[20141125]
----------------
2014/11/25 HST
Hilo: Minowa, Imanishi, Hattori, Takato, Iwata
Mitaka: Kashikawa
Skype: Narita, Tanaka Masaomi
- Reports and discussions were made based on documents prepared by TF members as
action items defined in the last meeting.
[Tanaka-san: Instrument publication performance]
- Analyses were made in yearly basis to improve S/N
- numbers of publications per night appear to be higher (approx. 0.5 paper / night) in
optical instruments than in infrared instruments (approx. 0.3 paper / night)
- this may due to larger overhead for IR instruments
- but see Imanishi-san’s report
- error bar in page 15 was calculated by taking standard deviation of the normalized
(annually averaged) number of publication for each instrument (page 14).
- It is difficult to say the difference in publication performance among IR instruments and
among optical instruments.
- COMICS statistics are from small number of observed programs.
- Q: how the trend can change if we take only recent programs? => A: no significant
difference
- citation information by Chie Yoshida-san is available => Tanaka-san will try to look at
citation related numbers.
[ Imanishi-san: Downtime due to instrument troubles and Referee scores ]
- Downtime information comes from operators’ night logs. When serious problem happened
beforehand, the observing programs have been changed. So these are downtime due to
relatively smaller troubles or incident happened during the observing runs.
- Nightlog is not always recording instrument troubles. The completeness of trouble records
would differ for different instruments.
- MOIRCS and FMOS have relatively frequent downtime due to instrument troubles. Other instruments with large down time are S-Cam and HSC, both suffered one major incident in
recent years.
- COMICS also have relatively higher downtime fraction but that would be due to smaller number
of observing runs.
- Referee scores (material was not distributed):
- Calculated fraction of high score proposals for each instrument in S08A-S15A. three
semesters are summed (5 periods).
- Fraction of score >=5 proposals: four instrument groups
- #1 group (>60%): HDS, SCam, Keck, HSC
- #2 group (~55%): FMOS, IRCS
- #3 group (~50%): MOIRCS
- #4 group (~45%): COMICS, FOCAS, Gemini
- Fraction of score >= 6 proposals
- #1 group (~40%): HDS, SCam, Keck, HSC
- #2 group (~35%): FMOS, IRCS
- #3 group (~30%): MOIRCS, COMICS, FOCAS
- #4 group (~25%): Gemini
- Unique capability and strong user groups are important factors to have high score
proposals.
- many of optical instruments have more higher score proposals
- there’s no significant change in trend through S08A to S15A
- Before decommission of T-ReCS many of Gemini time exchange programs were using
T-ReCS.
- Q: if we allocate more telescope time for high score proposals, can we expect larger
number of publications? => A: there’s a limit in night allocation for optical instruments.
- Science category of high score proposals? If the=> Imanishi-san will investigate.
- publication of this information: subject to approval by director and TAC.
[ Takato-san ]
- manpower required for PFS
- mainly during the commissioning phase, man power in operation phase is briefly
considered.
- cryocoolers specified have long life time
- fibre cleaning between fibre B and C is required. That is planned to be made every
instrument exchange at TUE floor.
[ Hattori-san ]
- Workload for regular maintenance items are listed and are summarized.
- HSC related work items are not included.
- Responses to the instrument troubles are not included, and such incidents can take much
time. However, it is difficult to quantify the expected workloads for trouble shooting. With
the discussion in instrument division, instruments with high risk of unexpected troubles are
FMOS, S-Cam, MOIRCS.
- In order to estimate feasible line-up of instruments in the periods of PFS commissioning
and operation, we need more discussion within Subaru Telescope staff.
[ Narita-san, Kashikawa-san ]
- Instruments in other telescopes (Gemini, Keck, TAO)
- MOIRCS, FOCAS, IRCS have relatively small aspects of unique capabilities (similar instruments
are available in time exchange).
- COMICS: currently unique especially in MIR imaging. MIMIZUKU will provide imaging capability
as well. Difference is mainly in spectral resolution.
- HDS: uniqueness lies in shorter wavelength (<3600A) and higher spectral dispersion.
- How much science cases are there in these unique capabilities of HDS? => Iwata will ask
Tajitsu-san
- For HK lines, HDS + IRM2 have been confirmed to be working.
- In Keck strategic plan, high-dispersion spectrograph specified to shorter wavelength was
proposed. That appears to be one of strong candidates for Keck’s future instrument.
- If operations using CsOpt and NsOpt are stopped, number of top-unit exchange will be
reduced.
[ Next steps ]
- Make radar charts
- Demand from community - Iwata
- Publication performance - Tanaka
- Competitiveness - Imanishi
- Instrument troubles - Imanishi
- Work loads - Hattori
- Alternative instruments / uniqueness - Kashikawa, Narita
- Have Subaru staff / task force meeting in the week of Dec. 8. Bring reports from task force
and show draft plan.
- 12/24 JST SAC
- 1/13-15 JST Subaru UM
[Action items]
- All: make radar charts
- Tanaka-san: citation performance of instruments
- Imanishi-san: check science categories of high score proposals
- Iwata: investigate HDS science cases with shorter wavelength, high dispersion
- Hattori, Takato etc.: consider man power requirements for PFS and balance of human resources
----------------