|
Phase 1 Proposal Submission for Semester 2008A Updated 07/24/07 |
|
| Table of Contents |
1) The QSO Project
The main concept behind the queue observation scheme with WIRCam is to perform observation programs only during sky conditions required to meet their science goals, as defined by the investigators. This can only be achieved if the programs are all grouped together in a database and are selected appropriately according to a set of constraints, rules and sky conditions. Programs are then carried out by a well trained, local team of observers in a service mode (i.e. investigators are not present at the observatory).
During 1999, CFHT has started a project to implement the necessary software and to review all the issues for achieving a queue/service observing mode with its CFH12K mosaic camera. This Queued Service Observations (QSO) Project has been developed in parallel to other projects necessary for the data acquisition (NEO), processing and analysis (Elixir), and archiving and distribution (DADS). The necessary software tools for proposal submission (Phase 2), selection of programs, management of the observations and execution of the observations have all been developed within the QSO Project. Most of these software components are for internal use only except for two obvious exceptions: Poopsy, proposals submission tool developed and maintained at CADC, and PH2, a Web based tool developed and maintained by CFHT for the second tier of proposal submission (see below).
The QSO mode has been used
for
CFH12K for over 200 nights between January 2001 and January 2003.
Since the semester 2003A, MegaCam has been operated in the queue mode.
Observations with WIRCam have been also done under QSO since
2005. WIRCam
is exclusively offered in the queued service observing mode
and observations are conducted following the same process as with
MegaPrime, with the general architecture of QSO (and NOP) being
modified to accommodate those observations.
This tutorial was written as a guide for helping in the preparation of the proposal submission for the QSO mode with WIRCam for the 2008A semester. At the time of writing, WIRCam has been fully operated for several semesters under QSO which resulted in large amounts of data collected. At the end of 2007A, improvements in the electronics of the camera resulted in much cleaner cosmetics. Except for some minor technical changes, we offer WIRCam with the same modes and options as in the previous semesters.
NOTE: For all technical information on WIRCam, please refer to this page.
2) Document Outline
This document presents the information for submitting a QSO proposal with WIRCam for the semester 2008A. A complete description of the submission process with Poopsy and an outline of what will have to be done following the TAC evaluation for the second phase, planned for December-January, 2007-2008, are included. A few QSO Rules used for the selection of the programs are presented and some other issues related to the QSO programs are also discussed.
3) Two Important Notes!
IMPORTANT NOTE 1 :
At the time of the writing, the non-sidereal guiding option with QSO
WIRCam has not been implemented. Due to other urgent issues at CFHT, it
is unlikely that this mode will be commissioned before some time so the
mode is not offered for 2008A.
For more information about the submission of your WIRCam QSO proposals, contact the QSO Team.
1) Programs: Q or not Q?
The Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) has recommended that the QSO mode to be the ONLY mode of operation for the WIRCam mosaic camera. So, the classical mode is NOT offered for WIRCam for 2008A.
Note: Observation of Solar System targets through the QSO system is now possible through ephemeris entries in the Phase 2 Tool. However, as mentioned above, differential tracking with WIRCam (i.e. non-sidereal guiding) is a complex implementation and is not offered for 2007B. Please consult the QSO Team for further information about the progress done on this issue.
2) Types of QSO Programs
Many types of programs can
benefit from the queue observing mode. Programs requesting
excellent or exceptional sky conditions, surveys, short- or long-term
monitoring, target-of-opportunity programs, are all well suited for the
QSO mode. Also, contrary to the classical mode, it is now
possible to submit
very short programs necessitating only a few hours of
observations. Programs scientifically valuable during bad sky
conditions are also
possible. During the submission phase with Poopsy (Phase 1), you are
asked to specify what type of programs you are submitting for the QSO
mode. These types of programs are defined below:
For the WIRCam programs in the queued service observing mode, two submission phases are necessary. The first phase (Phase 1) is done through CADC Poopsy and consists in a general description of the program used for the evaluation by the Time Allocation Committee (TAC). This is the "normal" submission procedure for all proposals requesting time at CFHT. The second phase (Phase 2) is requested for ALL the WIRCam queue programs for which telescope time has been allocated by the TAC. As described below, it is done prior to an observing semester (with a few exceptions) through an entirely new Web based tool developed at CFHT. During this phase, all the information necessary for the local staff to perform the observations is entered by the investigators and stored in a database at CFHT.
C - Phase 1: Instructions for Proposal Submission with Poopsy
The current version of Poopsy, now available for the proposals for 2008A, allows investigators to send proposals for the queue mode for WIRCam. A section has been created which includes some information necessary for TAC evaluation, and for the QSO Team in the preparation of the queue database. Below, we review the questions related to QSO proposals as introduced in this version of Poopsy.
1- Are you applying for a queue program with WIRCam? (Run Info Section)
As explained above, the queue mode is the only mode of observation for WIRCam. Answer "Yes" and complete the Queue Section.
2- Indicate the type of queue observing program: Regular, Target-of-Opportunity, Snapshot (Run Info section)
These three types of programs have been reviewed earlier.
3- Indicate a global image quality (IQ) constraint (K band) describing your program ? (Run Info section)
The main objective of the queue mode is to observe targets under sky conditions required to meet the science goals defined for each program. During Phase 2, the investigators will have to define precisely observational constraints for their project. However, it is important that a global image quality for each program is defined during Phase 1 as well. An efficient queue can only be achieved if the database contains programs requesting a wide range in constraints, especially on the image quality, and the TAC will strongly consider the choice of image quality indicated here for the overall selection of the queue programs.
It is clear that the probability of a specific program depends strongly on the image quality requested versus the statistics of the site. The chance that your program is performed might be less if you request an exceptional image quality. Of course, science should be the priority in your selection of IQ but beware that it cannot be the only criterion in your choice. So, do not request a better image quality than what is really needed for your program. For guidance, the table below describes approximately the seeing statistics on Mauna Kea, in K band. Statistics reveal that seeing is highly variable during a night and globally better during the summer months (Seigar et al., 2002, SPIE, 4844, 366).
|
|
|
| IQ |
20 |
| 0.55" < IQ |
25 |
| 0.65" < IQ |
20 |
| 0.80" < IQ |
|
| 1.0" < IQ |
|
| IQ > 1.2" |
|
For your information, the table below gives
the average weather statistics for Mauna Kea:
|
|
|
| Usable Nights |
|
| Lost to Weather |
|
| Usable Photometric Nights |
|
4- How many hours are required for this queue program for this semester ? (Run Info section)
A significant difference between the classical and queue modes is the way the observing time is accounted. In a classical mode, nights are usually requested and the total time asked includes the different operational overheads. In a queue mode, the time requested is in HOURS, and might or might not include overheads. For queue programs for the semester 2007B, you can follow these directives:
i)- You must request HOURS of observations. If the total time of your program is fractional (e.g. 32.4 hr.), please indicate so (.4 hr in a queue mode is possible).
ii)- In your
calculation
of integration time, two different overheads must be calculated (that
is, they will be charged at the phase 2 level): 1) The readout
overhead
(reset + readout time) of the array should be included for
every
exposure planned. For 2008A, this is 10 seconds for the
entire array (n.b.: binning is not possible with WIRCAm). Work
is underway to significantly reduce this overhead but it's better
to consider this high value at the moment. 2) If you plan to do nodding
mode (i.e. target-sky-target-), an overhead of 60 seconds
must be added in your calculations for each slew between the
target
and the sky position.
| Filter |
Maximum
Exposure Time |
| Y |
150
sec |
| J |
60 sec |
| H |
15 sec |
| K |
25 sec |
| LowOH1,2 |
3000
sec |
| Ch4on/Off |
50 sec |
| H2/K_cont/Br-Gamma |
200
sec |
5- How many additional HOURS would be requested to complete this project ? (General Info section)
If you are planning to submit an additional proposal for the same program for the subsequent semester (and the following, if necessary), please indicate the number of hours that might be required.
Note on Sky Brightness:
The sky brightness options presented in Poopsy (i.e. position of the
Moon) are different than the ones presented in PH2. For the Phase
1,
these are used to help us evaluate the best periods for a scheduling
a queue observing period covering as many programs as possible. More
precise
options, adapted for near-IR observations, will be described during the
phase 2.
One of the main advantages of the queue mode scheme is the possibility to share calibrations between a set of programs. More so, since the queue runs are spread over several nights, the quality of the calibrations can also be greatly improved compared to the ones obtained during a short run in a classical mode. To achieve this, a calibration plan has been defined and will be carried out regularly by the queue/service observers. This plan includes the necessary "detrend" frames for removal of the instrument signatures (bias, darks, flat-fields, fringing) and the astronomical calibrations (standard stars, astrometric fields). More details will later be found on the Elixir page.
For the semester 2008A, you can consider the following situations:
1- No programs under any circumstances are allowed to request "detrend" calibrations during Phase 1 or Phase 2. These calibrations are exclusively handled by the QSO and Elixir Teams.
2- Photometric calibration will be obtained by Elixir using the 2MASS catalog for every field observed. For observations done during non-photometric conditions, NO short exposures will be taken like we do with MegaCam. The 2MASS calibration should suffice.
3- If your program includes any filters with a broad bandpass and you prefer to obtain your own astronomical calibrations, this time must be added during the Phase 1. However, TAC will evaluate this request. Of course, the integration time will be automatically charged to the program for this kind of observations during the Phase 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Most of all the snapshot programs will be accepted
so a given percentage does not make sense
Important Note: Telescope time is scheduled for A + B programs. Programs below the normal evaluation cut-off are generally C and S programs and are considered for overfilling the queue database. There is, of course, a good chance for these programs to get some data especially if the conditions requested are realistic and take advantage of poor sky conditions.
F - DIET: The WIRCam Exposure Time Simulator
An important component in the preparation of the proposals during Phase 1 and 2 of all the queue mode programs instituted around the world is the availability of a exposure time simulator. Since the investigators are not present during the observations, it is crucial for the QSO observers to know that if the observations are undertaken during sky conditions requested, the science goals should be reached because the PIs have verified that using a robust exposure time simulator. It is not always easy to judge the science merit of an exposure frame and this is better accessed by quantitative evaluation.
In preparation for the QSO observation, the investigators have now access to an elaborate exposure time simulator for the WIRCam mosaic. Developed first for CFH12K and MegaPrime under the supervision of Jean-Charles Cuillandre, the simulator, named DIET for Direct Imaging Exposure Time, allows the user to evaluate the integration time in different sky conditions for WIRCam. Moreover, the simulator offers different combinations of exposure time and number of exposures to minimize overheads. A Web based interface for the simulator is also available. Note that at the time of writing, the results calculated by DIET for WIRCam are best estimates; numbers will be better defined after the performance evaluation of the instrument during its commissioning. It is strongly recommended to use the simulator, accessible through the WIRCam web page, during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the queue programs!
Maybe the most difficult task facing the queue observing model is found in the selection process leading to the execution of a science program. This selection algorithm can be based on simple criteria (e.g. mounted filters) but it becomes immensely complicated when other parameters like actual sky conditions, completeness level, science merit, monitoring constraints, or targets visibility are taken into account.
The process, resulting in the choice of a specific program to be undertaken for the queue observations with WIRCam, will be done in three steps:
1- Selection: This is the first selection of the viable observations stored in the database according to instrumental constraints, sky constraints, actual sky conditions, completeness level, and the position of the targets.
2- Ordering: This second step creates a prioritized list of observations to be sequentially executed regarding their TAC grade, rank, target positions, and user's priorities.
3- Human filtering: The final step consists in the possibility for the QSO observer to modify the queue list according to special constraint like the focus sequences, calibration plan, etc.
Without going into too many details, each of these steps include an algorithm based on a set of observing rules. More information will be available during the release of the Phase 2 tool but some rules might be of interest already for the Phase 1 submission process. The rules given here are not presented in any order of priority. Among them:
1) Communication and Night reports
The QSO Team has integrated a Email communication system inside PH2 ("HelpDesk") that allows the investigators to send request to the Team during the Phase2. This system is also available during the semester through PH2. It includes several discussion forums, and keeps tracks of all the communication related to the QSO mode for each program identified by its runID. Even if a bit cumbersome, using the Helpdesk is much preferable that using a normal email system. It ensures that everybody related to the observing process is informed,
After each observing night, a report detailing what observations were performed is available on the CFHT Web site. These reports include the observations groups executed and the sky conditions at the time of the observations. This does not mean that your data will be immediately available (see below). The goal of these reports is to inform the community of the progress of the queue and, in particular, the current status of your program.
Current global statistics for a semester are also available on the QSO Web page.
2) Data Evaluation
As part of the data quality control assessment, all data taken will be automatically processed and calibrated by the Elixir Team. Data evaluation will be done in two steps: during the observation by the Service Observer ("on-line" evaluation) and, during and after the data processing. This last step is very involving and represents one of the reasons why data cannot be distributed immediately after a QSO run, unless specifically justified during the Phase 2 period. If the observations are judged satisfactory, the queue database is then updated by the Queue coordinator.
3) Data Distribution
Data distribution will be ensured by the DADS Team. Our goal is to be able to distribute the data to the PI of each project (or another member if specified during the Phase 2) and the relevant calibrations at the period specified during the phase 2. Due to the heavy workload, it will not be possible to send the data to the investigators during a run. However, for certain types of programs (e.g. TOO) where looking at the data as soon as possible is important, this will be possible under the supervision of the Queue coordinator.
4) Proprietary Period
A special procedure is taking place regarding the proprietary period for data obtained with WIRCam in the QSO mode. By default, the proprietary period of QSO data extends to 1 year + 1 month starting at the end of the QSO semester. For instance, data taken for the 2008A semester (February 1st - July 31st) will have a default release date set to 08/31/2009. If an extension is requested in Poopsy and approved by TAC, a new date will be set for this program through the QSO system. The release date for the data is indicated in the fits headers by the keyword REL_DATE. This system applies only to QSO data for MegaPrime and WIRCam (and also CFH12K). For snapshot programs, the proprietary time is 3 months following the end of the semester.
5) The QSO Team
The QSO Team is formed of
Pierre Martin (QSO Project Scientist/Manager), Billy Mahoney
(Database/System Programmer), Tom Vermeulen
(System Programmer), Mary Beth Laychak, Peter Forshay, Adam Draginda,
Rachael Zelman and Todd Burdullis
(Service Observers). During a QSO run, supervision is ensured by
the QSO Coordinator (one of the CFHT Resident Astronomers) who, among
other
things, is responsible for managing the queue database, planning of the
observations, and maintaining the contact with the investigators, if
necessary.
Observations will be conducted by the Service Observer and the Resident
Astronomers, with a strong involvement by the Observing
Assistants.
Software support will also be provided during the observing nights. For
TOO programs and decisions related to the viability of some programs,
the
CFHT Executive Director acts as the final authority.
|
|
|