Re: RE : SAC updates

From: Jean-Charles Cuillandre <jcc_at_cfht.hawaii.edu>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 06:10:35 -1000

 Hi,

To make it clear about QFITS at CFHT from discussing about it
with Christian, there are two aspects: on-going QFITS on new
data coming out from CFHT en route to CADC, PIs and LS alike,
and the globql reprocessing. For the LS, the review work of
QFITS output has been done at Terapix and except for some
problematic (flagged C D ) images by Terapix that could
jump into B category (new defringing essentially) there is
no reason why all images should regraded, so it ought to
be all well automatized. Now if QFITS is also wanted for
the PI reporcessed data, that is a different story, but
let us keep the discussion focused on the LS for now?

I still need the latest release of QFITS for full evqluqtion
qt CFHT (geee, zho invented the AZERTY keyboqrd?) and I wish
to put this as an item on the DOG list of todos.

                                        Jean-Charles

> Dear Dave,
>
> the SAC had a discussion about how efficiently and timely Terapix is producing the releases, not on CADC distribute them. T0004 is late with respect with its original schedule (was Feb. 2007). This is a concern more on the side of the french community than on the canadian one where people are more producing themselves their stacks. The concern has risen lately because: a) of the loss of manpower by Terapix, b) the work load induced by the reprocessing of past data with new recipes, c) the need, at least from the Wide, to have Terapix process the qFits quickly when new data arrive so that we can react quickly and not create holes. The fact that there was no real report from Terapix did not really help, but most of the information was already there in the November report.
>
> Also, Christian did not seem too warm to the idea of running all QFits at CFHT: from my impression, it's not a problem of running it actually, but finding a full FTE for the grading, as seem implied by their discussions with Terapix. Also, there was a question concerning the re-processing of all Elixir data: clearly, as flat-field will have changed, new weight maps will have to be computed, so QFITS need to be re-run. There was a question regarding as whether Terapix was thinking to re-grade the newly processed old images, but i could not really answer. The general impression was that it was not needed.
>
> I pointed out the manpower problem of Terapix. The SAC can't really make any recommendations concerning this matter, as the funding of Terapix is an agency matter. But the french SAC members will probably contact their agency.
>
> Then the discussion went on the images validated by QSO, and rejected by Terapix. We clearly need to identify which are the concerned images. Also, a lack of communication between Terapix and the QSO part of CFHT was pointed out (communication between Terapix and Elixir is OK).
>
> Hope this answer all your questions
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hervé
>
> -------- Message d'origine--------
> De: Schade, David [mailto:David.Schade_at_nrc-cnrc.gc.ca]
> Date: mar. 15/05/2007 02:49
> À: Aussel Herve; Steering Group
> Objet : RE: SAC updates
>
>
> Herve,
>
> Could you please tell us more about the SAC concern about "data releases"?
>
> David
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hervé Aussel [mailto:herve.aussel_at_cea.fr]
> Sent: Mon 5/14/2007 1:30 PM
> To: Steering Group
> Subject: SAC updates
>
> Dear all,
>
> I had a conversation with Pierre-Alain Duc this morning about the
> outcome of the SAC meeting for the CFHTLS. The presentation went
> reasonably well. They were one point where I was grilled that I had
> not foreseen : the out-of-spec images that Terapix rejects while they
> were validated by CFHT. The others were the ones I was expecting: the
> data releases and the very-wide extension
> - concerning the SG mandate, there is a clear consensus from the SAC
> that it runs until the last data release of the survey: this is until
> 08A if we do not have an extension, and 09B if we have one
> - concerning the extensions: the SAC will recommend the extension of
> the WIde into 08B, for the gathering of the data that has not yet
> been observed. They will recommend the 30 hrs of patching only if it
> proven that there are good reasons for the discarded images to have
> been discarded. They will ask the SG to evaluate whether the
> discarded images can be salvaged or if they should definitively be re-
> observed. The CFHT should be put in the loop for this.
> - concerning the very-wide, the SAC noted that this 2nd period was
> not part of the project as discussed in the mid-term review (only
> brown dwarfs were part of the scientific case) and that it constitute
> an excellent PI program. So they will not recommend it.
>
> They will ask the board to answer quickly on these matters, so we
> know before december if we have an extension...
>
> Of course, the Board can overrule the SAC on both these issues, the
> very-wide situation being very political....
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hervé
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------
> Hervé Aussel
>
> CNRS / Service d'Astrophysique phone: (+33) 01 69 08 95 79
> Bat 709 CE-Saclay fax : (+33) 01 69 08
> 65 77
> Orme des Merisiers email:
> herve.aussel_at_cea.fr
> F 91 191 Gif-sur-Yvette
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tue May 15 2007 - 06:10:36 HST