2024.02.07

[seanmcilroy29]

---

2024.02.07 Agenda/Minutes

---

Time: Bi-weekly @ 1600 (GMT) - See the time in your timezone

• Co-Chair - Marco Valtas (Thoughtsworks)
• Co-Chair - Chris Xie- (Futurewei)
• Convener – Sean Mcilroy (Linux Foundation)

Antitrust Policy

Joint Development Foundation meetings may involve participation by industry competitors, and the Joint Development Foundation intends to conduct all of its activities in accordance with applicable antitrust and competition laws. It is, therefore, extremely important that attendees adhere to meeting agendas and be aware of and not participate in any activities that are prohibited under applicable US state, federal or foreign antitrust and competition laws.

If you have questions about these matters, please contact your company counsel or counsel to the Joint Development Foundation, DLA Piper.

Recordings

WG agreed to record all Meetings. This meeting recording will be available until the next scheduled meeting.
Meeting recording link

Roll Call

Please add 'Attended' to this issue during the meeting to denote attendance.

Any untracked attendees will be added by the GSF team below:

• Full Name, Affiliation, (optional) GitHub username

Agenda

• Approve agenda
• Approve previous Meeting Minutes

Introductions

• Any new members?

Review Updates

• Open question for the group-- if kWh consumed is the factual basis of the SCI score for SCER (since the energy mix in the deployment environment is unknown), should that be included in the label/rating? CO2e codes more information to the consumer and should be kept, but kWh could be relevant too.

PR submissions

• Optional updated to Extended #20
• Proposed SCER Rating and Labelling added #24

Submitted Issues

• The scope of SCER specification: would SCER address the specifications of data collection, and the resulted rating publication? #14
• Should SaaS be part of the software categorization?  #10
• Should these aspects of categorizing software be OR or AND relationship?  #11
• Benchmarking #12
• Examples for SCER Reference Applications and Technical Integration & Visualisation #1

Draft Timeline

• Formation and Kick-off: Within one month of the working group's establishment on GitHub (Starting Date: Oct 18, 2023).
• Carbon Efficiency Best Practices Guide: Develop and finalize the guide within six months **(Target Completion Date: [Insert Date]).**
• Software Carbon Efficiency Rating (SCER) Standard: Develop and publish the SCER standard within eight months (Target Completion Date: [Insert Date]).
• Badge Program Implementation: Establish the software carbon efficiency badge program within eight months (Target Completion Date: [Insert Date]).
• Documentation and Guidelines: Create and release comprehensive documentation and guidelines within six months (Target Completion Date: [Insert Date]).
• Community Engagement Initiatives: Plan and execute engagement initiatives continuously, with an initial series of webinars starting within three months (Starting Date: [Insert Date]).

Spec Review

• Proposal to discuss the Spec updates at the next WG meeting?

Next Steps

• PR/blog/email notification to GSF members
• Info SWG
• Circulate Draft Standard

AOB

• Member submissions

Future meeting Agenda submissions

• If you have any Agenda submissions, please let Sean know via email [email protected] or open an Issue

Next Meeting

• 21st Feb @ 9 am P/T

Adjourn

• Motion to adjourn

---

Meeting Action Items / Standing Agenda / Future Agenda submissions

• Add here

[seanmcilroy29]

sk16-dev Demonstrate the rating from a consumer view. It shows the benefit of having both the grade and score accessible.

[csheargm]

attended

[sk16-dev]

Attended

[seanmcilroy29]

Attended

[seanmcilroy29]

Summary Meeting Notes

Labelling and categorization for a sustainable food rating system.
Sean M and Sean O had a discussion about labelling and categorization for adoption. Chris O provided input on Marcos' similar labelling system. Sean O recommended using a neutral score template to create new content and suggested seeking Marcos' feedback before proceeding. The group talked about sharing and uploading a PowerPoint presentation to GitHub for collaboration. They decided to create a document and share files.

Software development methodology and carbon efficiency.
Sean O is seeking confirmation on removing a software unit that was discussed previously. During their conversation, Sean M and Sean O discussed the next steps for a project which includes contacting Marco and drafting a PR article. During this discussion, Sean M asked if the Shawn submitted is related to a group discussion or addressed offline. Sean O suggested including kilowatt-hours instead of grams of CO2 equivalent on the SEI score label to make it more accessible to consumers.

Using CO2 equivalent vs kilowatt hours for carbon emissions calculation.
Sean O suggested using "CO2" as a unit of measurement for energy consumption, instead of "kilowatt hours," to ensure consistency and flexibility in future calculations. The group agreed to use CO2 equivalent as a safe unit of measurement, despite the possibility of changes to the algorithm or definition. Additionally, Sean Mcilroy proposed bringing the methodology to a standards working group for discussion. The group agreed to use CO2 emissions as a benchmarking metric, regardless of potential variability in the energy mix.

Categorizing software and measuring energy consumption.
Sean O suggested classifying software based on existing standards, while Chris discussed the potential of AI, including generative AI, and its energy consumption. Chris and Sean O proposed developing a standard for large language models on Macs. They suggested starting with a small number of widely used models and measuring energy usage to ensure optimal performance.

AI energy consumption and model efficiency.
Chris and Sean O discuss existing categories for software and potential new ones, including prompting models for AI language models. Chris and Sean O  suggest using a website model to track AI energy consumption and reference a potential partnership with Hugging Face.

Software categorization and rating system.
Sean O recommends the use of a neutral score copy to define workloads and test environments for a language model. Chris proposes customizing a Hugging Face model for the project and using it to create a test case. The group discusses designing a software categorization system with shared icons, color coding, and visual identity. Sean O suggests rewarding efficient and greener software development while avoiding punishment for others. Chris explains that end-users prioritize energy efficiency, so filtering for green labels is a good approach. Sean O proposes a simple and intuitive labeling system for carbon emissions, with a color-coded system and a number or detail tag for each model. Chris and Sean O discuss the possibility of adopting a standard for carbon emissions labeling, with the goal of maturing the standard enough to approach Hugging Face and potentially partnering with them.

[seanmcilroy29]

Agreed