Editing Copenhagen 2012 (section)

===Workshop description ===
Open-source E&P Software - Six Years Later
Convenors: Joseph Dellinger (BP), Karl Schleicher (University of Texas at Austin), Helene Huck (dGB), and Tariq Alkhalifah (KAUST)

Friday 8 June, 09:00 - 17:00 hrs

In the six years since the 2006 EAGE workshop [http://www.eage.org/events/index.php?evp=274&eventid=1&ActiveMenu=16&Opendivs=s2,s11,s13 (announcement)] [http://sepwww.stanford.edu/oldsep/joe/Vienna/Workshop2.pdf (abstracts)] there has been considerable progress. Although no single "standard" has emerged, there are now several contenders. Far from being an "academic curiosity", commercial processing is now performed using open-source packages. Reproducible research has become routine for many academics. Some exciting new packages have emerged that deserve to be better known. We invite developers and users to present recent progress in open-source E+P software, and to brainstorm how to collaborate and use what's available.<br><br>

The economic benefits of a collaborative open-source exploration and production processing and research software environment would be enormous. Skilled geophysicists could spend more of their time doing innovative geophysics instead of mediocre computer science. Technical advances could be quickly shared and reproduced instead of laboriously re-invented and reverse-engineered. Oil companies, contractors, academics, and individuals would all benefit. There are now several packages that are comprehensive enough that for some purposes they might fill that bill. Unfortunately, not all of these are as well known as they deserve to be. And as always, there remains a pressing need for better collaboration so that existing efforts may be combined instead of dissipated.<br><br>

We are seeking presentations from those with a vision of where we need to go, from those who have useful pieces or techniques they would like to show off, and especially from those who believe they can already demonstrate a practical working success (or a glorious failure). The emphasis should be on showing off useful capabilities and good ideas, not technical implementation details. What makes your software interesting? We request lighting talks (5 minutes) with or without a poster presentation. A limited number of presenters will be able to give interactive demonstrations from their laptop onto a screen instead of a poster. There will be a few longer keynote talks and a panel discussion to wrap up the session. The panel will discuss: What pieces are now "ready"? What pieces are yet missing? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the most promising packages discussed? What sorts of collaboration might address those weaknesses?<br><br>