do we deal with these?

Brainstorm:
•	Key definitions (proximal vs distal etc.)
•	Keep it simple – first step most important information template, suppl. For publication, Earthchem data entry single step. Host somewhere, point to it.
•	Existing data:  Pre-existing db’s that DO NOT talk to each other – point this out-dealing with it!  Linkages – how does this work (standards, code, etc.)
•	NO SINGLE DATABASE
•	Keep it simple – build incrementally, like AVO’s GeoDiva in modules.  Have data to populate and test design.
•	Funding agencies do not often support adding old data into a database…not sexy.  We could make the case that this is critical – give case studies, show value, ie regional connections
•	Templates are the way to go (csv) – universal file format
•	Deal with other countries/contributions/sharing
•	If in a Db – they are on-line and available to ALL – no borders
•	Why don’t we use Earthchem.?  
•	3-click process – design a system to answer your questions NOT force yourself into someone elses vision.  Build something for this TEPHRA COMMUNITY and ask something like EarthChem to host or adhere to OUR needs
•	It needs to work for YOU
•	Check with places like EarthChem to see if they can morph. To meet our needs.  They are flexible!
•	Systems now are build in a modular way – they (ie Earthchem) want others to build interfaces to grab data but they need to be build
•	Data quality – what do we do?  Philosophy
o	Let people know how to identify bad data.  Can this be built into a database (yes).  
o	Document this by case studies (ice vs terrestrial etc.)  
o	Peer review should be a basic cut off (must be published first)
o	Include all metadata to make you own decision on data quality
•	Best practices in collection, analysis, reporting (publishing) – this could be brief or long and detailed, discipline based
•	Research Gate
•	Is there an existing system that we can use as a framework?  Tephrabase, AVO’s Tephra Db, RESET
•	Ability to use your own data to compare to a dataset in a database without having to add your data to the database (sandbox) – 
•	Data permissions- ability to share sample information OR NOT
•	Tools
o	Data processing software-share with community, we can post
•	MS Excel, R, MatLab, 
o	Data visualization, strat sections, geochemistry, isopach etc.
•	What do we mean by Db-be clear? Engine, data, front end, interoperability, processing…
•	Goals and capabilities vs. how do we do it?
•	Include all methodologies for all processing steps
•	Constrain physical properties of deposits
•	Do you want physical properties in a database – here are some quick field techniques to consider
o	Use field data to get at ESP (eruption source parameters), and forecast eruptions
o	Report on Uncertainty and constrain them
o	Systematic approachs for plume ht (Carey and sparks, 1986), Mass (Wilson & Walker (1987), Mastin et al 2009 etc. Volume (Fierstein et)
o	Seb Biass suggests a workflow (will provide to this group)
o	TError (Biass et al, 2014)– easy approach to constrain error
•	Chronology
o	More than just the mean values
o	Raw data
o	Report all processing steps (calibration, etc.)
•	Catalog of what exists and what is available
o	We gave posted a list of database online- there now
•	Workflow diagrams by discipline
o	Physical volcanology has these published (reference)
•	Spatial distribution of tephra deposits

GOALS:
•	Need to emphasize protocols for analysis/reporting and make it easy to find, journals and editors, reviewers need to be able to find it and point to it quickly –TEMPLATE.  We’ve been talking about this a long time but people are still not following through – MAKE IT EASIER
•	Global marker horizons
•	Be able to compare data
•	Ability to assess data quality
•	Proximal sample Db – listing of physical samples that exist for comparison to your sample.  Db of occurances at min. so we can request samples (sample ID, quantity of material, etc.)