hst cycle 12 tac results
DESCRIPTION
HST Cycle 12 TAC Results. Bob Williams TIPS – 17 April 2003. TAC Review Committee. “We find no fundamental flaws in the process or unwarranted influence by STScI staff or management.” “ We also attest to the overall integrity of the TAC process “ - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
HST Cycle 12TAC Results
Bob Williams
TIPS – 17 April 2003
2
TAC Review Committee
“We find no fundamental flaws in the process or unwarranted influence by STScI staff or management.”
“ We also attest to the overall integrity of the TAC process “
“The committee panel was impressed by the efficacy of the process for awarding time on HST, and the role of the STScI in organizing and supporting complex and challenging TAC procedures that we judge to be fair and unbiased.”
3
TAC Review Committee Recommendations
Each proposal should be reviewed by at least one expert
Institutional conflict of interest rules should be eased
Collective memory of TACs should be retained through repeat panelists over consecutive cycles
Written feedback on the evaluation of all proposals should be provided to PI’s
Encourage participation in Treasury Program by organizing annual workshops for development and coordination of large HST programs
4
Cycle 12 Timeline Reduction in time between proposal submission
and cycle observations by ~ 4 months Opportunity to follow up on scientific discoveries ‘Fresher’ science programs
Deadline was January 24 (from September 7) 11 review panels met 24-26 March TAC met 27-29 March Director’s Review April 3, PI notification April 4 Phase II deadline: Mid-May Nominal Cycle 12: July 2003 - June 2004
5
Cycle 12 Overview
1,046 proposals received:
-19,674 orbits requested• Plus: 1860 [Cyc13] & 855 [Cyc14]
-6,067 SNAP targets
-$13.2 M AR funding (including Theory)
6
Oversubscription by Cycle
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7N 8 9 10 11 12
Cycle
Ov
ers
ub
sc
rip
tio
n R
ati
o
GO Proposal oversubscriptionGO Orbit oversubscription
AR Funding oversubscription
7
Review Process
Panels select small/medium proposals (2000 orbits)
Panels review large programs for TAC
TAC selects Treasury/Large programs (1000 orbits)
Duplicate panels minimize conflicts and maximize attendance and participation by all panelists
8
New and continued features since Cycle 11
TAC met after panels- NEW Panels provided input on Large/Treasury
programs via Chairs “Progressive subsidy” for Regular proposals -
MODIFIED Chandra allocation for multi-wavelength
programs NOAO allocation for supporting ground-based
observations
9
Types and Sizes of Proposals GO - orbits
Large (100 or more orbits) Regular (1-99 orbits)
AR and Theory - funding SNAP - targets
one visit = one target no links, no guarantees probability of execution ~50%
10
Proposal categories
Treasury Provide datasets for lasting value to HST program Should focus on potential to solve multiple problems Provide enhanced data products
AR Legacy Provide homogeneous set of calibrated data Should enable new and important science
(AR) Theory Direct relevance to HST observational research Mission-specific favored over general theory programs
11
Other Categories Long-term Programs
Cycle 12 TAC/Panels may award Cycle 13+14 time (~5%) where required by science.
(No proposal resubmission in those cycles)
Target-of-Opportunity (TOO) Proposals 1-2 ultra-fast (< 2 days) activations (15 orbit
overhead) ~ 6 rapid (< 2 weeks) activations allowed ~ 20 TOO activations (> 2 weeks)
12
Cycle 12 Summary
GO Acceptance Rate: ~1/5 for proposals and ~1/6 for orbits
SNAP Acceptance rate: ~1/3.5 for proposals and targets
AR Acceptance rate: ~1/2.6 for proposals and dollars
Theory Acceptance rate: ~1/4.2 for proposals and ~1/4.6 for
dollars
AR Legacy Acceptance rate: 0 approved
GO proposals acceptance rate approximately independent of size.
28.7% of program awarded to Large/Treasury Programs.
Instrument breakdown for GO Programs: ACS (55%), STIS (23%),
NICMOS (21%), WFPC2 (2%), FGS (5%)
ESA acceptance fraction 16.8% for proposals and 10.2% for orbits
13
Cycle12 Summary (Cont.)
$2.97M awarded to Regular AR programs $680K awarded to Theory programs Proposal acceptance fraction similar for panelists and non-
panelists Proposal acceptance fraction similar for STScI staff &
community Chandra: accepted 3 out of 25 proposals, or 115 ksecs out of
1444 submitted NOAO: accepted 7 out of 15 proposals, or 17.5 nights out of
41.5 submitted Calibration: 2 AR for $130K and 3 GO for 12 orbits approved ToO’s: approved 1 ultra-fast (< 2 days) + 2 fast (< 2 week) + 8
other
14
Summary Results
Proposals RequestedApproved% AcceptedESA Accepted ESA %
GO 819 170 20.8% 28 16.5%
Snapshot 74 21 28.4% 4 19.0%
Archival 111 41 36.9%
Theory 42 10 23.8%
Total 1046 242 23.1% 32 16.8%
Primary Orbits 19674 3154 16.0% 323 10.2%
Includes 0790.bahcall (48 orbits) and 0314.webster (30 orbits) and 12 calibration orbits
15
Acceptance Fraction by Size
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
1 - 10 11 - 20 21 - 30 31 - 40 41 - 50 51 - 100 >100 Overall
Orbit Bins
Proposals
Orbits
83
3826
86
4 4
16
Orbit Size by Cycle
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
6 7 7N 8 9 10 11 12
Cycle
Orb
it S
ize
Median Submitted
Median Approved
Average Submitted
Average Approved
17
STScI Acceptance Resources
Submitted Approved Approved
Fraction
Fraction of Cycle
Approved
AR $492K
(6)
$60K
(1)
12.2% 2%
Theory $472K
(7)
$90K
(1)
19% 13.1%
Orbits 2573
(73)
424
(20)
16.5% 13.4%
Snap
Targets
460
(5)
40
(1)
9% 2.3%
18
STScI Proposal Acceptance
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
5 6 7 7N 7AR 8 9 10 11 12
Cycle
STScI Acceptance RateAverage Acceptance RateFraction of Program
19
GO Instrument Summary
InstrumentsRequested
Orbits %Approved
Orbits %Total for Instrument
ACS/HRC 1914 7.4% 251 4.7%ACS/SBC 266 1.0% 19 0.4%ACS/WFC 11727 45.3% 53.7% 2640 49.7% 54.8%FGS 578 2.2% 2.2% 268 5.0% 5.0%NIC1 427 1.6% 183 3.4%NIC2 1866 7.2% 597 11.2%NIC3 1471 5.7% 14.5% 342 6.4% 21.1%STIS/CCD 1475 5.7% 333 6.3%STIS/FUV 2743 10.6% 433 8.1%STIS/NUV 1516 5.9% 27.8% 126 2.4% 23.2%WFPC2 1919 7.4% 7.4% 123 2.3% 2.3%
25902 100.0% 5315 100.0%
20
Pure Parallel Instrument Summary
Instruments ModeRequested Orbits %
Approved Orbits %
ACS/WFC Imaging 700 35.0% 0 0%ACS/WFC Spectroscopy 300 15.0% 0 0%NICMOS/NIC/3 Spectroscopy 500 25.0% 500 100%WFPC2 Imaging 500 25.0% 0 0%
2000 500
21
Calibration Proposals
7 Proposals Submitted: 2 AR for $130K and 5 GO for 33 orbits2 AR and 3 GO approved for 12 orbits
AR: 0433.wyse An astrometric standard field in omega Cen
0562.dolphin CTE Corrections for WFPC2 and ACS GO: 0149.odell Calibration of the ACS Emission Line Filters
0568.dolphin ACS Photometric Zero Point Verification
1233.hines Enabling Coronagraphic Polarimetry with NICMOS
22
TREASURY & LARGE PROGRAMS
Thompson -[T]- 144 orbits Deep IR images in CHANDRA Deep Field South
Scoville-[T]-320 orbits Cy 12+320 orbits Cy 13 COSMOS 2-Degree ACS survey
Riess & Perlmutter -60 orbits each SNIa Hubble Diagram
Benedict- 60 orbits- Astrometric Calibration of Cepheids P-L relation
23
TREASURY & LARGE PROGRAMS
Sahu- 110 orbits Galactic bulge planetary transit survey
Malhotra- 40 orbits Grism- ACS program for extragalactic science
Kochanek- 110 orbits Imaging of gravitational lenses