Received: from astro.wisc.edu (pool.astro.wisc.edu [144.92.179.209]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id eAI4rTI3660902; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:53:30 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3A160DA5.8361E7D9@astro.wisc.edu> Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 23:03:35 -0600 From: Ed Churchwell X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: churchwell , whitney barbara , chip , mathis , cassinelli , lazarian , wolfire , wolff , dickey , benjamin , seager , clemens , bania Subject: [Fwd: Legacy Science Program Results] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear SIRTF team, I just returned from a very full Visiting Committee Meeting of the Arecibo Observatory and found the following message. As you can see it is very good news. We did it! However, it isn't all good news. The MIPS part of the program was cut, perhaps with justification. They do say that we might be able to do this later as a large GO proposal depending on the MIPS detector responses in orbit. The budget has been cut accordingly and we will have to discuss this. I propose having a telecon next Wed. This will give me time to set up the telecon on Monday. This is the day before Thanksgiving and some of you may be away from your office. Let me know if Wed. will work. In the meantime, we all have to start using contacts to locate potential post docs for our project. Congratulations to the whole team. I look forward to continuing our productive collaboration that we have had so far. Sorry for the delay in getting this out to all of you, but I only just saw it myself. Best, Ed -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Legacy Science Program Results Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 09:12:36 -0800 (PST) From: SIRTF Science Center HelpDesk To: ebc@astro.wisc.edu CC: sirtf@ipac.caltech.edu Dear Ed: I am pleased to inform you that the IRAC portion of your proposal, "The SIRTF Galactic Plane Survey," has been approved for implementation as a component of the SIRTF Legacy Science Program. This decision follows from the recommendation offered by a Science Review Panel and Time Allocation Committee (TAC). With a nearly 6:1 over-subscription of SIRTF observing time, only a small number of proposals were accepted. I am enclosing a consolidated summary of the Review Panel and TAC evaluation of your proposal. The comments represent a consensus established by qualified peers at a competitive review of all Legacy Science proposals held October 23-25, 2000 at the SIRTF Science Center (SSC). I hope this summary evaluation will be helpful to you in understanding the perceived strengths and weaknesses of your proposed investigation. In my role as the NASA-designated selection official for the SIRTF Legacy Science Program, I am allocating 400 (four hundred) hours of SIRTF observing time, primarily in the first year of the mission, for your project. This amount of time should be adequate to carry out the proposed IRAC observations. The Review Panel and TAC, following careful study and additional discussions with SSC instrument experts, concluded that the MIPS portion of the investigation would likely be severely compromised by saturation and latency effects, particularly at the longer wavelengths. I concur with their recommendation to proceed with the IRAC survey of the inner Galactic Plane as part of the Legacy Science Program. When the on-orbit performance of SIRTF and MIPS is fully characterized, the efficacy of a MIPS survey in the Galactic Plane can be re-examined. With this in mind, you should be aware that the second solicitation for General Observer proposals, nominally scheduled for May 2003, will likely include the option of proposing investigations with up to ~200 hours of SIRTF observing time. In addition to the SIRTF observing time, I approve the allocation of an estimated $2,420,000 (two million and four hundred twenty thousand dollars) in supporting NASA funds, contingent upon their availability, over the life of the project. This represents 75% of your requested amount, and is deemed by an independent cost analysis to be sufficient to successfully carry out the IRAC-only survey. A revised cost plan and amended proposal should be submitted to the SSC address listed in the Call for Proposals. Since some of the decisions you make in revising the proposed investigation may depend on discussions with other approved Legacy Science teams and/or with SSC experts, the revisions can be submitted after the January Legacy Science Workshop (see below). In the meantime, I approve the allocation of $186,000 (one hundred and eighty-six thousand dollars) for a six-month start-up contract, effective January 1, 2001. The full funding level for the first year of your investigation is likely to be approximately twice this level, and will be negotiated with each team following the Legacy Science Workshop. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory, acting as the contracting agent for the SSC, will immediately begin processing the necessary paperwork to initiate the start-up contract. Beforehand, you should contact Michael D. Bicay, Manager of the SSC Office of Community Support (mdb@ipac.caltech.edu), as soon as possible and provide the information requested below. (1) Confirm whether you want JPL to issue separate start-up contracts to your Co-Investigator institutions, or whether you want your home institution to receive all of the funds in advance of issuing subcontracts to your partners. If you elect to have JPL issue awards directly, please confirm whether the investigators listed in parentheses below are the appropriate institutional leads (in a contractual sense). (2) Confirm whether the fractional six-month allocations listed below are appropriate, given the possible science/budget re-planning that you will have to undertake following the January Workshop. The figures listed here maintain the relative distribution cited in your original first-year cost plan, but on a reduced cost basis. You now have the option of re-distributing funds among your partners for the first six months of 2001; that is, to change the allocations listed below. U. Wisconsin (Ed Churchwell) $ 131,743 SSI-Boulder (Barbara Whitney) $ 30,670 Boston U. (Dan Clemens) $ 12,784 U. Maryland (Mark Wolfire) $ 10,803 U. Minnesota (John Dickey) $ 0 Six-Month TOTAL $ 186,000. There is no need to submit a revised cost plan at this time; the start-up contract can be initiated with the original cost plan and the Email answers to the questions above. Now that your project has been approved, the SSC is prepared to assist you and your team, as necessary, to optimize the SIRTF observational strategy and to maximize the scientific return from your investigation. As you will see in the enclosed evaluation, the Review Panel and TAC devoted considerable effort to understand the degree of IRAC confusion expected in the survey. I believe it will be in the interest of your team to carefully examine, with expert assistance from the SSC, the issue of confusion and ways to ameliorate its effects. The TAC also recommended that your team carefully study the issues of robustness and redundancy in your observational strategy. SSC instrument experts are prepared to help your team study these matters, and to assist you in performing a risk/benefit analysis of any possible tradeoffs. The SIRTF Legacy Science Program offers an unprecedented combination of observing time and supporting NASA funds. Your team will be able to implement a large and coherent science investigation that, if executed successfully, will likely produce a long-lasting legacy. While the immediate scientific benefits are obviously important, the approval of your investigation also carries a responsibility to the larger astronomical community through the broader science enabled by your SIRTF Legacy Science dataset(s). In view of the critical importance of these data to the realization of SIRTF's full potential as a national and international resource, the TAC recommended that approved investigators work with SSC experts to "ensure that their data are obtained and processed with the quality and timeliness to fulfill their promise." With that goal in mind, I offer you the necessary institutional expertise to improve the implementation of your project (as needed), while protecting the original scientific intent of your investigation. I invite you to attend an invitation-only Legacy Science Workshop to be held at the SSC in Pasadena on January 12-13, 2001. These dates are the Friday and Saturday immediately following the winter meeting of the American Astronomical Society in San Diego. This meeting will serve as the initiation of the SIRTF Legacy Science Working Group, and will bring together the Principal Investigators of the approved projects with representatives from the SIRTF Instrument Teams and the SSC. One purpose of this Workshop is to identify areas of mutual scientific and/or technical interest between teams and possibly between teams and science instrument experts. You may wish to invite one (or possibly two) additional Co-Investigators to attend the Workshop. The agenda for the Workshop is still being developed. I anticipate that the Friday morning will be devoted to an executive session with the Principal Investigators only. Friday afternoon will be devoted to an overview of each of the approved projects, with subsequent discussions intended to identify possible areas of overlap. The Saturday focus will be on breakout sessions with other Legacy Science investigators and instrument experts, based on mutual science interests and instrument usage. These sessions will be scheduled serially to avoid the need to bring large groups of investigators to this Workshop. Let me congratulate you and your team on submitting an excellent Legacy Science proposal. On behalf of the SSC, I look forward to working with you to assure a successful completion of your project in the coming years. The SSC and JPL are developing a coordinated press release announcing the Legacy Science selections. It is anticipated that this NASA news release will be issued in December. If your home institution (or that of any Co-Investigator) intends to release a parallel announcement, I ask that you coordinate the timing of such a release with Dr. Bicay at the email address cited earlier. If you have additional questions regarding the evaluation or the review process, please contact me at 626.395.8000. Sincerely, B. T. Soifer, Director SIRTF Science Center California Institute of Technology ===================== START EVALUATION ==================== Overall Rating: Excellent (1) Scientific Merit Excellent (2) Enabling Science Excellent (3) Technical Merit Good (4) Products / Tools Excellent (5) Organize / Manage Excellent Criterion (1): The overall scientific merit of the proposed project, its contribution to maximizing the overall scientific return of SIRTF, and the uniqueness of the utilized SIRTF capabilities in advancing knowledge in the proposed area of research. Major Strength(s): The proposal was very highly rated because of the scientific utility of the catalogs that will be produced, as well as the science directly resulting from the program. The promised data products will be a 'gold mine' for Galactic research. The catalogs, containing millions of point and extended sources, will be among the most heavily utilized datasets produced by SIRTF. This survey will provide key information about Galactic Structure and star-forming regions in the Galactic plane. It will produce a complete census of star-forming regions (SFRs) over a large (240 square degree) portion of the Galactic disk, in order to measure key stellar and galactic parameters, including: stellar luminosity and mass functions, disk scale length, inner arms and bar, and populations of embedded OB stars. The infrared imaging plus HI and CO radial velocities provide an important set of test particles for mapping the Galactic potential. The survey should detect several thousand SFRs, and will map the bar and molecular ring in the inner Galaxy, the richest region of star formation. Minor Strength(s): This study will determine the near and mid-infrared interstellar extinction law, and may detect other stellar and nebular sources, including supernova remnants and planetary nebulae. The large survey area should produce many serendipitous discoveries (globular clusters, hidden galaxies, etc.). Major Weakness(es): None Minor Weakness(es): The authors may be slightly optimistic about resolving the young stellar clusters, which have sizes nearer to 0.1 pc, rather than the 1 pc cited in the proposal. Criterion (2): The extent to which the project will facilitate subsequent SIRTF investigations, either observational or interpretive, and the extent to which the project data will support broader-based research by the scientific community. Major Strength(s): This project will produce some of the most-cited catalogs from SIRTF. It will initially produce a bright source catalog (>2 mJy for IRAC). This will be useful as an inventory for Galactic structure and for identifying candidates for follow-up IRS spectroscopy and MIPS observations. The larger Faint Source Catalog and the Extended Source Catalog will contain approximately 10^8 objects. This survey will facilitate subsequent observations with MIPS, in selected directions, of OB associations that may be obscured in the near-infrared. The IRAC survey will identify the locations of young stellar objects and mass-losing evolved stars, for follow-up studies at longer wavelengths. In addition to the excellent science described in the proposal, data from this survey will be the starting point for a broad range of exciting SIRTF science programs. Minor Strength(s): Overlap with other Galactic plane large-scale surveys in HI and CO, which are described in the ancillary data section. Major Weakness(es): None. Minor Weakness(es): None. Criterion (3): The overall technical merit of the proposed project, and the likelihood of achieving its stated scientific goals in a timely manner. Major Strength(s): With assistance and advice from the SIRTF Science Center, this Galactic plane survey with IRAC should achieve its goals for over 99% of the inner Galaxy. Minor Strength(s): None. Major Weakness(es): The proposed MIPS scan data are expected to be compromised by saturation and latency effects. The panel recommends excising the MIPS portion of this proposal. When more information is available about SIRTF and MIPS performance, this might be an excellent subsequent large-scale General Observer investigation. Minor Weakness(es): The proposal did not adequately address the issue of IRAC saturation in the Galactic plane. Members of the panel accessed the MSX data during the review in an effort to understand better the severity of IRAC saturation in the Galactic plane. In the 8 micron band, MSX sources were extracted down to approximately 50-100 mJy, which is below the saturation limit for the IRAC 8 micron band. Looking at an expected worst case for the regions to be surveyed (l=10, b=0), we found a source density of around 400 per square degree at this level. An IRAC frame is 0.0069 square degrees, so we expect about 3 MSX sources per IRAC image. If we assume that a saturated point source fully compromises 10 pixels, this would be 30 saturated IRAC pixels per frame, or a small fraction (0.046%) of all pixels. If we then assume that every saturated pixel is fully compromised in 5 subsequent frames, then 0.27% of all pixels will be compromised by saturation and residual images. We note that these are worst case scenarios. Source densities are much lower at larger longitude. Of the MSX sources, only a fraction will exceed the ~150 mJy saturation limit in the IRAC 8 micron band. A smaller fraction will be saturated at a level that will result in significant residual image in subsequent frames. For most of the survey region, we estimate that <<0.1% of pixels will be affected by saturation of residual image. We also addressed the question of the level of diffuse background. In the worst case (again, 1= +10, b=0), we found a median background in the MSX data of ~4 x 10(^-6) W/(m^2 sr), which corresponds to a few mJy per beam in the IRAC data, two orders of magnitude below saturation. The strategy for avoiding asteroid contamination was not addressed in the proposal. Additional Comments: The committee believes that this team needs to work closely with the SSC staff in order to understand the issues of IRAC saturation and to optimize survey strategy. The team should address issues of robustness of the survey strategy they propose to employ. Criterion (4): The extent to which the project proposes to develop post-pipeline data products and/or software analysis tools that will enrich the overall scientific return from SIRTF. Major Strength(s): The team will accumulate over 34,000 IRAC pointings over the inner Galaxy. From these, they will produce a series of source catalogs. Their Bright Source Catalog will be extremely useful for SIRTF observers, and will be available in time for guest observer proposals. The Point Source and Extended Source Catalogs will also appear soon after the completion of data acquisition. The team will develop image mosaics, in the IRAF environment, to address the multiple rotated images. They will also provide several web-based tools for modeling PDRs and IR dust emission. Minor Strength(s): None. Major Weakness(es): None. Minor Weakness(es): None. Criterion (5): A realistic and credible plan that describes how the Principal Investigator will organize and manage the scientific, technical and financial aspects of the project. Major Strength(s): The management appears to be strong, with several key individuals identified to lead the major science efforts. Team meetings at Wisconsin and progress reviews are scheduled frequently. This will be important to address the survey design, and the transition to scientific working groups. The management plan is set up to ensure timely delivery of the data products. Minor Strength(s): None. Major Weakness(es): None. From - Wed Jan 17 20:01:10 2001 Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0I0QAd2171379; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 18:26:10 -0600 (CST) Received: from sscsci9 (sscsci9.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.71]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id QAA16882; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 16:25:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200101180025.QAA16882@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 16:25:39 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Marston Reply-To: Tony Marston Subject: Re: report from SSC SIRTF Legacy meeting in Pasadena To: ebc@astro.wisc.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu Cc: churchwell@astro.wisc.edu, bwhitney@colorado.edu, mathis@astro.wisc.edu, lazarian@astro.wisc.edu, cassinelli@astro.wisc.edu, mwolfire@astro.umd.edu, wolff@colorado.edu, john@ast1.astro.umn.edu, benjamin@wisp5.physics.wisc.edu, seager@ias.edu, clemens@protostar.bu.edu, bania@ninkasi.bu.edu, jackson@slime.bu.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu, meade@sal.wisc.edu, brian@sal.wisc.edu, sirtf@ipac.caltech.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: 4ud57TNm77lMBAmtjWiuqQ== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Chip et al, Sorry for delay -- in meetings much of today. Here are answers to at least most of your questions. 1. Latency/saturation -- the best info is still that in the SIRTF Observers Manual. Residual images remain on the array. 30 seconds after looking at a very bright object (providing full well) there are residuals of 0.6%, 1.1%, 2.1% and 3.7% respectively in channels 1, 2, 3 and 4. These disappear after 270 seconds. Amplitude of image does not scale well with source brightness. But light saturation leads to negligible to 0.3% residuals of full well 30 seconds after viewing. The whole issue is likely to be looked at again in the near future to try to get a better handle on these numbers. 2. The new IRAC AOT of 2secs + 0.4secs (basically the HDR option without the 12 second integration) is getting strong play. It appears it will be a relatively easy fix for the uplink folks. Hasn't been to downlink yet. 3. Data format will be single plane FITS files. The headers will be "sensible" (provide calibration and RA and Dec positions in the BCD products). The full list of headers in the final products is not yet settled and may not be for 4 to 6 months. I suggest designing a "flexible" system. Raw and intermediate pipeline products will also be available (after each "correction" in the pipeline a data product is produced), although you may not want to deal with these too much. 4. Move and read out is certainly possible. Actually, read out is almost instantaneous. The problem is time taken in data transfer to the spacecraft and data compression. 5. It is believed that the flats will be very stable (<1%?) but this won't really be known until IOC has occurred. The dark current is negligible (up to 10 electrons per day!). 6. Background and zodiacal light. This information is available for different areas of the sky using SPOT (this is based on Bill Reach's model, probably the best around). If you are unfamiliar with SPOT, you might like to check it out soon. You will need to submit all your AORs with it later this year. If you need large-scale models of the sky background please let me know and I will see what we can do (it should be feasible to get an accurate map in a relatively short turnaround time). Cheers Tony. ************************************************** A.P.Marston Tel: 626-395-3507 Observer Support SIRTF Science Center, IPAC Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 ************************************************** From - Tue Jan 16 14:42:11 2001 Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0GKdxd2099436; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 14:39:59 -0600 (CST) Received: from sscsci9 (sscsci9.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.71]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA00145; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:39:49 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200101162039.MAA00145@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:39:49 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Marston Reply-To: Tony Marston Subject: Re: report from SSC SIRTF Legacy meeting in Pasadena To: ebc@astro.wisc.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu Cc: churchwell@astro.wisc.edu, bwhitney@colorado.edu, mathis@astro.wisc.edu, lazarian@astro.wisc.edu, cassinelli@astro.wisc.edu, mwolfire@astro.umd.edu, wolff@colorado.edu, john@ast1.astro.umn.edu, benjamin@wisp5.physics.wisc.edu, seager@ias.edu, clemens@protostar.bu.edu, bania@ninkasi.bu.edu, jackson@slime.bu.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu, meade@sal.wisc.edu, brian@sal.wisc.edu, sirtf@ipac.caltech.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: 7HlWeYZYVNeZdKjvvZzRFA== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 A quick note. I have just had a conversation with Bill Reach (team lead for the IRAC instrument support team). It appears we are one step nearer implementing an option that would provide 0.4s and 2s options (like the high dynamic range option without the 12s integration). The total time fof a frame (including slew and settle) is estimated at 18 secs. There is an issue regarding data compression on board the space craft. This could add as much as 15 secs to the total time per position (or per dither). Incidentally, Bill recommends two dithers per position. So 1 dither per position = 18 secs (or 33 secs if data compression is slow). 2 dithers per position = 36 secs (or 66 secs if data compression is slow). I know the factor of 2 in time is a problem here, but the data compression issues is one involving the spacecraft rather than IRAC. The issue should be resolved relatively shortly. My question to you is do you still want to push for a 2secs integration time? If you do then it is very likely to happen. It does mean quite a bit of idle (non-data taking) time for the instrument which concerns some people around here. Cheers Tony P.S. For our records we are trying to keep track of information flow between liaison scientists and Legacy groups by cc'ing info to our helpdesk (sirtf@ipac.caltech.edu). Please cc messages to this address. If you would rather send a private message to me, then you might want to avoid this cc. ************************************************** A.P.Marston Tel: 626-395-3507 Observer Support SIRTF Science Center, IPAC Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 ************************************************** From - Tue Jan 16 12:58:41 2001 Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0GH2Gd2093295; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 11:02:16 -0600 (CST) Received: from sscsci9 (sscsci9.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.71]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA26523; Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:02:00 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200101161702.JAA26523@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 09:01:59 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Marston Reply-To: Tony Marston Subject: Re: report from SSC SIRTF Legacy meeting in Pasadena To: ebc@astro.wisc.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu Cc: churchwell@astro.wisc.edu, bwhitney@colorado.edu, mathis@astro.wisc.edu, lazarian@astro.wisc.edu, cassinelli@astro.wisc.edu, mwolfire@astro.umd.edu, wolff@colorado.edu, john@ast1.astro.umn.edu, benjamin@wisp5.physics.wisc.edu, seager@ias.edu, clemens@protostar.bu.edu, bania@ninkasi.bu.edu, jackson@slime.bu.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu, meade@sal.wisc.edu, brian@sal.wisc.edu, tmarston@ipac.caltech.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: VBGsWviSukmIqS0vk2qBsg== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc X-Mozilla-Status: 8013 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Dear All on the Galactic Plane Survey Legacy Team, I just wanted to introduce myself. I am your Legacy liaison scientist for the SSC. My main task is to make sure that your program is a success by providing as much assistance as I can. Chip's message indicated that I should be contacted via Ed. On thinking more on the subject, I would be happy to take questions directly from anyone (it may turn out to be easier to simply take questions from someone working in each of the sub-groups you have st up for your project -- but let's see how this goes for now). I shall be looking into Chip's questions over the next couple of days. Hope to get back to you soon. Cheers Tony ************************************************** A.P.Marston Tel: 626-395-3507 Observer Support SIRTF Science Center, IPAC Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 ************************************************** From - Fri Jan 19 09:42:45 2001 Received: from astro.wisc.edu (churchwell.astro.wisc.edu [144.92.179.174]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0IMpPd2228345; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:51:25 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3A67745A.34A0341D@astro.wisc.edu> Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 16:55:45 -0600 From: Ed Churchwell X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Megeath , churchwell , whitney barbara , mathis , lazarian , cassinelli , chip , mwolfire , mwolff wolff , dickey , benjamin , seager , clemens , bania , jackson Subject: Re: IRAC integration times References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Tom, Thanks for your note and consideration of the shorter integration time. At 3.6 microns, the confusion limit is about 0.16 mJy. A 5 sigma detection limit of about 0.25 mJy can be reached in about 2 sec at 3.6 and 4.5 microns. Although this is above the confusion limit, the 2 sec time would make our data much more robust in terms of reduced latent images and fewer CR hits. The 0.4 sec high dynamic range option would be useful in crowded massive star formation complexes which are already known from radio and MSX data. Is it an either/or proposition or might there be a possibility to have a mixed mode of operation where we used the high dynamic range option with 2 sec long exposures in known bright crowded fields and dispensed with the 0.4 sec option outside these areas? I should talk this over with my team before committing us to a specific set of exposure times. For my part, I think 4 sec or less would be optimal. I will bounce this off my team for their responses. Best, Ed cc Team Tom Megeath wrote: > > Hi Ed, > > I hope you made if safely back to Madison. > > The IRAC team is starting a re-evaluation of integration times. I will > try to keep you posted and ask for input. I think there is some interest > in finding a time which will be optimal for your survey (I just worked it > out: your project will roughly contain 5% of all IRAC time in the first > 2.5 years), but I can't guarantee anything at the moment. > > I had two questions for the moment. First, what is the integration time > at which your measurements become confusion limited. From our dinner > conversation, I remember the number 6 seconds - I wanted to confirm this > number. > > Second, if we went to a shorter integration time, for example 6 seconds, > would you be willing to give up the high dynamic range mode. The high > dynamic range mode would take a 0.4 and 6 second exposure. In a 6 second > exposure, you would saturate on sources at 90 mJy - as opposed to around > 1.4 Jy at 0.4 second. The problem with the high dynamic range mode with > short 6 second integrations is that the data rate may be too high, and > there would be extra overheads for data transfer. > > Best wishes, > Tom From - Sat Jan 20 13:50:33 2001 Received: from astro.wisc.edu (churchwell.astro.wisc.edu [144.92.179.174]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0KJldd2348928; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:47:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3A69EC4E.368EB978@astro.wisc.edu> Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:51:46 -0600 From: Ed Churchwell X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Megeath , churchwell , whitney barbara , mathis , lazarian , cassinelli , chip , mwolfire , mwolff wolff , dickey , benjamin , seager , clemens , bania , jackson Subject: Re: IRAC integration times References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Dear Tom, Thanks for the info on possible minimum integration times and HDR mode combinations. I am copying this to my team members so they can think about it before our telecon next Tuesday. We will discuss it then and get back to you with our recommendations next week. I also want to express my appreciation to the IRAC Instrument Team for supporting a shorter integration time. Hopefully this will be beneficial for calibration and possibly other users as well. Best, Ed Tom Megeath wrote: > > Hi Ed, > > The HDR mode for 12 seconds (12, 2 and 0.4 sec) will probably go to one 12 > second frame and one 0.6 second frame. The problem with the original HDR > mode (12, 2 and 0.4) is that there is an extra 6-15 second overhead which > was not accounted for in the SPOT time estimator (unfortunately, the data > flow - which depends on the interaction of the IRAC camera with the > spacecraft - was not well understood when the estimator was written). > > What I am suggesting is the following mode: A 4 second integration at > each point with one dither. Thus, you would have two, spatially offset, 4 > second integrations at each point in the sky. The saturation level would > be 140 Jy. > > An alternative, which would depend on the data compression rate onboard > the spacecraft (a number which is not known at the moment), would be an > HDR 4 second mode: a 4 second and an 0.4 second integration. > > In either of these modes, you could cycle 2 times through a map with > differing offsets. Thus, at each position in the sky you would have two 4 > second (and with HDR two 0.4 second integration). Plus, these may be > separated in time by an hour or so, which may (I have to work this out) be > enough to detect a small motion in many of the asteroids in your field. > > The downside is that due to the extra moves in this plan, your time > estimates will probably be about 30% higher. > > I should add that the implementation of these modes depends on what we can > convince the SSC to support. I hope that if we come up with a very good, > detailed reason to support a particular mode, they will adopt it. > > Cheers, > Tom > > On Thu, 18 Jan 2001, Ed Churchwell wrote: > > > Tom, > > Thanks for your note and consideration of the shorter > > integration time. At 3.6 microns, the confusion limit is about > > 0.16 mJy. A 5 sigma detection limit of about 0.25 mJy can > > be reached in about 2 sec at 3.6 and 4.5 microns. Although > > this is above the confusion limit, the 2 sec time would make > > our data much more robust in terms of reduced latent images > > and fewer CR hits. > > The 0.4 sec high dynamic range option would be useful in crowded > > massive star formation complexes which are already known > > from radio and MSX data. Is it an either/or proposition or > > might there be a possibility to have a mixed mode of operation > > where we used the high dynamic range option with 2 sec long > > exposures in known bright crowded fields and dispensed with > > the 0.4 sec option outside these areas? I should talk > > this over with my team before committing us to a specific set > > of exposure times. For my part, I think 4 sec or less would be > > optimal. I will bounce this off my team for their responses. > > Best, Ed > > > > cc Team > > > > > > > > Tom Megeath wrote: > > > > > > Hi Ed, > > > > > > I hope you made if safely back to Madison. > > > > > > The IRAC team is starting a re-evaluation of integration times. I will > > > try to keep you posted and ask for input. I think there is some interest > > > in finding a time which will be optimal for your survey (I just worked it > > > out: your project will roughly contain 5% of all IRAC time in the first > > > 2.5 years), but I can't guarantee anything at the moment. > > > > > > I had two questions for the moment. First, what is the integration time > > > at which your measurements become confusion limited. From our dinner > > > conversation, I remember the number 6 seconds - I wanted to confirm this > > > number. > > > > > > Second, if we went to a shorter integration time, for example 6 seconds, > > > would you be willing to give up the high dynamic range mode. The high > > > dynamic range mode would take a 0.4 and 6 second exposure. In a 6 second > > > exposure, you would saturate on sources at 90 mJy - as opposed to around > > > 1.4 Jy at 0.4 second. The problem with the high dynamic range mode with > > > short 6 second integrations is that the data rate may be too high, and > > > there would be extra overheads for data transfer. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > Tom > > From - Tue Jan 23 15:08:23 2001 Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0NL6Dd2520016; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 15:06:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from sscsci9 (sscsci9.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.71]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA02838; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:05:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200101232105.NAA02838@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:05:30 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Marston Reply-To: Tony Marston Subject: Re: Telecon Minutes from Jan 23rd To: tmarston@mail0.ipac.caltech.edu, chip@astro.wisc.edu Cc: ebc@astro.wisc.edu, churchwell@astro.wisc.edu, bwhitney@colorado.edu, mathis@astro.wisc.edu, lazarian@astro.wisc.edu, cassinelli@astro.wisc.edu, mwolfire@astro.umd.edu, wolff@colorado.edu, john@ast1.astro.umn.edu, benjamin@wisp5.physics.wisc.edu, seager@ias.edu, clemens@protostar.bu.edu, bania@ninkasi.bu.edu, jackson@slime.bu.edu, meade@sal.wisc.edu, brian@sal.wisc.edu, tmarston@ipac.caltech.edu, watson@astro.wisc.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: Rp3gF+G8p+AKyY1jlE2y7A== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Dear All, I have had a word with Bill Reach to try to clarify the proposed new AOR. For the situation where you have 2s+0.4s integrations, it appears likely that each position will take approx. 18 seconds (NOT an additional 15 seconds to transfer data -- slew and data-taking can be done in parallel). Obviously this amount doubles if you do 2 dithers at each position. The hexagonal observing grid can currently be of variable size -- this will be driven partly by what Legacy teams would like to have (i.e. you). I was asked to check on overlap -- a mosaicing program is being created here, your originally stated 8% overlap of fields would be fine but you might get away with a bit less than this. Lastly -- you get early warning on a topic that has arisen at SSC. If we are to attempt scheduling then we would need as many AORs from the Legacy projects as possible (and GTOs for that matter). If you want an idea of any potential scheduling problems it might be good to submit AORs with the target lists in April. Let me stress -- this is NOT required of you but is response to concerns that both Legacy and GTO folks have regarding how easy it will be to schedule the first year of observations. Preliminary estimates are that this should not be a big problem but we would like to check it out as earlier as possible. Once again, this is not a requirement of you. We might also be able to do something if you supplied us with the AOR information some time between April and October. For this group there is also the concern that the 2secs integration time mode does not yet exist (in SPOT). We would suggest that you use the HDR (12 secs) mode to produce AORs for such trials. The total time might be over-estimated but this way we get a good idea of the problems there might be in scheduling (timing, total AOR times and positions of observations are the main issues for the scheduling). Hope this helps. Cheers Tony > Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 13:49:53 -0600 > From: Chip Kobulnicky > X-Accept-Language: en > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: Tony Marston > CC: ebc@astro.wisc.edu, churchwell@astro.wisc.edu, bwhitney@colorado.edu, mathis@astro.wisc.edu, lazarian@astro.wisc.edu, cassinelli@astro.wisc.edu, mwolfire@astro.umd.edu, wolff@colorado.edu, john@ast1.astro.umn.edu, benjamin@wisp5.physics.wisc.edu, seager@ias.edu, clemens@protostar.bu.edu, bania@ninkasi.bu.edu, jackson@slime.bu.edu, meade@sal.wisc.edu, brian@sal.wisc.edu, tmarston@ipac.caltech.edu, watson@astro.wisc.edu > Subject: Telecon Minutes from Jan 23rd > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Telecon Minutes of 23 January 2001 > > TEAM PRESENT: Churchwell, Kobulnicky, Christer Watson, Meade, Babler, > Mathis > TEAM BY TELECON: Seager, Wolff, Clemens, Wolfire, Whitney, Bania, Tony > Marston > > Ed reviewed notes from Meeting at SSC 12-13 January. > > We will be expeected to produce some software as part of the Legacy > effort but we don't want to commit to doing too much. We will work > with other groups so as to not duplicate effort. > > > EPO budget > > We need to think about how to spend EPO money, about $8k/year, perhaps > we can use it to fund the speakers who will travel around to speak > about Legacy Science. Also the Space Place at UW can make great use of > a little money like this. > > Mark would like a piece of the EPO money to use with Lee Mundy at MD. > > Important Deadlines: > March 14: EPO proposal call > April 6: revised observing plans due > We will have to work to avoid overlap with GTO areas > Need a description of fields to be observed > May 2: revised proposals due; we will have to identify the impact of > budget reductions > May 9: Extended Abstracts due; will be published for the communty > May 16: multi-year EPO proposals due > Sep 4: observing strategy review at SSC > Oct 3: Delivery of AORs > 2002 > Mar: Data plan review > 1/2 year after launch: validation review of observing strategy & > progress on post-pipeline progress > End of stage 2: delivery of final data products & documents > also delivery of software tools > > We have 4 working groups in Phase 1: > 1) Hardware Acquisition; we need recommendations right away > 2) Survey planning; > 3) Data Analysis > 4) Web tools > > In phase 2 > > 1) Post-pipeline processing; (quality asseessment, source extraction) > 2) Higher level data analysis; (cross IDs, crowded field > deconvolution) > 3) Catalog (Mike) & Web Tools (Mark) > > Postdoc Hire: Ed spoke with Gus ?? who might be a good postdoc hire, > a student of Charlie Lada who has experience with IR and large > databases. > A few other names: > ?? A Korean student... > James Lloyd: student at Berkely with James Graham, Tom Bania > knows > him. > Greg Sloan: Another name from Dan, works with Steve Price on > MSX > Ed will talk to Al Harper & R. Hildebrand to see if they can > recommend > > **************** > To do list: > **************** > > Hardware definition: should acquire computer by march; need computer > recommendation ASAP > initial computer configuration by March > Database configuration by July? > Planning: need software to visualize fields and produce AORs by March > New SPOT will be released in about 2 weeks; it will include > ability to visualize AORs > spot will not have the new AOT for IRAC at this point > Eventually, hexagonal mapping for IRAC is allowed > but will not be available in the next SPOT version; > Tony Marston says we CAN be moving during readouts but 15 sec > readouts > still limit our efficiency. He's unclear whether 18 sec or > maybe 33 sec will be the minimum downlink time for a given > field. With 0.4 and 2 sec integration times, but no 12 sec frame, we > will save saturation. Chip will work to estimate saturation > incidence per field. > > Software: data analysis tools to be in place by April, 2002 > Web Tools: we may not need to develop web portal tool for access to > data > since SSC will develop something like this for the archive, we > hope > > Tony will look into someone we can work with at SSC involving archive > interface. > > Ed will talk to Hildebrand and Harper about postdoc possibilities > > Mike will report on computer purchase next time. > > ********************* > Upcomming events > ********************* > All-Team Meeting: Friday-Sat, 2-3 Feb in Madison. Watch your email for > details > > Agenda items for Feb meeting > 1) Observing Strategy; how many dithers; how will we deal with Cosmic > rays? > Saturation? > 2) What common software should can develop with other teams? > We need to trace the software flow through every step from BCD to > final > products > 3) Team name/logo & summary of project for release to the community > > NEXT TELECON: Tuesday, Feb 13th, 11:00 a.m. Central time. ************************************************** A.P.Marston Tel: 626-395-3507 Observer Support SIRTF Science Center, IPAC Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 ************************************************** From - Wed Jan 24 15:57:49 2001 Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0OLs3d2602451; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:54:03 -0600 (CST) Received: from shiraz.ipac.calteche.du (shiraz.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.155]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA13801; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:53:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200101242153.NAA13801@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> X-Sender: mdb@pop.ipac.caltech.edu X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 13:51:40 -0800 To: mdb@ipac.caltech.edu From: Michael Bicay Subject: LegSci Workshop Report Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; types="text/plain,text/html"; boundary="=====================_4754615==_.ALT" X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 --=====================_4754615==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable SIRTF Legacy Science Workshop DRAFT Report The SIRTF Science Center (SSC) hosted a Legacy Science Workshop on Friday= and Saturday, 2001 January 12-13 in the Morrisroe Astrosciences building on the Caltech campus in Pasadena. The Workshop brought together, for the first time, the Legacy Science Principal Investigators (PIs), the SIRTF Instrument Team (IT) Principal Investigators, and SSC science and technical staff. The purpose of the Workshop was to initiate long-term relationships between the LegSci PIs, the ITs and the SSC, with the goal of facilitating mutual exchanges of= useful information. The Friday morning executive session involved the six LegSci PIs, four= members from the SSC (Soifer, Helou, Green, Bicay), Project Scientist Werner and Project Manager Gallagher (both from JPL), and the NASA-HQ Program Scientist (Harley Thronson). Bicay welcomed the attendees in his opening remarks, outlined the goals of the Workshop, and summarized what the SSC wanted to= see come out of Saturday=92s breakout sessions. Thronson offered the HQ= perspective on the LegSci Program and its potential impact on future NASA missions. Soifer=92s presentation concentrated on the expectations inherent in the= LegSci Program, and on the roles and responsibilities of the LegSci teams (LSTs),= the SSC, and the ITs. Helou led a discussion pertaining to communications and interactions, which include the LegSci Liaison Scientists, the LegSci= Working Group, Interest Groups (to evolve from this Workshop), and the ITs. He also discussed reports and reviews, and data product deliveries. Bicay then discussed the LegSci schedules, with emphasis on the Stage One milestones in the coming year. He also closed with a short presentation on the= contractual aspects of the LegSci Program. Friday afternoon was devoted to a series of ~half-hour presentations by each of the LegSci PIs. They were asked by the SSC to provide a science summary of their project, and to also introduce the databases and post-pipeline data products and/or analysis tools to be developed through their project. The= PIs were also asked to present their perspective on the biggest challenge(s) facing the successful completion of their project. Two of the projects have established Web sites, which will soon be linked= into the SIRTF site. Dickinson: =20 http://www.stsci.edu/science/goods/ Kennicutt: =20 http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/legac= y/ The other projects were encouraged to inform the SSC if/when they produce online sites also. Brief descriptions of the science goals of each LegSci projects are= available on the SIRTF public Web site. More detailed descriptions (~5-page =93extend= ed abstracts=94) will be available soon. This report hereby summarizes the major concerns of each LegSci PI. Dickinson: (1) Data processing requirements will push the calibration limits early= in the SIRTF mission. (2) Scheduling of the IRAC Deep Survey will require repeated coverage= six months later, with a 180-degree flip in field orientation. Lonsdale: (1) Unlike the original proposal, which had no constraints on instrument usage, the project recommended by the Time Allocation Committee would= increase the areal overlap between the IRAC and MIPS surveys. This, in turn, places increased demands on scheduling and orientation of fields. Kennicutt: (1) Schedule flexibility =20 (a) Matching orientation of MIPS/SED strips=20 (b) Second-look spectroscopy of IR-selected targets=20 (2) Data reduction =20 (a) Project utilizes all SIRTF instruments in all observing modes=20 (b) Shared data reduction software is deemed to be desirable=20 (3) Variable Point Spread Function as a function of wavelength =20 (a) Matched-resolution SEDs from images=20 (b) Calibrated emission-line spectrophotometry. Churchwell: (1) IRAC saturation and latency effects Evans: (1) Achieving goals on 60% of requested funding level (2) Preparing for data reduction with severely constrained funding in Stage One (3) Interfacing with SSC, ITs and other LSTs (4) Responding to changes in instrument performance and in SIRTF= schedules Meyer: (1) Coordination with SSC =20 (a) Status of pipelines=20 (b) Effort towards calibration=20 (2) Coordination with ITs =20 (a) Adopt common observational procedures?=20 (b) How to work around GTO proprietary periods=20 (3) Coordination with other LSTs =20 (a) Undertake joint software development projects? Saturday morning was devoted to five breakout sessions, organized by instrument and sky coverage. Each session involved participants from the LSTs, the ITs and the SSC. The goals of these 90-minute sessions were to: =20 (1) Identify issues and topics of common interest =20 =B7 Observing strategies, data processing, data products, etc.=20 (2) Prioritize issues/topics =20 =B7 Schedules for working the issues and solving problems=20 (3) Identify direct or implied assumptions =20 =B7 SSC resources and/or commitments=20 (4) Develop ideas for organizing and sustaining Interest Groups (IGs) = =20 =B7 Processes, leads, coordination, communication=20 =B7 Interfaces with LegSci Working Group This turned out to be an overly ambitious set of goals, and most of the session discussions concentrated on Item (1) above. Reports from each of the breakout sessions were presented early Saturday afternoon, and are summarized here. IRAC Wide-Area (Bill Reach, Session Chair) This session recommended the creation of IGs to study four broad topics. (1) Scheduling & Observing Strategies =20 =B7 Possible short integration time frame (2 sec)=20 =B7 Possible dither table changes & re-observing needs=20 =B7 Hexagonal mapping area to make observations more robust to= scheduling=20 (2) IRAC Calibration =20 =B7 Stability of flats/darks=20 =B7 Gain variations over 3+ hour periods after bright-source viewing= =20 =B7 Use of =93Fixsen-style=94 flat fields=20 =B7 Calibration stars: which ones other than those selected by IRAC= team=20 =B7 Latency predictability/time scales=20 (3) IRAC Tools =20 =B7 Software for mosaicing from SSC. Beta testing by LSTs?=20 =B7 Pipeline issues: only documentation?=20 (4) LegSci Data Products =20 =B7 Data access for all final products provided by SSC (via IRSA)=20 =B7 Possible coordination between teams of data products=20 =B7 Community access to products IRAC Wide-Area (John Stauffer, Session Chair) Recommended Interest Groups: (1) Pipeline =20 =B7 Basic Calibrated Data (BCD) & Extended Pipeline=20 (2) Source Extraction (3) LegSci Product Dissemination =20 =B7 Standards=20 (4) Super-Calibration =20 =B7 Fixsen, e.g.=20 (5) Flux Calibration & Calibration Observing Strategy (6) Debris Disk Science (7) Cloud Core/Cluster Science In addition, this session identified other issues pertinent to all SIRTF groups. (A) BCD Pipeline Pliability =20 =B7 How to modify/interact with =93guts=94 of BCD pipelines=20 (B) Definition of Extended Pipeline & Connection to Tool Development (C) Commonality of Product Definition/Formats for LegSci Products (D) Need for Documentation/Information =20 =B7 Pipelines, In-Orbit Checkout, Calibration IRS Targeted (Tom Soifer, Session Chair) This session recommended the creation of one functional Interest Group and= one topical science IG. (1) IRS Analysis Tool Kit =20 =B7 IDL-based=20 =B7 Built for =93small=94 groups of users: IRS team, Evans, Meyer,= Kennicutt, SSC=20 =B7 Develop tools, based on interest=20 =B7 Set standards=20 =B7 Recommended Lead: Bernhard Brandl (Cornell U.)=20 (2) Coherent Database for Study of Material in Disks =20 =B7 Coordinate target lists=20 =B7 Observing modes=20 =B7 Possible members =20 =B7 Blake (for Evans)=20 =B7 Meyer (for Meyer)=20 =B7 Watson (for IRS Team)=20 =B7 Jura (for general GTOs)=20 The session also noted these IRS issues of interest: (A) Observing Strategies (B) Peak-up Imaging MIPS Wide-Area (Bill Latter, Session Chair) This session recommended four Interest Groups: (1) MIPS Calibration =20 =B7 Ge:Ga calibration (initially, an information route)=20 =B7 Large-field internal calibration=20 (2) Pipeline Validation by LSTs =20 =B7 Release of pipeline test data=20 (3) Source Cross-ID/Associations (4) Engineering of Infrastructure The following issues were identified during this session: (A) Scan AOR-to-AOR Offsets (B) Clarification of 24-micron and Ge:Ga Differences (C) Observing Strategy =20 =B7 Need for Total Power Mode=20 (D) Ge:Ga Spatial Filtering =20 =B7 Are 2 data products needed?=20 (E) Tools and Standards (F) PSF & STinyTim (G) Availability of Detailed Information to LSTs =20 =B7 Instrument SDDs=20 =B7 Access to STARS web site at JPL?=20 =B7 Limited LST access to MIPS test data Web site?=20 =B7 Capture of generally useful information=20 (H) LegSci & Calibration Working Group Linkages MIPS Targeted (George Helou, Session Chair) This session identified three Interest Groups: (1) Extended/Diffuse Emission =20 =B7 Largely neglected issue by MIPS team; pushed =93downstream=94 by= SSC=20 =B7 Bright extended sources involve memory/latency pipeline treatment= =20 (2) Super-Resolution =B7 Separated from image-combination group =B7 LSTs can contribute to efforts at Arizona (3) Asteroid ID Strategies (Data Product Reliability) =B7 Templates =B7 Frequencies The session also identified these issues, some of which pertain to other groups/instruments and some of which pertain to general communications: (A) Data Quality & Documentation (B) Databases (C) MIPS Data Reduction/Analysis Software (D) Calibration/Memory Effects/Latency Following brief reports from each of the breakout session chairs, a plenary discussion period ensued. This exchange of ideas was stimulating, but= failed to produce a consensus on the best way to organize and sustain Interest Groups. Nonetheless, some progress was made. While a couple of the= sessions recommended science-based Interest Groups, it is likely that such groups= will form naturally with or without the supreme organizational skills of the= SSC!=20 Following the Workshop, the SSC management elected to concentrate on forming function-based IGs and to assume that the topical science groups will form themselves. Apart from these science groups, the five breakout sessions recommended the creation of 17 Interest Groups (excluding any degeneracies). Given the fact that LST investigators, IT members and SSC scientists will likely need to focus on many functional issues, this number is clearly too many to sustain (to= say nothing of the number of teleconferences that would have to be covered).=20 Therefore, the attendees concurred on the suggestion that a =93small=94= number of IGs be formed, and that each IG would likely want to establish smaller sub-groups to work detailed and specific issues. Two primary organizational schemes were debated at length. In one, there would be 4-7 IGS, organized without respect to instruments, per se: (1) Imaging Tools, (2) Spectroscopic Tools, (3) Data Products, and (4) Pipelines. There was some interest in splitting the Pipeline Group into three Groups, one for each science instrument. The other scheme would organize the Groups= primarily by instrument: (1) IRAC Pipeline & Tools, (2) IRS Pipelines & Tools, (3)= MIPS Pipelines & Tools, and (4) Post-Pipeline Data Products. In each of these schemes, it was assumed that the Pipelines Groups would also include issues pertaining to calibration and validation. Moreover, it was assumed that the Data Products Groups would also include formats, standards, and simulations.= =20 There was even a suggestion to start with the first scheme and then= gradually transition to the second. A spirited debate failed to achieve consensus on which approach to= implement, although there was some preference for the second scheme. The SSC promised= to map all of the various recommendations and issues that emerged from the breakout sessions into the two schemes, and to recommend which approach to undertake. This will be done in a conference call with the LST PIs and the Instrument Team PIs about two weeks after the Workshop. [The conference= call has since been scheduled for Monday, January 29 at 1.00pm PST.] Report filed by M. D. Bicay. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Michael D. Bicay (SIRTF Science Center/IPAC) -------------------------------------------- California Institute of Technology IPAC 100-22 770 South Wilson Avenue Pasadena, CA 91125 PHONE: 626.397.9506 FAX: 626.397.7181 -------------------------------------------- mdb@ipac.caltech.edu =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D --=====================_4754615==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
SIRTF Legacy Science Workshop
DRAFT Report


The SIRTF Science Center (SSC) hosted a Legacy Science Workshop on Friday and Saturday, 2001 January 12-13 in the Morrisroe Astrosciences building on the Caltech campus in Pasadena.  The Workshop brought together, for the first time, the Legacy Science Principal Investigators (PIs), the SIRTF Instrument Team (IT) Principal Investigators, and SSC science and technical staff.  The purpose of the Workshop was to initiate long-term relationships between the LegSci PIs, the ITs and the SSC, with the goal of facilitating mutual exchanges of useful information.

The Friday morning executive session involved the six LegSci PIs, four members from the SSC (Soifer, Helou, Green, Bicay), Project Scientist Werner and Project Manager Gallagher (both from JPL), and the NASA-HQ Program Scientist (Harley Thronson).  Bicay welcomed the attendees in his opening remarks, outlined the goals of the Workshop, and summarized what the SSC wanted to see come out of Saturday=92s breakout sessions.  Thronson offered the HQ perspective on the LegSci Program and its potential impact on future NASA missions.

Soifer=92s presentation concentrated on the expectations inherent in the LegSci Program, and on the roles and responsibilities of the LegSci teams (LSTs), the SSC, and the ITs.  Helou led a discussion pertaining to communications and interactions, which include the LegSci Liaison Scientists, the LegSci Working Group, Interest Groups (to evolve from this Workshop), and the ITs.  He also discussed reports and reviews, and data product deliveries.  Bicay then discussed the LegSci schedules, with emphasis on the Stage One milestones in the coming year.  He also closed with a short presentation on the contractual aspects of the LegSci Program.

Friday afternoon was devoted to a series of ~half-hour presentations by each of the LegSci PIs.  They were asked by the SSC to provide a science summary of their project, and to also introduce the databases and post-pipeline data products and/or analysis tools to be developed through their project.  The PIs were also asked to present their perspective on the biggest challenge(s) facing the successful completion of their project.

Two of the projects have established Web sites, which will soon be linked into the SIRTF site.

Dickinson:      http://www.stsci.edu/science/goods/
Kennicutt:      http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/legacy/

The other projects were encouraged to inform the SSC if/when they produce online sites also.

Brief descriptions of the science goals of each LegSci projects are available on the SIRTF public Web site.  More detailed descriptions (~5-page =93extended abstracts=94) will be available soon.

This report hereby summarizes the major concerns of each LegSci PI.

Dickinson:
(1)   &nb= sp; Data processing requirements will push the calibration limits early in the SIRTF mission.
(2)    &nbs= p;Scheduling of the IRAC Deep Survey will require repeated coverage six months later, with a 180-degree flip in field orientation.

Lonsdale:
(1)    &nbs= p;Unlike the original proposal, which had no constraints on instrument usage, the project recommended by the Time Allocation Committee would increase the areal overlap between the IRAC and MIPS surveys.  This, in turn, places increased demands on scheduling and orientation of fields.

Kennicutt:
(1)    &nbs= p;Schedule flexibility
(a)     Matching orientation of MIPS/SED strips
(b)     Second-look spectroscopy of IR-selected targets
(2)     Data reduction
(a)     Project utilizes all SIRTF instruments in all observing modes
(b)     Shared data reduction software is deemed to be desirable
(3)     Variable Point Spread Function as a function of wavelength
(a)     Matched-resolutio= n SEDs from images
(b)     Calibrated emission-line spectrophotometry.

Churchwell:
(1)    &nbs= p;IRAC saturation and latency effects

Evans:
(1)    &nbs= p;Achieving goals on 60% of requested funding level
(2)    &nbs= p;Preparing for data reduction with severely constrained funding in Stage One
(3)    &nbs= p;Interfacing with SSC, ITs and other LSTs
(4)    &nbs= p;Responding to changes in instrument performance and in SIRTF schedules

Meyer:
(1)    &nbs= p;Coordination with SSC
(a)     Status of pipelines
(b)     Effort towards calibration
(2)     Coordination with ITs
(a)     Adopt common observational procedures?
(b)     How to work around GTO proprietary periods
(3)     Coordination with other LSTs
(a)     Undertake joint software development projects?

Saturday morning was devoted to five breakout sessions, organized by instrument and sky coverage.  Each session involved participants from the LSTs, the ITs and the SSC.  The goals of these 90-minute sessions were to:
(1)     Identify issues and topics of common interest
=B7       Obser= ving strategies, data processing, data products, etc.
(2)     Prioritize issues/topics
=B7       Sched= ules for working the issues and solving problems
(3)     Identify direct or implied assumptions
=B7       SSC resources and/or commitments
(4)     Develop ideas for organizing and sustaining Interest Groups (IGs)
=B7       Proce= sses, leads, coordination, communication
=B7       Inter= faces with LegSci Working Group

This turned out to be an overly ambitious set of goals, and most of the session discussions concentrated on Item (1) above.

Reports from each of the breakout sessions were presented early Saturday afternoon, and are summarized here.

IRAC Wide-Area (Bill Reach, Session Chair)
This session recommended the creation of IGs to study four broad topics.

(1)    &nbs= p;Scheduling & Observing Strategies
=B7       Possi= ble short integration time frame (2 sec)
=B7       Possi= ble dither table changes & re-observing needs
=B7       Hexag= onal mapping area to make observations more robust to scheduling
(2)     IRAC Calibration
=B7       Stabi= lity of flats/darks
=B7       Gain variations over 3+ hour periods after bright-source viewing
=B7       Use of =93Fixsen-style=94 flat fields
=B7       Calib= ration stars: which ones other than those selected by IRAC team
=B7       Laten= cy predictability/time scales
(3)     IRAC Tools
=B7       Softw= are for mosaicing from SSC.  Beta testing by LSTs?
=B7       Pipel= ine issues: only documentation?
(4)     LegSci Data Products
=B7       Data access for all final products provided by SSC (via IRSA)
=B7       Possi= ble coordination between teams of data products
=B7       Commu= nity access to products

IRAC Wide-Area (John Stauffer, Session Chair)
Recommended Interest Groups:
(1)    &nbs= p;Pipeline
=B7       Basic Calibrated Data (BCD) & Extended Pipeline
(2)     Source Extraction
(3)    &nbs= p;LegSci Product Dissemination
=B7       Stand= ards
(4)     Super-Calibratio= n
=B7       Fixse= n, e.g.
(5)     Flux Calibration & Calibration Observing Strategy
(6)    &nbs= p;Debris Disk Science
(7)    &nbs= p;Cloud Core/Cluster Science

In addition, this session identified other issues pertinent to all SIRTF groups.
(A)    &nbs= p;BCD Pipeline Pliability
=B7       How to modify/interact with =93guts=94 of BCD pipelines
(B)     Definition of Extended Pipeline & Connection to Tool Development
(C)    &nbs= p;Commonality of Product Definition/Formats for LegSci Products
(D)    &nbs= p;Need for Documentation/Information
=B7       Pipel= ines, In-Orbit Checkout, Calibration

IRS Targeted (Tom Soifer, Session Chair)
This session recommended the creation of one functional Interest Group and one topical science IG.
(1)    &nbs= p;IRS Analysis Tool Kit
=B7       IDL-b= ased
=B7       Built for =93small=94 groups of users: IRS team, Evans, Meyer, Kennicutt, SSC
=B7       Devel= op tools, based on interest
=B7       Set standards
=B7       Recom= mended Lead: Bernhard Brandl (Cornell U.)
(2)     Coherent Database for Study of Material in Disks
=B7       Coord= inate target lists
=B7       Obser= ving modes
=B7       Possi= ble members
=B7       Blake (for Evans)
=B7       Meyer (for Meyer)
=B7       Watso= n (for IRS Team)
=B7       Jura (for general GTOs)
The session also noted these IRS issues of interest:
(A)    &nbs= p;Observing Strategies
(B)    &nbs= p;Peak-up Imaging

MIPS Wide-Area (Bill Latter, Session Chair)
This session recommended four Interest Groups:
(1)    &nbs= p;MIPS Calibration
=B7       Ge:Ga calibration (initially, an information route)
=B7       Large= -field internal calibration
(2)     Pipeline Validation by LSTs
=B7       Relea= se of pipeline test data
(3)     Source Cross-ID/Associations
(4)    &nbs= p;Engineering of Infrastructure

The following issues were identified during this session:
(A)    &nbs= p;Scan AOR-to-AOR Offsets
(B)    &nbs= p;Clarification of 24-micron and Ge:Ga Differences
(C)    &nbs= p;Observing Strategy
=B7       Need for Total Power Mode
(D)     Ge:Ga Spatial Filtering
=B7       Are 2 data products needed?
(E)     Tools and Standards
(F)    &nbs= p;      PSF & STinyTim
(G)    &nbs= p;Availability of Detailed Information to LSTs
=B7       Instr= ument SDDs
=B7       Acces= s to STARS web site at JPL?
=B7       Limit= ed LST access to MIPS test data Web site?
=B7       Captu= re of generally useful information
(H)     LegSci & Calibration Working Group Linkages

MIPS Targeted (George Helou, Session Chair)
This session identified three Interest Groups:
(1)    &nbs= p;Extended/Diffuse Emission
=B7       Large= ly neglected issue by MIPS team; pushed =93downstream=94 by SSC
=B7       Brigh= t extended sources involve memory/latency pipeline treatment
(2)     Super-Resolution=
=B7       Separated from image-combination group
=B7       LSTs can contribute to efforts at Arizona
(3)    &nbs= p;Asteroid ID Strategies (Data Product Reliability)
=B7       Templates
=B7       Frequencies

The session also identified these issues, some of which pertain to other groups/instruments and some of which pertain to general communications:
(A)    &nbs= p;Data Quality & Documentation
(B)     Databases
(C)    &nbs= p;MIPS Data Reduction/Analysis Software
(D)    &nbs= p;Calibration/Memory Effects/Latency


Following brief reports from each of the breakout session chairs, a plenary discussion period ensued.  This exchange of ideas was stimulating, but failed to produce a consensus on the best way to organize and sustain Interest Groups.  Nonetheless, some progress was made.  While a couple of the sessions recommended science-based Interest Groups, it is likely that such groups will form naturally  with or without the supreme organizational skills of the SSC!  Following the Workshop, the SSC management elected to concentrate on forming function-based IGs and to assume that the topical science groups will form themselves.

Apart from these science groups, the five breakout sessions recommended the creation of 17 Interest Groups (excluding any degeneracies).  Given the fact that LST investigators, IT members and SSC scientists will likely need to focus on many functional issues, this number is clearly too many to sustain (to say nothing of the number of teleconferences that would have to be covered).  Therefore, the attendees concurred on the suggestion that a =93small=94 number of IGs be formed, and that each IG would likely want to establish smaller sub-groups to work detailed and specific issues.

Two primary organizational schemes were debated at length.  In one, there would be 4-7 IGS, organized without respect to instruments, per se: (1) Imaging Tools, (2) Spectroscopic Tools, (3) Data Products, and (4) Pipelines.  There was some interest in splitting the Pipeline Group into three Groups, one for each science instrument.  The other scheme would organize the Groups primarily by instrument: (1) IRAC Pipeline & Tools, (2) IRS Pipelines & Tools, (3) MIPS Pipelines & Tools, and (4) Post-Pipeline Data Products.  In each of these schemes, it was assumed that the Pipelines Groups would also include issues pertaining to calibration and validation.  Moreover, it was assumed that the Data Products Groups would also include formats, standards, and simulations.  There was even a suggestion to start with the first scheme and then gradually transition to the second.

A spirited debate failed to achieve consensus on which approach to implement, although there was some preference for the second scheme.  The SSC promised to map all of the various recommendations and issues that emerged from the breakout sessions into the two schemes, and to recommend which approach to undertake.  This will be done in a conference call with the LST PIs and the Instrument Team PIs about two weeks after the Workshop.  [The conference call has since been scheduled for Monday, January 29 at 1.00pm PST.]


Report filed by M. D. Bicay.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Michael D. Bicay (SIRTF Science Center/IPAC)
--------------------------------------------
California Institute of Technology
IPAC 100-22
770 South Wilson Avenue
Pasadena, CA   91125
PHONE: 626.397.9506   FAX: 626.397.7181
--------------------------------------------
mdb@ipac.caltech.edu
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
--=====================_4754615==_.ALT-- From - Sat Jan 27 10:12:56 2001 Received: from astro.wisc.edu (churchwell.astro.wisc.edu [144.92.179.174]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0QGtgd2708770; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:55:42 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3A71AD0B.3213615@astro.wisc.edu> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:59:59 -0600 From: Ed Churchwell X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: churchwell , whitney barbara , mathis , lazarian , cassinelli , chip , mwolfire , mwolff wolff , dickey , benjamin , seager , clemens , bania , jackson , meade , babler , marston Subject: [Fwd: archiving etc] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------B02C549C7125E9A96B467290" X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------B02C549C7125E9A96B467290 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Team, This message from Carol Lonsdale indicates that our hesitation about cross correlation of SIRTF sources with other catalogs may not be as problematic as we had thought. I have told her that we will be interested in learning more about the IRSA options for correlation of our catalogs with those in the IRSA archive. Ed --------------B02C549C7125E9A96B467290 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from madraf.astro.wisc.edu (madraf.astro.wisc.edu [144.92.179.156]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id f0PMwxd2644197 for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:58:59 -0600 (CST) Resent-Message-Id: <200101252258.f0PMwxd2644197@uwast.astro.wisc.edu> Resent-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:56:09 EST Resent-From: Resent-To: Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu by madraf.astro.wisc.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:56:08 EST Received: from chaplin.ipac.caltech.edu (chaplin.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.50.77]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA25196; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:58:38 -0800 (PST) From: cjl@ipac.caltech.edu Received: (from cjl@localhost) by chaplin.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA18509; Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:58:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <200101252258.OAA18509@chaplin.ipac.caltech.edu> Subject: archiving etc To: nje@bubba.as.utexas.edu (Neal Evans) Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 14:58:37 -0800 (PST) CC: churchwell@madraf.astro.wisc.edu, cjl@ipac.caltech.edu, med@stsci.edu, mmeyer@as.arizona.edu, rkennicutt@as.arizona.edu In-Reply-To: <200101252125.PAA03227@bubba.as.utexas.edu> from "Neal Evans" at Jan 25, 2001 03:25:37 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Colleagues, Input for the draft Neal sent around to follow. Meanwhile here's some notes about archiving, data distribution, catalog cross-correlations, etc. that you mind find useful, and give you some background on how IRSA at IPAC can help all SIRTF projects, and can most likely reduce the costs you've estimated for this activity. I am Project Scientist for the IPAC Archive, IRSA (InfraRed Science Archive - catchy name, huh?). IRSA has one of the most Virtual Observatory (VO)-like archives in the astronomical community. It was designed in response to the expected needs of 2MASS: fast, robust, massive datamining jobs on the terabyte-size 2MASS catalogs and images data sets on-the-fly; ie in real time over the internet (some jobs in background with email notification when done, if very large). I co-designed it, and we worked closely with Alex Szalay of JHU, standing on the shoulders of what he and his team had designed and developed for SDSS. IRSA may be able to support a large fraction, if not all, of your archiving and data distribution needs right now (if you had the data yet!). All you would do is send IRSA the data, formatted appropriately of course, and with sufficient metadata; ie data about the data. For catalogs (tables in db language) this comes down to a "data dictionary", which is nothing more than an ascii file listing column names in the table, their units, epoch, wavelength, etc., whatever is in the table. Parallel requirements for images (and spectra, though IRSA doesn't support spectra yet). You also supply help files and other necessary documentation. IRSA takes it from there. Loading into the archive is a few hour proposition. IRSA would then index the catalogs and tables; perhaps a few day proposition. You would then test the installation, and when it's signed off by all the powers that be it can be released to the community. Then it can be datamined, visualized and so on. Currently IRSA support includes: - subsetting. ie the user selects a catalog and constrains the result set by any parameter or combination of parameters they like; color, flux, latitude, etc. - similar subsetting for images, by location on the sky or by any other feature available in the image header - overlay of multiple tables on multiple images with links between; ie you select a source on an image and see the data record from the catalog - cross-comparisons; ie. you upload a list of your favorite objects and IRSA can select all sources from any catalog it has in the archive that fall within a given position radius (future plans will fold in match reliabilites like in Rutledge et al 2000 ApJS 131, 335) Future IRSA plans include more sophisticated and flexible versions of all this, and transparent connection for all these sorts of functions to other archive centers; eg. you find an interesting SIRTF source using IRSA (or 10^4 sources!), then request back all data that NED, MAST, HEASARC, whatever, has for it. IRSA has some of this already, and this kind of remote connectivity and data management is being protoyped by many archive/data centers and will form the basis for the NVO (National Virtual Observatory) initiative. Let me know if any of this sounds of interest, or if you would like more details. For a hands-on feel you could use IRSA to browse the 2MASS data holdings. Any features you like about other archive center's services will also likely be available for SIRTF data by the time we have it. Naturally the extragalactic Legacy teams will be thinking in terms of NED for archiving too. In my view that should be done too and is a highly complementary approach since NED specializes is details and data about specific objects (a source-based archive, similar to most other astro archives at the moment) while IRSA specializes in really fast and efficient subsetting access to enormous datasets. The SSC has a specialized visualizer for observation planning purposes, and in the long run will also likely have some special features required for data access. In the realm of NVO it becomes invisible to the user just which engine is supplying which data; ie. the archives network with each other to minimize the personal information and data management that the user has to do. The needs of our projects might help jumpstart the planning of what we would like these sophisticated data services to be able to support for SIRTF data. Regards Carol --------------B02C549C7125E9A96B467290-- From - Mon Jan 29 11:09:22 2001 Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0TH0V410458 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:00:31 -0600 (CST) Received: from sscsci9 (sscsci9.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.71]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA15760; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:00:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200101291700.JAA15760@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:00:29 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Marston Reply-To: Tony Marston Subject: Re: irac hex tiling To: chip@astro.wisc.edu Cc: sirtf@mail0.ipac.caltech.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: amyk1rldifF9DM2YdCnQLg== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Hi Chip, A couple of things to pass along. 1. Regarding the short time frames. It looks like the 2 second frame (if offered) will NOT include a 0.4 sec frame with it. It turns out that the data throughput simply isn't fast enough and although 2-3 positions of information could be obtained quickly, large numbers of sequenced 2 second observations could not. We are therefore looking at about 20 seconds total to take 1 position in your field (2 second on sky integration). This 20 seconds includes the slew needed for the position. 2. Regarding hex tiling. This method of taking data was not meant to increase observing efficiency (in terms of laying down tiles). It does help with scheduling. It makes it less of a problem what roll angle the telescope is viewing your target fields at. This makes scheduling easier and the observations are more likely to be scheduled quicker. Hex tiling is being discussed in a meeting at SSC tomorrow. If you have an idea about the size of tiles that would be good for you then please send it along. It is quite likely that there will be 3 or so tiling options -- you may well be able to define one of them. Incidentally, the 2 second integration frame has not yet been implemented, indeed Bill Reach has asked for "ammunition" for its cause i.e. could you spell out the differences for your program between having a 2 second integration and not having a 2 second integration (a 12 sec frame instead). What will this do to number of saturations per frame? to number of latencies? to number of sources? Probably best to go from MSX data if you can. Basically, some people still need to be persuaded that a 2 second frame time is worth the extra effort. Cheers Tony > Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 16:11:37 -0600 > From: Chip Kobulnicky > X-Accept-Language: en > MIME-Version: 1.0 > To: tmarston@ipac.caltech.edu > Subject: irac hex tiling > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > HI Tony, > > Is there any further information about what the IRAC hexagonal tiling > options will be like? I don't understand how that will save time > given the square footprint (actually rectangular when you account for > teh fact that the IRAC arrays are side-by-side, separated by about 1'). > I must be missing something. What are the hex mapping modes being > explored? > > I'm tryig to put together an overview for our team meeting in Madison on > Friday. > > Thanks, > CHip > > > -- > > Henry A. (Chip) Kobulnicky email: chip@astro.wisc.edu > Department of Astronomy phone: 608-265-6768 > University of Wisconsin fax : 608-263-6386 > 475 N. Charter St. WWW : > Madison, WI 53706 http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~chip ************************************************** A.P.Marston Tel: 626-395-3507 Observer Support SIRTF Science Center, IPAC Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 ************************************************** From - Tue Jan 30 14:13:08 2001 Received: from dustem.astro.umd.edu (mwolfire@dustem.astro.umd.edu [129.2.14.31]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f0UK6H488906; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 14:06:17 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (mwolfire@localhost) by dustem.astro.umd.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1/WLS8.9s) with ESMTP id PAA29998; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:04:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:04:49 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Wolfire To: Ed Churchwell cc: churchwell , whitney barbara , chip , mathis , cassinelli , lazarian , wolff , dickey , benjamin , seager , clemens , bania , tmarston@mail0.ipac.caltech.edu, meade@sal.wisc.edu, brian@sal.wisc.edu Subject: Re: The Zodiacal Light Vol 4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 More Notes on Zodiacal Light PLUS Additional Backgrounds SPOT on Cirrus: 1)SPOT estimates cirrus background using i)a refined 100 micron map from Schlegel et al. (1998) The map is derived from IRAS and DIRBE data and is smoothed to 6.5' . ii)a temperature map derived from DIRBE maps. iii)the intensity at any point is found by scaling it by the 100 um emission, and assuming it has a B(T)lambda^-2 emissivity for other wavelengths. iv) 5 - 16 um PAH emission is added on by adopting a single ISM emission spectrum, matched to the 12um DIRBE waveband. The main problem with this method for our Galactic disk observations is that the IRAC band emission is not expected to be well correlated with the 100 um emission and thus SPOT understimates cirrus background. One potential way to proceed is to 1)Use MSX A band images Bandwidth = 3.36 um at 8.28 um MSX images are zody subtracted. 2)Find a "typical" Galactic disk 5-16 um spectrum 3)Find ratios of IRAC_1/MSX_A, IRAC_2/MSX_A etc for typical spectrum 4)Estmate IRAC backgrounds from MSX_A background emission. As a very rough first guess (and I mean guess!) I estimated the cirrus background at gal long = 30, gal lat = 0 from SPOT as IRAC_4 = 159 My/sr I obtained the 30 0 ga MSX A band image from IRSA and subtracted sources using the following IDL routines (these are guestimated parameters) ; input FITS file filename = 'msxmapA30.fit' ; read file + header from Goddard IDL Library image = READFITS(filename, Header) ; remove points above 3 sigma from Goddard IDL Library ; sigimage = sigma_filter( image, 15, N_sigma=3, /MON, /ITER) ; smooth image ; result = filter_image(sigimage, SMOOTH = 15, /ALL) ;smooth ; write fits file fits_write,'results30.fits',result,Header I also tried an FFT low pass filter: ; input FITS file filename = 'msxmapA30.fit' ; read file + header from Goddard IDL Library image = READFITS(filename, Header) ; code scammed from IDL FFT filter demo imagesize = SIZE(image) nx = imagesize[1] ny = imagesize[2] distfun = double( DIST(nx)) distfun[0] = 1d-4 order = 3 cutoff = 21 filter = EXP(-(distfun / cutoff)^order) imagetrans = (FFT(image, -1)) filteredImage = FLOAT(FFT(imagetrans * filter, 1)) fits_write,'results30fft.fits',filteredImage,Header These both give about 1-1.2 x 10^-5 W/m^2/sr at long = 30, lat = 0 For a bandwidth of 3.36 microns this gives approx 68 - 82 MJy/sr for MSX_A band. Since MSX_A band is rather close in wavelength and bandwith to IRAC_4 these should be comparable. For some reason SPOT is giving 2 to 3 times higher background than MSX, but this could be due to my crude approximations or due to improper averaging. Mark From - Wed Feb 7 15:10:34 2001 Received: from dustem.astro.umd.edu (mwolfire@dustem.astro.umd.edu [129.2.14.31]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f17L3rS565219 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:03:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (mwolfire@localhost) by dustem.astro.umd.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1/WLS8.9s) with ESMTP id QAA06428; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:03:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:03:45 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Wolfire To: Barbara Whitney cc: brian@sal.wisc.edu, Marilyn Meade , Chip , Michael Wolff Subject: Re: Data flow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Too bad I wasn't there to comment on "GLIMPSE". What does this stand for? and who is responsible for it? I think that if you have not yet read through the MSX point source Catalog Explanatory Guide V1.2 - you really need to do so. see http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/ipac/msx/msx.html . This gives the complete overview of their pipeline. Comments.. B.2.g)..subtact from frame, based on favorite model, [observation date], and position in sky. C.1. I thought we were to do a type of (rapid) aperture photometry (DAOPHOT ?) on the BSC thereby skipping both zody subtraction and high-pass filtering (maybe this was changed though on Saturday). There is no problem with doing zody subtraction here, but filtering takes a lot of time. D.3. Point 1 Zody subtracted here right? Point2 Now do high pass filtering. Note that in my Zodiacal Light notes I mention the MSX filtering scheme. Really a type of median subtraction filter or "cascade average" filter. Point 3 photometery on sources. Level E Web modeling Tools should not be a part of the pipeline. -Modifications for SIRTF are to be a joint effort between our team and Neal's team with Lee Mundy at UMD First Order Products: 1)Extend the model parameter range to lower Luminosity and Lower Teff appropriate for brown dwarfs L = 0.01 L_0, Teff = 1500 K, bracket and fill in the ``new'' spectral classes. 2)Add in Av = 0 spectral energy distributions. 3))Create new SIRTF specific modules: i)Convert units to common SIRTF values (microns, Jy). ii)For each IRAC band plot model intensities I vs source size arcsec. Convolve model sources (at user input distances) with the IRAC filters and (cleaned?) PSFs. iii)Enter IRAC observations in viewer and search for best fit models iv)Repeat for MIPs filters. 3)Simple fitting tools i)Estimate total shell mass from MIPS, single T fits from band ratios, power law dust emissivities from T and SEDs. Second Order Products: i)2-D analysis. Enter map and find radial profile from data. Subrtract off model profiles to find goodness of fit. Third Order Products: TBD i)Add disk emission ii)Add PAH emission to spherical code iii)Add additional large grain models iv)Add PAH emission to PDR code and show IRAC bands from face-on and side-on PDRs Mark From - Wed Feb 7 15:20:56 2001 Received: from spot.colorado.edu (spot.Colorado.EDU [128.138.129.2]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f17LK3S564074 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:20:03 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (bwhitney@localhost) by spot.colorado.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3/ITS-5.0/standard) with SMTP id OAA04411; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:20:00 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:20:00 -0700 (MST) From: Barbara Whitney To: Mark Wolfire cc: brian@sal.wisc.edu, Marilyn Meade , Chip , Michael Wolff Subject: Re: Data flow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Hi Mark, thanks for the clarifications. We didn't remember when the high-pass filtering came in, and obviously got it wrong. We'll take a look at the MSX thing. GLIMPSE stands for Galactice Legacy Infrared Mid Plane Survey Extraordinaire, (or something that starts with an E). Chip thought it up. With our short exposures, we're just going for glimpse of the inner galaxy, see. It's not set in stone. If you are feeling creative, feel free to come up with something else. We also came up with a logo though there's some disagreement on that--it consists of wedges of cheese, but some quiet people who didn't speak up at the meeting later confessed they were tired of the cheese association, and I myself would prefer a glider (a plane with long wings) representing the galactic plane--the glider pilot could wear a cheesehead. -barb On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Mark Wolfire wrote: > Too bad I wasn't there to comment on "GLIMPSE". What does > this stand for? and who is responsible for it? > > I think that if you have not yet read through the MSX point source > Catalog Explanatory Guide V1.2 - you really need to do so. > see http://www.ipac.caltech.edu/ipac/msx/msx.html . This gives > the complete overview of their pipeline. > > Comments.. > B.2.g)..subtact from frame, based on favorite model, [observation > date], and position in sky. > C.1. I thought we were to do a type of (rapid) aperture photometry > (DAOPHOT ?) on the BSC thereby skipping both zody subtraction and > high-pass filtering (maybe this was changed though on Saturday). There > is no problem with doing zody subtraction here, but filtering takes > a lot of time. > D.3. Point 1 Zody subtracted here right? > Point2 Now do high pass filtering. Note that in my Zodiacal Light > notes I mention the MSX filtering scheme. Really a type of median > subtraction filter or "cascade average" filter. > Point 3 photometery on sources. > > > Level E Web modeling Tools should not be a part of the pipeline. > > -Modifications for SIRTF are to be a joint effort between our > team and Neal's team with Lee Mundy at UMD > > First Order Products: > 1)Extend the model parameter range to lower Luminosity and Lower Teff > appropriate for brown dwarfs L = 0.01 L_0, Teff = 1500 K, bracket > and fill in the ``new'' spectral classes. > 2)Add in Av = 0 spectral energy distributions. > 3))Create new SIRTF specific modules: > i)Convert units to common SIRTF values (microns, Jy). > ii)For each IRAC band plot model intensities I vs source size > arcsec. Convolve model sources (at user input distances) with the > IRAC filters and (cleaned?) PSFs. > iii)Enter IRAC observations in viewer and search for best fit > models > iv)Repeat for MIPs filters. > 3)Simple fitting tools > i)Estimate total shell mass from MIPS, single T fits from band ratios, > power law dust emissivities from T and SEDs. > > Second Order Products: > i)2-D analysis. Enter map and find radial profile from data. > Subrtract off model profiles to find goodness of fit. > > Third Order Products: TBD > i)Add disk emission > ii)Add PAH emission to spherical code > iii)Add additional large grain models > iv)Add PAH emission to PDR code and show IRAC bands from face-on > and side-on PDRs > > Mark > > From - Thu Feb 8 17:20:05 2001 Received: from dustem.astro.umd.edu (mwolfire@dustem.astro.umd.edu [129.2.14.31]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f18NIHS614106 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 17:18:17 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (mwolfire@localhost) by dustem.astro.umd.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1/WLS8.9s) with ESMTP id SAA08110; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:18:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:18:14 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Wolfire To: Barbara Whitney cc: Michael Wolff , brian@sal.wisc.edu, Marilyn Meade , Chip Subject: Re: data reduction/database working group In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Mosaicing stuff.... > Mark: quick lit search on algorithms for mosaicing and resampling, refs > for papers the rest of us would find useful. could start with drizzling > algorithm used for WFPC. what software is publicly available? Promised from SSC: (SSC Pipeline overview IRAC p.8 - already mentioned by Barb and others) 1)Reconstruct on a fine pixel scale grid in a manner similar to DRIZZLE in order to avoid unnecessary aliasing with large IRAC pixels 2)Will be flux conserving 3)Will have latent image and CR rejection 4)Be written in a scalable and controllable manner to allow end-users to reprocess their own data 5)Will include postion reconstruction and correction of gometric distortion with proper regridding onto a tangential projection 6)Will match backgrounds between frames. The mosaicer will not do background removal. 7)No widets or GUI DRIZZLE: 1)Disscused in "The Dither Handbook" http://www.stsci.edu/instruments/wfpc2/drizzle.html Chapter 4 "How the Drizzle Algorithm Works" Chapter 5 "Using Drizzle General Overview" 2)Available as on IRAF add on through STSDAS V2.2 dither package stsdas.analysis.dither 3)drizzle is written in FORTRAN F77! (I am astonished!) In our distribution it is found in: ....iraf/extern/stsdas/pkg/analysis/dither/drizzle/drizzle.f 4)More info is found on "Andy's Dithering Page" http://www-int.stsci.edu/~fruchter/dither/ NOAO Mosaicing: (from a tip from Brian and Barb) 1)http://iraf.noao.edu/iraf-help.html ->images ->e.g., immatch 2)From the IRAF help files which might narrow down the important packages (??) cl.images: imcoords - Image coordinates package imfilter - Image filtering package imfit - Image fitting package imgeom - Image geometric transformation package immatch - Image matching and combining package imutil - Image utilities package cl.images.immatch: geomap - Compute geometric transforms using matched coordinatelists geotran - Transform 1-D or 2-D images using various mappinng transforms geoxytran - Transform coordinate lists using the geomap transforms gregister - Register 1-D or 2-D images using the geomap transforms imalign - Align and register 2-D images using a reference pixel list imcentroid - Compute and print relative shifts for a list of 2-D images imcombine - Combine images pixel-by-pixel using various algorithms linmatch - Match the linear intensity scales of 1-D or 2-D images psfmatch - Match the point-spread functions of 1-D or 2-D images skymap - Compute geometric transforms using the image celestial wcs skyxymatch - Generate matched pixel lists using the image celestial wcs sregister - Register 1-D or 2-D images using the image celestial wcs wcscopy - Copy the wcs from one image to another wcsmap - Compute geometric transforms using the image wcs wcsxymatch - Generate matched pixel lists using the image wcs wregister - Register 1-D or 2-D images using the image wcs xregister - Register 1-D or 2-D images using x-correlation techniques xyxymatch - Match pixel coordinate lists 3)Most (all ?) appear to be written in C 4)NOAO Mosaic Data Handling System http://iraf.noao.edu/projects/ccdmosaic/ It is not clear to me how available this is. The package "mscred" is not found on our distribution. MIRIAD: Mosiacing routines are here, but I rather doubt that they are applicable. IDL: MOSAIC Image processing Package written by Frank Varosi (A very nice guy I know who used to be at Goddard now at Florida, Gainesville) http://idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/ftp/contrib/varosi/mosaic/README Imaging Tools: (I know we are not doing these now but they are kinda neat to play with) 1)ds9: (replacemnt for SAOimage, and SAOtng which are no longer supported). http://hea-www.harvard.edu/RD/ds9/ -supports ``NOAO IRAF Mosaic Data Structures'' - Tk/Tcl application 2)karma image processing library http://www.atnf.csiro.au/karma/ -supports simple RGB overlays kview-rgb -written in C Mark From - Sat Feb 17 12:48:24 2001 Received: from dustem.astro.umd.edu (mwolfire@dustem.astro.umd.edu [129.2.14.31]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f1CKmlS887893 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 14:48:47 -0600 (CST) Received: from localhost (mwolfire@localhost) by dustem.astro.umd.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1/WLS8.9s) with ESMTP id PAA13121; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:48:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:48:44 -0500 (EST) From: Mark Wolfire To: Barbara Whitney cc: Michael Wolff , brian@sal.wisc.edu, Marilyn Meade , Chip Subject: Re: data reduction/database working group In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Whoops! I forgot ISO. How could I forget ISO? http://www.iso.vilspa.esa.es/archive/software/ <- all IDL though In the ISOPHOT Interactive Analysis Package (PIA) there appears to be a DRIZZLE thing which might be of some help. -> PIA -> PIA Libraries -> PIA routines MAPAAP2DRIZZLE PURPOSE: Make Drizzle Script for IRAF from ISOPHOT / PIA / IAAP - Map Data I also registered to download the ISOCAM software. It is just a cgi-bin request form. Mark From - Mon Feb 19 09:09:29 2001 Received: from mail1.doit.wisc.edu (mail1.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.9.40]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f1JEw3N1302643; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:58:03 -0600 (CST) Received: from [128.104.221.176] by mail1.doit.wisc.edu id IAA88562 (8.9.1/50); Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:57:52 -0600 Message-ID: <3A913588.4AB95605@wisp.physics.wisc.edu> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:02:33 -0600 From: Bob Benjamin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ed Churchwell , Chip Kobulnicky Subject: Saturation histogram Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------715B416CA0B9438015BEACE8" X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------715B416CA0B9438015BEACE8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi guys, I've written the code to read in the MSX point source catalog into IDL, and can now work with that information to estimate the number of point sources that will saturate the detector. The histogram I'm attaching (as a gif file) was derived by taking all of the MSX point sources in a one degree square centered on the Galactic plane, and calculating how many sources (in Band A) there are that were greater than a certain flux cutoff (t=2 sec was 300 mJy, t=12 sec was 50 mJy). For a few selected areas, I could do histograms of number of sources in each flux bin to estimate completeness, but look over the attached figure and tell me what you think. Is this good or bad? Bob --------------715B416CA0B9438015BEACE8 Content-Type: image/gif; x-mac-type="47494666"; x-mac-creator="6F676C65"; name="msxsat.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Description: Unknown Document Content-Disposition: inline; filename="msxsat.gif" R0lGODdhgAIAAvcAAAAAAAQAAwkABw0AChIADhYAExsAFx8AHCQAICgAJi0AKzIAMDoAOz0A P0AAREQASEUATUgAUUoAVk0AW08AX1AAZFIAaFMAbVQAdlYAelcAf1gAhFYAiFcAjVcAkVcA llUAmlQAn1QAo1QAqE8AsU4Atk0AukwAv0cAw0YAyEQAzEIA0TwA1joA2jcA3y4A6CsA7CgA 8SQA9SEA+hkA/xUA/xAA/wwA/wQA/wAA/wAE/wAQ/wAV/wAZ/wAd/wAm/wAq/wAu/wAz/wA3 /wA//wBD/wBI/wBU/wBZ/wBd/wBh/wBq/wBu/wBy/wB3/wB//wCD/wCH/wCM/wCY/wCd/wCh /wCl/wCu/wCy/wC2/wC7/wDD/wDH/wDL/wDY/wDc/wDh/wDl/wDp/wDy/wD2/wD6/wD//wD/ 9gD/8gD/7gD/4QD/3AD/2AD/1AD/ywD/xwD/wwD/vwD/uwD/sgD/rgD/qgD/nQD/mAD/lAD/ kAD/hwD/gwD/fwD/ewD/cgD/bgD/agD/ZgD/WQD/VAD/UAD/TAD/QwD/PwD/OwD/NwD/LgD/ KgD/JgD/GQD/FQD/EAD/DAD/CAD/AAT/AAj/AAz/ABX/ABn/AB3/ACr/AC7/ADP/ADf/AD// AEP/AEj/AEz/AFD/AFn/AF3/AGH/AG7/AHL/AHf/AHv/AIP/AIf/AIz/AJD/AJn/AJ3/AKH/ AKX/ALL/ALb/ALv/AL//AMf/AMv/AND/ANT/AN3/AOH/AOX/APL/APb/APr/AP//AP/6AP/y AP/uAP/pAP/lAP/dAP/YAP/UAP/HAP/DAP+/AP+7AP+yAP+uAP+qAP+lAP+hAP+ZAP+UAP+Q AP+DAP9/AP97AP93AP9uAP9qAP9mAP9hAP9ZAP9VAP9QAP9MAP8/AP87AP83AP8zAP8qAP8m AP8iAP8dAP8VAP8RAP8MAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8A AP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP8AAP///ywAAAAAgAIAAgcI/wABCBxIsKDBgwgTKlzIsKHD hxAjSpxIsaLFixgzatzIsaPHjyBDihxJsqTJkyhTqlzJsqXLlzBjypxJs6bNmzhz6tzJs6fP n0CDCh1KtKjRo0iTKl3KtKnTp1CjSp1KtarVq1izat3KtavXr2DDih1LtqzZs2jTql3Ltq3b t3Djyp1Lt67du3jz6t3Lt6/fv4ADCx5MuLDhw4gTK17MuLHjx5AjS54M8t/Af5gvY7asebPn z6BDix5NurTp06hTq17NurXr17Bjy55Nu7bt27hz62ZtkDOAzZ1918z8+7JAzsJ9Kzd+nHnx 5tCXQ39OXXp159azY5+unft27+Cvh/+X3l28+fLovz9PP149+/PM38t3Tx/8/Pb44edHXl+/ //viAfjecfxFNx1NlhVYXHL9CbhfgxA+aKCE/0VY4YQXZuigfRZuqGF8HYZIIXkifjjidx6m GKGK4S3oHYMIYpggQSzqV+ONKJaIo4Q7mnhhj0CeKKSPJA4ZJH5HEpmjkfUpOKNzMn0W4IFH JrmjlTouqSSTPGbJ5Y9ebgnml1jKGGaVZ2Ln2ZTU2eQkhmJ2V2acZKbZZZ14sklnnkXu6Wef c7IYqJdJgjihcMN1FhyNJiEqkqOVnQTpR5NS+uiljWaqKUmVetQpR44qR9xvwCn16Uanorop p6uOlGpFr1L/FCtGs1pUq62tYsqqV7fKKmmuIfU6kbDDQiQlQ8Q2lGxEyz7UrLPARlrSs0ZR i+yv02K7a7bQHnhQqdJyu+24upIb7FfWUuaUdQg9qS5e6Q615rtjsdsbuPTKNW9X8eaLlL29 temvvugOXC+U3wps8Fv9BtXwwkIBXJC7EDNccMW8IhzwwxhDxbFPH3e8k8SMhizyUiaPfPJW JBuX8spHvZyTzDBHqfHECtdMFs038ayzSy035/PPIF9M9FRBu3h0WUPHuLRUSVP8NFhNz1T1 1Nt+KjXW/KKLL9f/3rwo2FztWzbZTUWdM9pXXR2T22yDKrbLcZ+dcd1he7sx3lrB//2S33zj qjfOgAcebduGF6V24Wdp/TXVRifu8NxCD6z14Hd3LXnElCtN7+MJ30scuKDnrfnmQC2+c+kq IQcazgF77i7jGtHeOuqTY073wWvfTuqxmK8ppe1yZ457T4uPKq/Zxfae0qmV8rdc0vJ6rfzx OAUtfLWdX+s8SqW/PnGppF8fM+tWEY996N/PqL5D1C+kIMzvH76+0+17Xr3u8PMPcf3iut/M Ouc+7vnPewBkSwJdJUCV+a+AojMf/pY1v5UtsFwNjNK+Lrc181htgxep4MkueK4M4o9RCoEg 7L63EkhR8IAGI2G4TPg29rVLf+qxmg2bJ8PGRY6Gf9vh3v9c2D3frRB4CPxZDz0FRJvFLiEq RCELjSjF+MHJgj9sIkuImEIctsiJ4yNdt3qFxMUssSNnnEsZB/jEG3YwO8x7XreUBcMnphFl 1rujW+CIvi0KkUbA4aJ/WjjHJErEin6JY1b0CJcBgVGKbsyZI+XYv0qSsYiCYSSt+CYqMSaq jQl7Y38IWUk6TtGOj9FkCDkpP0WScoWRFGR5Xuk9U16yjoFRpeDqFivACTKW7JslFeU3xuad MpdZJFsvH0lAL2aIlsS0pDF1qbhkgm2ZNQTlEIOZw2F2UZqHxCQyjcc2bMLkl6GsDgi/SElT 2nKaqbQm18wZRG0SzoOj9CYUixn/TlwChpq+whs9gfbHkuEzP9D85jv7ecx/yhNrAz2kK0sJ yXRKTJjtrKUhmSVOh/Kqj0SLKEf9ac9ObW9wfJTgtyZK0WgudKQN5QtLqwJQtYjUWB0tqSJV KMuConKXGo3mLWOayIdO7aZzTNbltonSm70KkTds6TeHWlPOkRNtSC2lUl1q0Is6VaurlOo+ iXrQxFQVpnHLqju3qtCufrWpaw2rO9s1L6rG86rKLCQ8YeXS0JTVq3EFKleFaFfHnBWnAtUr Q9k61uvMjpv2hCxfxVrR9q2TrDI16tPUWkvGRtWxf30rXT052bkStq/dVMxhFZtXyiZVsD91 EWAl2dac/0bWp3pb6iDNqNmlcRa1pf3s9EKL0jiik6FB1aZuMWrW3h7ttwr1rGR5KtnPijag plUucMuKmNW6FqKsRSxmH7idx8bWunANo0rFqdtmIpS3H12vb8P72uBC9qS0JS8sRevCmVZ2 v/l772H8izRWfjew2BUu3Wbb3vRWEbdQ3OltKcQY72a3tRcWr3RjS93znrak1zVmZZeb2ubi 9Zr0Bat9OSy76n4YwMRdscJIzE4Tny6tKUawiKfbYg9rF8QO3nFutwvVv1g4uRhGMrI2SODf yRc+5j3iYPMr5QlfOFREtm1fjjzlJHdZyZg053AZPOXjxjjBGqMxdwfs3NY1ef8t0IXxfyH8 4MqRubZUrrOcWYvl6Ja4u21uJ5fN1VjxorfQWY6yng9t5tmiech+rjGgT3xOLZslznMOc31l y98y/zGlL/xxY5m7xi0HGnzBGbSlDnzoPbu6ypxOr+PI9+k/C3nGqW7QZa9W6qSoerS0M/P5 QApbRB/4qfXFb0/BCWPmPhrXQ9Izry09M2JDLXt0tup4I2xtss5avmJecKeZ/V9nT9O4JZI2 QUn6k19nO6HbNtabsduvoRr6y7jUjqJtHbtG8xumJk13PgXtsVNrK9NopLaKi4fWHCM83HYe 90vL/W8NR/qZA0c1u4tG6Xq+WlUbt3jCketwykE81lT/xqa/Jb1XBVM449o6rLut3BJhM7G4 3QYkaUHecFabfNMdhvVGKc7yxV58krsl+FNm/nE/0rx2Er93yPGcYXz3+7KdFbes+dnsim+a xwJOOref/HWmMB3h6256Ru7c83i/W+1wf1O+yxtjlde66ABP4a5LbG4f07vgHU872nm+7LbX +9Zg7rfX27NvvKNw5Ws2et5rDOrtylXmBgfWy9gudbc//fNxD7vLUV74JUuwk6Mq8sWBHnX3 ej7yBrzxCRUucqHz+eZtTzzs+g7roC96l6W/vOSdHHwClW/nwAe87HUIeuH7HcmHJ7nPzTT3 F9Ud6lvHPlERqbYglxbz8Q32/9udb3uxRj/3Vt/94gMUyNZ/38XJn7yO4f961Y8s50vHNuh7 vfr1l3veVKd7rRZVvKduCSJhU1d+sFd7Zdd/fkct9oc8mRdA7GVbnJdjEIh46fd466dv8/d+ z9dyDThqlkd7/pc6E0hoYtZkF3hs2td5AmgoC0gfqRKBDwiADph1Czd6g7eDZpeCDLR/79aC VZeAPdh8FSh2o9dBISh/WTN8OkiCSCiF6wKEGFR9akeEupeB0leE6ud4NKgsOMiDQbh9SRhg eRZ/VRh4Nfd2NqeA9tdgMhaDQqiEPNY0NgiFY6OAZPiA2gd+y8dMWHiEWph+XIh+ARg6BRiG ryQzgP9VfFTYh/VngvoXiNkUep9HhKUmh8/WWTNld2DIeE73eh+4HvQnib9nhCfYblZYQpiY he53ZuOXiHqHfHW4iKLYiDGniKfYi5T3h8pnN27ihkMYi442i8Y2h0mIi1A2io74VpCIinwH jPkXfp/0ioRojCE2hQOogdXHjOSBf4S3i4rXhHw4jWtHiQgijmlTiUeYhpGIjvAIdxuIgVzH fXSni5vCRdHoi381hqvIcZZYaXUIi9kHh/XohTC4jB2Yj0bkiAjYj+bYfX9XjQPpce/4hql4 fcb3ZIe4SbT4hTOYiw/JfBJ5jnjHWIAojNeYkcV4kOo2fXTohaA4ks2oj9n/dJIbuZMKl4c6 cXbqiHsumYnaGIrHhIDpGJIcaJT6Rna4VzgiZJMUyYkj6GutOENnmI0wCXPEOI+dyJBMSXc+ 45PFo5P/RpEi+INsOIpDaZApB3YKKYPvuIX3eIZjVpJOZJYp6XppiUe+xmSARI8ah42atpWi 15UauZDf2JDWN5ZBCZJ6CXtoqYd+SXwI45RtWDlwoj6JuY2SyHZxFpXWQpW8GJaNiZc56Y88 uZcguIYP1ifXWCQwMowFqZVvyWIyKZo8143lKJViiZpbVFeqeZafqIbtGJNR+TZvMpvic4lt aZuQCI5cN5eGWJf5RhqkWJUHZ5jxCFv8Z5Q80ZwE/2J9j5lwwxWQFDiIhXmbvVdyV6SKfClU 6Kl1g+k2fYaS+Cl1UxmMu6M/72Ne88OZn4Z16xmdjDlxQbmJ1hlvUbSPGMmd0ih9+2mRBnUo tNljAeqOEteZHNmeuel9SYmJzAhMSpeZRHeUCTqR5cl8oGWhw3F8e5idDHeix9idHRqaIAqS IjqfEVeibAmhK8WOjOZ6gMhkqFeZLbmhL8meMRmX7ymjOVqaNkmi9fmgTJpQE+qaLDl7B8mh mnigQ7eiXimlPtmg4kJGAJlmw3mFWXqcFyl4SkqU3Cmd5CamHGqK4GlRwKmdUhWZWCmZYuqc LKOhXbqkBmqaCAqfQPZSZf/qTGVYWCvmp6u2mlOKgmsJb4XnpUXpm3WKc5jZdczWqEyoK5D6 nQAmqULJmlAqiItEqOypqXMKpvK5qPYGlpXKVFUKP3unnlfqTW2qlm9qojTqmfQHmu6Jp6Dq bbkWqrRnpk9ofrLaqxmlqivJMkLqisMapQhZqB86j3GoZXLnba/jmLxqh6JGqebyq/9yrY2S pkr5o9zqlpm6q06KrNnqhAtaq6PqiiJFp//HriF6loFKkD2DKAArmNsZr9AZTEiJo94KrhD7 H8VZobl6ZdEKQEeqX6sqqCyKjMnIsa8apOBGrGuKopYJpDm4UcAzmfsaLv16sQ4EbTZqlZeq T5n/anU1OrNduZHfunHJKbAUS44Wi6gDS41oR5au+qKfqphwqrC4lbMRSpgdyoDT6Y8Gu7Ep e3ecSp17iobV2jOOWmwge7O0CLUlG1GFmLVTVYKg1LKT+rJEq6j8amVIC7Yq47ZdOLZwyZtm a47P+Ys+G7Fqhl54i0Zv1l+2aGwYm2YNy58Fe7DcmJ4hW7Yk67fLqrhqkrhRiFjLhZSaGZ7H ep+VGHCWuz+gO6lJ6rQT1rf5KbIri5sIe6v2qrUVVbgEO5Oia7fOg6oCuaUdG6cfC7ilWJFN yrWy+7MgerUX1Es7hW4/+XOlq23VBrnqlbqTG7zncbgJ6ryy6IOdmqyP/9d+EtiFpMtGu1uy IEO9l2K7xzqtqutqI8qjtXen6CqlrYZO7Nu0Q8ubl1i+9Wu6A5S/9eq+18u3AVm3UUi/B9xH kPe5rtK8oFOr/LO4E4y+lnp/DSOgtBqfHoqvc6utOhuwISbAxMuzt+a/uovCTOmu9kNTrkq2 2Bu/edqaiPupCEy7l4m12zqmVKfCsdnDdnm6z4utXFrAT3vARVu8O/sxDRy2I/eqY/iGFHy+ 0XvDf3qhqFvEMGzAMyy7LUea0XvCO2S7o+G96gSwUhyzPoyPckvEj7u0MknAW3zEXWzFVAjG rStj+Guy8uqx0PeuQMNSr4uFCQSUbTyjwMvFx/+bxFxJyFeYhmRsqH7cZT4cMwdayFeZxe/7 cEh8yHeckF4MrW3LxwsbuZQMyBfMxjr8gtkjnjpqvXO8up28yo3Mx0yMw5EspzwMKwQau2oc xDFrvsiLiPoby/A7y5sHtMPLykGWy31symZ8uZaMqJj8y6TIwqm6ydC7yJ68hKBsxycavpkB t5ubxFakS/76n+obLAeYnRqcrKZavj1Ly4fpyG4MyZLUy6fEujqKbDS7tdUsxE8Myx4rzxFL z+Z6lNgMxKNszP68y/0cx0MM0AI9vZrMqoOMiDIcysyiz8ZbhuHsTKRmxiFzzgttoqoc0AEM pe8ctYo8z9OGygmLzw7/TdKPmrcCmdIVDbYkDMoE/L/HXMeMHJK208SiJLxsu8qqp0fpvNPD 2NMyPZjAJsFKHM0tXNS4bMR1VHmkitPjS9HBbNHZzKqI3MFU+9NDbXhjrNX7LL9nPZMpDMwT 7btkvZuw+9Yz/dGPvMc1jWDPyG5MfclOrUGuLMK/O9a17NKPrNf3zNeXy8/1/MS3EtjUPNgT hNi3e9GJbcEDPcmNvdZf6tdC274XqtNhHdeGC8eEVtZVvcySy9hXzI/iK60PDc6K7ctgZNpv LMTnZ72svdlhjNndLFch3Xjdq3Opl9a3StlgPddi3dmHDd2tXc5oPdzF5tixmoy2zdnMrdvm /0vXIPvbkT3V+gvbF53Rn3uo96vcSx17UePRRYwVLa3Z4+3cEeRLJWjcfcu7JSzRP6yx5r3a iKO7VwzcSevZ4v1F+l25/N2XcF3aHIzQYjvgWEzfCf3GmLbY3bTg2trglPng/42GAQ7Sg1oZ 7FjSRye9pJ3aHpnDob3e1h3cEv62Ea7SJb5qVJ3gG22lAyzctsfhPOzhHgzilw3gyq2MH6Ta Pc653rh23Lvd90zkdt1/BxjBDM7ZrbniRS7iR/6VOgTV2BtWOa7JO17ePu3jv1eDVy7jWe7f W86JNs7TLF1CY57NZS6sWj7l8ajmnpq7XSwrONjdNW7ZX87S6/ykUv8uZHcOr0ue4FVGYJMp rQSubZE+4x2t5G6WwXTe5GW96PCW6Ia95659skKe1zktzZVb19Gt59hX59Dt6foE6q+c36OO 3Fj+6ae+qCOu4avOzCDn6qAinH9u5lEt3WTI55MY446OwaeHw5NesFGelMCO424d62du7C6G 7Ie4vI990lKd6uG9joeOtcPMv9IC69Ud5iRO5bVu1SGO7t8OwuS97q167pxO7cOO527O6tne 7v5OsEh32hB960yrnOPOMeWO4AGFeks07dHuYdputNZ84RUu7wSf5xXL75B57zeHzhxf4P1O 3f0tzAYe3Qqc7/ue8b7e6h9flqbS8mi+4f//ntSoTfEEzY1Qruwh2tsj5/A9//JeLeAQP/Nq ++bVLscFzcgLNO5O1vEwz/L/XPC8/ujEVrc5P471ffOxu93eThQIH7i+4/FBT+/HTvQhbPQo j6lJr/OF3PXWnfDQPFliT8xkH/I0/+E1D++Sos+Q+vAVP+suP/b4bjpS7/dpbva3DfAlD+E4 r/QXrPFi/vTSDvR0P/WHL/IOnvdH74xrT8syxPOBX/lOn77N6fMhBN9Dj/l4z/g2P7qdbzJt j+nXXrUpLzgkdJ+mr4YnB0NW3+U0vPk4abxXb8jkDvaUdPtsnsyV3YO9r/NGq/ddq6xsH55+ xcqmGqa1L/esmMe4/y1/uz9FzW/pNIz6vP36Qp/bqdqo0n/82w/Uws+Cgs386nj1Eq/waXfy HJ39Z5r+zWr8Gof8AAFAoMB/AwsORJhQ4UGFDREyZOjQ4ESCEhdSxGgRokWOCTd2BBlSZMOP EiOORJlSZMmHKlmqBHkS5syQL2lmBGAz5j+eB2XGvAnTZ1CiNS9WTPmzo06SGJU2RYrTIdOk UotedcrxKVauLaN6RUn16tauM3uW7Tn068qjYcsuXfu2qEyxJl1ahZoTb16fZ+HGFZpWLte6 ZAcT1WmYr1zBhx3fPFl3atuRiruqfRyU7l6NdwEv/gyac9bMpdmGRm1aqFXLHkcjVu2yMf/W yK/z2qZcGnPsqq5TT+6tl+Bs0sKBrlUsmXfmwsvnsvZsnLFztgVbny5eObfR2MSpHwd7Hbdv 4zZLtn6ZfPx3tKPFsyf/8315x/NVW5f+PHz09f3hL9/st9uwO68t5aKq7a/8/mPOPQajk8+7 zgSE7MGprLNvwuyw829BCxkM0EMFtUNQqgK5y089Cj+ELbUM4WtOo9leRJHFxxIUUavtwLMR RAP5I3BD+lZMDzwaezRSRySVzNHFAdtjcasjcTqQvA6nXJKmtEKcr8viuByvSAWxzFI04Mo0 80krO3TLRqXITPHKHUdE0zQp5QzuxP2IpDLJOglz8E+PJFxzRzj/z4wSIp4A3bPNhwhFVNAb NfQyT6ca03PMQtOUVMtAO3U00hXNytKvy+IDctNHTQX1sDtHxXNI3zLVyjsVm2wVRbIO7TFC Vtkk8UNeL1xU1mDVBCvXSe2CtVlZ5SvRWYN+PXNYNGNUlsdPL6MWRGuTNZbDOYHNNtQfgws2 sWhxrZFZdsutlkl43QV33LGWLPYtHCsVVdV573WX33She7bFWrv9l1J5Ex7U1F0RNhjJb/dN tV5/Ga4w4Io1BQyzKjXEmFFcv+0Vt4mvHZZidO19N2RzUV1ZV0I9Jrdmlzm9OOQDT64zX/2E 1DZnkv99teWc+wWO1tVupm1bpoFGNmKU/wGGeuH4Znz6Z5zpbHdCpTfO2lKQw955urAj/Ziz Las+u+tGK4M06qO+jrltR3e1O1x6Re41blLfFtfPvOtmO+i9vZ4W4mMHh1txo+ctW99S9eJV 5Zc5ZnxxmP82PGmzM5fc7sihlJjyUwF3m8mhIVfY09RJctx10Ek/e/TTJcbw9nU1x3x2rlG/ HGkAfaedbJM/ZxzTWIMk/vfCnZdbt9ibD/7mtTvXcvrv/OZ898B7p17utFm22LnVBz8/W55L x49vvbHXOPzDgeddeN7SF11++zNm//F2x/ff+/TXpOt1z2rUwV/bEtiq9ZWsfU2j3wFVN8Do UQ1696uflbTHOv8Klk9qbvKZBQUoQRltcHbpQ8+DrmOYfC0qhExbIKgaiL7NZbCDYHPf2LZn Q9N5D4Y3tNn8LOTCytXwe0DEIQTh152VFGtLEYFWw/rixBeWKYadmmGU1NZCLvrMcjxE4uty KMThHbFQERqOYAC4QyQ20GFdTCBV+jKk3WDIYUkM4xJFqEMEpquAcTLJA6X1nytKan1z/Mhu 6pO7pD1QkBuJYvXyKEYlXpCJZkzWUyBZkTX2sY2fQ+REoHgf7mzyUsQR2CQJpzsSMuePS6li eCSEKb+Y0EefHMsrhWPKQa7yXD0sUSTBqEoyEoZ7hdwfMYP4NF/FUlsFGmWDeJTIrwj/cnnK xGToinlJbPJRf5HMUDSjpUhXxW0z1BRlBdXZTQ8ib53SZCexnOk7cHLunBRBZiDf+CjXCDOb 8WynNpNpJ4BaEnT1XFpOsMZP1vmTkgXtZUIHqhuIepN4CMUje3SpGQ897I4VXQj3ikc+goL0 nXnDqC+FdSqHbi6fPzRfK7lp0oAedGt6VCFLo0c3iOYTb7ekaU0zl1JJElKkVWlpo15qPU9u k5RBFWrybmrQH7a0gJ3EZRmdWlKoRpSpv1QpM6ll1WUO0KcydeU8e9pBou5ErTA6qlvIClaa ntWiGOyqV13W1n9qtKzpNNRUgbhRu26VonkNYO0Ee1dC/pWT/2riax7VFVPGPjWvSy0ZXYe5 PUY2ba5GVOVktTpReHYVs25arGH92p7PRjCrSS3tSeuD2PLEFaag7StTW/s8tp7yrYP5aWMR y1MFppa05rNtdSBrXLMm7rfLUi10TctbZjKXpDu0Jmx268NJnnZ/3k1saKl7W9ei1a/Z5eh2 R5hVLVaWq9PlLkqtezSNdvZe6t3oDfNr1G6BF7wYI65iNZvbvXZUtuy91oGBS9sAG2/AD4Xh WBWsX0NO2JjPZWeDsxbZEv6XieqNp4d/518Gj/eruIWwbpd7o+RWWFCwxetlTVzgNLbQgPIF 8e1EvMfJXTe2QdVwdTt24/zlWGQ7zv+eLWFk4ZHWdcY6mxmRh+hYYFoMhVRerQyZzEogP5mG Eh3iE4toZCUiWcoJrjGJh+tl+YK5vZIjM9XM7OY/YXXBa46v/NCjxhMa2Mf82++Lc2Vnd3Y5 z+FL4WPx1WKgxFlrWI4xFiHNUTyvl3qBps+cw2sUR39w01Nm4KT5B19Lf3OCmibZLLf8PU2n edVN/S+jiRnkSytJ1pZl7Ypn+2dYv5qyn76zjA/dXIWh+tad6TSl6bvkIYdar002Ka2bF1z0 FjfZoxZ1mX2t1R23etBsHuqp+6ZQJcPl2rKL6iL7SzAtP5vLTh62qYvd53MTuUvHdulCl41a d48x2uCW6rz/rQhnXbtKwYReV71z2u9KQlXaFxX3ohWq08BKN1ZY+hqMewzsQsO71HqG3R1R TWX0apzH/MI40BRVbqB2u8TxBnlgR87wKrPb4LyGueA4LGiaP9rQH0f0clvNch0pvGIo/5lo vQ0+oJIa4QrU96roXfBgp7u8zPMzx4WrdWiD9Dz4Rp850cytF5rc54l9esazLT2i66vtYRTt qjB80bezeOKAMnrd9vxRZSudtlbHZtwBHm58kTzrmD45q5PO7qWr7+VZvzqxS0fzkq+94oZL OXefDvfHf7bxTQfhE+87X08net8TbDbXOV9pzwd+6g+ueph8rfaeU/DzLob84AMe/+5mxtDs qQc04/9ueZsCX/df5v1Kffx7zO3c46aNMuwpbFMPWzXqy6S96hE8/E1tvrjUV373Vb741N/e 2dzXtfmzLNXqp9/mSdG38/+NfvcrU/25nLvFy//+yyUG7HCvO4CSP0QLQLcTPbwLPysbP3sj vtWjP/GrPfLiN+1TtIWDwPd5kQHkvvuDFw2MucmjwJpjtgsUvP5rwO17QA8MulLJP05LQN/K vqM7wcF6wMvjwF9jvxfUPP6TJ7+rweNyONKDOBZMmRBUNuApwXjZvx/ctm5SwVorvGpLMh3E QB4UjSesNCbEwiHsnyJ6MyS0wl/aQlLTQiGkp8mRwjNjI//cSsIrNMMgZEIEuT7JsqIWxKlI W8Dci5/Di0Oc8zjmW0HCo0IfXLbsu0Gi6cMqtL+Nq5wCTLwlLMQ8PET1cUQnDEOzqsQLQ7yw Gi1JXCdDTETA+zlAhEIQ7Lo1BMOO8RtQDMUIpEPjQ4z/m8DdAzU2dBqXesOfK0NY7DudIUI7 NC883EEn2cMxhMM4bEPZmcQm1CYvHEThuytWbMVlPD9SFJyEmbkQdLkBwxY3lL4UTMRktCdf LDzKm0VPjEZ0nMZwvMSEosbTQ64i/EJ1tB9pDMV3lDReDD4A27hTbKpUHJnW4cNWNELxUsUC 9D4LzCyBUkjncr6iIcR7ZEdi7EX/fpQ4A4w1CGkle9TCTFxEitxHyPFIsgNG9xLGaxQfepxI ZHQPfEtI0GszKoQlx4FIaFzHPqySDJzBw8Idj9zGjvuSXHy+H8xJZSTHseOxEWRIXPxG+sNH 3DM9jbRIpDw7pTxFjsTJcLQtnXTFf+zHqly/q1TJrCTIzVJChjG2kjTJmRJLzZPFinrKDTPK qaTFhny3oCzLYMzLT3vJrVtIZ6zFpVSqvVzLvOTKggxLFRKzu0xMf0s4woyusqSLY9rJH5NJ sETFtgS6m4RMHcKWuERMlFFLfzxCMexMuTtNSuG7s+zAkdREwLRLxyyY1BRFzgwR1kTEctTG c2TM2aTN/650upBaN+DsxDeDTZgco/j7zcosqEAzRt0ct9FkxqSUs1l6y+EDzWkTyoWEzoZD Tm1bTrMMTxK8TquMycAknewUxPHkHWs0ReUrT+LMqLlkT6qqTwX0Q+6sRXIqze+Us/u0TwDV w9Bky4V7yZ9sRgEtzPvMu3lUzM0kMFxLTwWNzPrEr/i8udDrOQzFNh2jUCn60IOxMRusQ+lU FgSd0BCFRwVNwr4ESgG7TPJTUeaswRal0fmksRg1GPWsyxnFGXDiUNmUSwc9Mh+9UafkQfeU 0PPURBx1RyOVT4nkRSV9L+Q7nVTyUCjl0VLEr69kUgjC0iLVUijdQ/xc0QL9Nv+GGo4zLSUn lUoj3VLtnNLpZCUcWdNEaQl0ikD+DNDAcE2yJFNupLov9CI6wtNxqiazCdNAFcxAtdH8fK8R 3aUovRvAksPy5E/CYlTG2EQVfVQ2LSdbyQpxskBegtA24as4FbZNzUMz1U9oqs1dM1Tp4JlU ZVVZvdVPjdUqPRE+zTJ0IlVGsdVbjb1N1dUjfSbS8FVUfKNCDZ1hJdZGJdNjpVQwgyI44iAo wahOjVY3ZdEkpVMhFTJt9cZuLVZGpVYC9bTvI1fTNNdzdVRwhVSe7FGA2dZ3hddplVdQpVcr FdZyxdfehNN93dV+/VJ7BdiA9U50JVhk7VO6/Fd3VVj/cZ1RTb08/UQpn4REVb2sP7XQQfUW E03TdmXKiV1YhW1Qy2TXK42/IA1YjqXBi+XN/FlKFzVZfh1YmSXSlc0hm71Zh+VMV51ZnvVO n/1ZdQ3PlNU/mh0po/1ZmJ0+cqsibl1SpuUyqj1aToxWbkXRg8XMrM1XsNXLqiVa6hTbFz3b ClVZGBXYtKVYtw0TlwXaeDxOuG1Su73DU20cqJ3XscVbOvvbfXNavsXZBQ3cogpc01sdwi1Y vz1c8XRbxcVVfz3Zx+1Py+UT4GRcx8JazM1buJXcDK1XdPPct7Xb3js+x8VG0y1dxP3blZPU we2zym1d0i1dQnTZzWU43ZXM/9odyyyyWqldVN9Vw8ONyIMsSd79oggl3odN2+MdSG/Fxlq6 puaVDZGdWMJStaYUTuXNt/6SW8zlXUCNPCBEy5KF3fHdS/XdRRT7XIjVE6clXvYlyjf03sHM OesFXP01kjlk3vPFX73l3xQbYFvcX+O5KrwsYNpd4B8t3ura1vBtXvqt0XY03NV9zgYmYA0W R9VFxAzWYOct4A6+4A/ezhAuYf4lYbUlGgmr1vn12MS14O59PSmi4OW8YaeMPuk1YRQuTh/W 2nDtGaQF4r4F4nCq4SI2WCX+37kdnhz+UCgmSKxVXuxl4ve9YkMR1eLL4rXt4hHrEy7+YtEd Y8VDjv/ZLeOwTeP6c+KTXGOzfWMSLNwTjWNprWMztdOws+I1lmAVBo0+fs87XldBZjw+E2NC vlxEntP7VeREVmSyYuRGtl1Jtr5IluQDJmTYsuRLDuI31mQ05mQe/uL0ZeFsDeVO5uOj2uRT 3mBWbmM0dWUPPuUq3uM0BuQrvuWhjeVSDuVV3mVe5mRf/mUh9mRQHuYU7mVjPmbzdWVhXuZX 9uNDfmYjpmRlnubGvWRnnmYpjmJrvuYXZmJtfmZuplBaJufxzGUlTmcdHedvZubcdOc5bmRx XuZzFlB6PmZ7BlB8HmZ9ZlBv/mZ//lhpjmeBZk9+/mWDRmeAvmaFTlqG3ub/eKbmQYthXK7o Ll5n9JRoh8ZhiG5nicZmOgZpaNZfhN5ljv5Nk45llKZNlW7mkSbpJXZnlk5Nl2Zlmj5Nm55l mAbn2JxpniZijC1ooDbngr7oLM5onw5oovbor2VgOH5qp4bqSZ5qqR7ktrXqq47qEyNjNa5q rf5qRwZrqibNrBbrrR7rtG5NeRZhTA7rDrVj1kVl1zVrssZqtT5rEcrOOvJiuX7gt/7ruqZr twZswhZsw8ZrdEvDNBWn+FVgmnnMyPZNx0ZUyabsyX5sZc1sy95szPbsz77s0Obs0QbtzRZt 0j5tz07t1e5sPWVt0jbl11bt1qZt1Man2i5t267s/9zm7deW7d82bdwG7tEe7t6u7eJGbs3W bd6ObeHGy+RebsqGbuMmbueO7uC+7uyebe2ebte2burebvDu7tvmbgXOzcb+bsgW7/Qm7/Uu 78ge7/eeVPmO7/h27/m+b/tWb/0+bvaW7PMOYN/27/xub/5+bwN3bwQfbgW3bgY/8AGvbwhP 3TDzIjGz8AvH8AzX8A3n8A738A8H8RAX8REn8RI38RNH8RRX8RVn8RZ38RdHpVoG6hmn8Rq3 8RvH8RzX8R3n8R738R8HUalNHMigJdglcmdNoyMnolpqu+spchrZYnJT8imicuiMzyd/zSRP z0yckVrGcvxjcvUE1vxFHP+kWFYCid0W4aUpsZwjiQz1pk8zx50Jl3MB/osD1dNHS0i1OPO/ kd/zylObcSJLBbYQejjYuQhCq/BEzZ5At3OGUp6YNhZ5xHMybzRGnwvq7TdHCum5kXTyc6Eg CvUK1Dr01itnTbt+Cmk+t/QLybROT1DDa/WdeHSo4Ov/9D4iotUsDerRWptUN1U2D+CQTPVB 6XQ7GnWuq41g3U9Yx3Rr4XQwZxVor/UfYfaK7HVYhnNLGfNxNO9QuXW+JPRo549owqo1r/O/ 5Fz31ci+zPMjJHf9YHW++fP7+fVmnXItF3KzQCWpS7IlpyK1vPcwh/JfWbl8d/Kj7h5MHfhD SXjGaq+xLJfyu8XQN8dpIMf4jNf4jef4jvf4j283mL74EM7Axc72p210FgJ5r9ajke8usHZ5 y7V454p4yhn1g9d3km8Ymt93O8JvfF95Pa/zeY92ou/pbk0Qo5/Ubp/3oId38i76WeVzhUfZ PRkKamL6mnd6bFN6Vs96/NZ5r+j6Chz7k9/xgYd6TQf4Ic95DlajEa3yXUJ2tp/4rXfjpbb7 Oru7jd77vJ8akY95vxf8wSf8wjf8w0f8xFf8xWf8xnf8x4d8SQ4IADs= --------------715B416CA0B9438015BEACE8-- From - Tue Mar 6 09:08:02 2001 Received: from astro.wisc.edu (churchwell.astro.wisc.edu [144.92.179.174]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f26ESVV1636835; Tue, 6 Mar 2001 08:28:31 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3AA4F54C.726F37DB@astro.wisc.edu> Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 08:33:49 -0600 From: Ed Churchwell X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 (Macintosh; U; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: whitney barbara , chip , mwolfire Subject: [Fwd: TNX issues] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------716C7990132E280D4161E885" X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------716C7990132E280D4161E885 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This from Tony will be of interest for geometrical projection corrections. Ed --------------716C7990132E280D4161E885 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Received: from hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (hydra.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.10.102]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f25LMqV2221764 for ; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 15:22:52 -0600 (CST) Received: from sscsci9 (sscsci9.ipac.caltech.edu [134.4.60.71]) by hydra.ipac.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA14182; Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:22:49 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200103052122.NAA14182@hydra.ipac.caltech.edu> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 13:22:49 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Marston Reply-To: Tony Marston Subject: TNX issues To: ebc@astro.wisc.edu Cc: wolff@colorado.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-MD5: mYDLONKMphi7H9Oa7DttSQ== X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4u sparc Dear Ed, Following up the issue of FITS keywords and the use of TNX projection for IRAC maps, I asked Dave Shupe for a summary of the present status of TNX projection information to be supplied in the FITS headers of files and which software currently supports TNX deprojection. The attached is his reply. It may be useful in constructing your piepline. Cheers Tony ------------- Begin Forwarded Message ------------- X-Sender: shupe@pop.ipac.caltech.edu Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 12:59:16 -0800 To: tmarston@ipac.caltech.edu From: David Shupe Subject: TNX issues Cc: David Shupe Mime-Version: 1.0 Hi Tony, here's some notes about SSC plans for distortion keywords, and software available for reading them. Dave SSC plans for representing distortion ------------------------------------- The BCD processing will not re-grid data onto a TAN projection, so the distortion in IRAC (~1 pixel at the edges) will be represented by distortion keywords in the headers. The SSC Downlink group would prefer to use distortion keywords supported by Mark Calabretta's WCSLIB library. Mark is reluctant to change the API to his library until the proposed standard is ratified. In addition, there is currently more software supporting the IRAF "TNX" keywords than the proposed FITS-standard PV keywords (see below). Finally, the IRAC instrument team favors use of the TNX keywords. We have adopted the following strategy: Use TNX keywords to represent IRAC distortion, but plan to switch to PV keywords in the future. Developers writing code that deals with coordinates should make it easy to e.g. swap header reading and writing subroutines to handle either projection. In addition, we will limit use of the TNX projection to the polynomial function, with xxterms and yxterms = "half" in IRAF parlance, and order < 7. This will ensure that the distortion as represented by TNX keywords will also have a PV-keyword representation. Software supporting distortion representations ---------------------------------------------- (note: we don't include the Digitized Sky Survey (DSS) projection here--it is similar to the PV-keyword method but is not exactly the same) TNX is of course supported by IRAF. However, it is our understanding that it is considered an "experimental" coordinate system by the IRAF group. TNX is also supported by Doug Mink's "wcstools" library. His library is used for SAOimage and SAOtng, so both programs can interpret TNX keywords. The AST library developed and distributed by the Starlink project has support for PV keywords and common forms of the TNX projection. See note from David Berry appended below. The AST library has been used in the DS9 image viewer (available at http://hea-www.harvard.edu/RD/ds9/ ). I have confirmed that this viewer interprets TNX keywords (and should handle PV as well). Appendix: Note from David Berry regarding AST library ----------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:27:44 +0000 (GMT) From: David Berry To: fitswcs@cv.nrao.edu cc: David Shupe Subject: Re: distorted TAN projections for SIRTF If it's any help, the AST library developed and distrubuted by the UK Starlink project has implemented all the proposals of WCS papers 1 and 2 (excluding the pixel regularization image). This includes the PVi_j terms for the distorted TAN projecton, and multiple WCS representations. AST can also read the common forms of TNX and ZPX projections (but only writes TAN and ZPN). It will also read (and write) various old WCS encodings such as those which use CROTA or PC keywords to represent rotation, etc. AST includes other WCS facilities as well as simply reading and writing FITS headers, and transforming between sky and pixel coordinates. For example, it can convert between most common celestial coordinate systems and also draw coordinate grids for any arbitrary (potentially discontinuous) mapping, including all-sky projections etc. The new DS9 image browser from SAO uses AST for these reasons. AST is written in C but has both C and Fortran interfaces. If anyone wants further information about AST, the current version of the documentation for the C interface is available at http://www.ast.man.ac.uk/~dsb/sun211.htx/sun211.html A slightly older version of the documention for the Fortran interface is available at: http://www.starlink.rl.ac.uk/star/docs/sun210.htx/sun210.html David Berry ------------- End Forwarded Message ------------- ************************************************** A.P.Marston Tel: 626-395-3507 Observer Support SIRTF Science Center, IPAC Caltech, Pasadena, CA 91125 ************************************************** --------------716C7990132E280D4161E885-- From - Tue Mar 20 12:05:03 2001 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f2KI2MD1211326 for sirtf-mumble; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:02:22 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail1.doit.wisc.edu (mail1.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.9.40]) by uwast.astro.wisc.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f2KI2LF1205766 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:02:21 -0600 (CST) Received: from [128.104.221.176] by mail1.doit.wisc.edu id MAA252518 (8.9.1/50); Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:02:19 -0600 Message-ID: <3AB79C66.9E1D3CAE@wisp.physics.wisc.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 12:07:33 -0600 From: Bob Benjamin X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sirtf@astro.wisc.edu Subject: Galaxy analogs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-sirtf@uwast.astro.wisc.edu Precedence: bulk X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Rob Kennicutt during his review talk in Wyoming this summer tapped the following two face-on galaxies as one which might resemble the Milky Way. NGC 3351 NGC 7331 -Bob