Observations that are no longer proprietary (see Section 1.4.7) are available for analysis by interested scientists through direct retrieval from the HST Data Archive or from the
Hubble Legacy Archive (HLA). The retrieval is free and does not involve financial support. The HST Archival Research (AR) Program can, however, provide financial support for the analysis of such data sets. AR Phase I proposals must outline a management plan for analyzing the data (see
Section 9.7). Detailed budgets are due in Phase II only (as is the case for GO and SNAP Proposals; see
Chapter 11 for details). Proposals for AR funding are considered at the same time, and by the same reviewers, as proposals for observing time, on the basis of scientific merit. Two categories of archival proposals are available, Regular AR and Legacy AR, depending on the size of the funding request. An AR Proposal may be submitted by a non-U.S. PI if there are one or more U.S. Co-Is who request funding (see
Section 11.4).
This cycle, we particularly encourage AR Proposals aimed at exploiting the data obtained as part of the Frontier Fields Program, and those designed to exploit UV data under the UV Initiative (see
Section 6.3). We also encourage the submission of proposals that combine HST archival data with data from other astronomical missions, such as the datasets maintained at the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (
MAST).
Please also note that the Hubble Source Catalog (HSC) provides a resource for visit-based WFC3, ACS, and WFPC2 source lists in a single master catalog with roughly 100 million sources. This may be of particular interest to developing Legacy and Calibration AR proposals. A few potential examples of value-added projects that might utilize the HSC are listed in Section 7.4 of the HST Primer.
The ‘Scientific Justification’ section of the proposal (see Section 9.1) should include a description of the scientific investigations that will be enabled by the final data products, and their importance. The ‘Analysis Plan’ section (see
Section 9.6) should describe the plans for data analysis, the data products that will be made available to STScI and the community, the method of dissemination, and a realistic time line.
Calibration Proposals (see Section 3.2.4) may also be submitted as AR Proposals. AR Proposals are appropriate in cases where the necessary data have already been taken, or for programs that do not require specific data but aim to develop specialized software for certain HST calibration and data reduction tasks. Examples of topics that have been addressed by Calibration Programs of the type discussed here are:
A Theory Proposal should address a topic that is of direct relevance to HST observational programs, and this relevance should be explained in the proposal. Funding of mission-specific research under the HST Theory Program will be favored over research that is appropriate for a general theory program (e.g., the
NASA Science Mission Directorate Astrophysics Theory Program; ATP). The primary criterion for a Theory Proposal is that the results should enhance the value of HST observational programs through their broad interpretation (in the context of new models or theories) or by refining the knowledge needed to interpret specific observational results (a calculation of atomic cross sections may fall under the latter category). The results of the theoretical investigation should be made available to the community in a timely fashion.
Award amounts for Theory Proposals are anticipated to be similar to those made for Regular AR Proposals (see Section 3.4.1), for which the majority in recent cycles have been under $120,000, with a median around $50,000. STScI also allows the submission of more ambitious proposals for which larger amounts of funding may be justified. For reference, 27 Theory Proposals were approved in Cycle 22, and 11 were approved in Cycle 21.
The ‘Scientific Justification’ section of the proposal (see Section 9.1) should describe the proposed theoretical investigation and also its impact on observational investigations with HST. Review panels will consist of observational and theoretical astronomers with a broad range of scientific expertise (see
Section 6.1). They will not necessarily have specialists in all areas of astrophysics, particularly theory, so the proposals must be written for general audiences of scientists. The ‘Analysis Plan’ section of the proposal (see
Section 9.6) should discuss the types of HST data that will benefit from the proposed investigation, and references to specific data sets in the HST Data Archive should be given where possible. This section should also describe how the results of the theoretical investigation will be made available to the astronomical community, and on what time-scale the results are expected.
