Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://www.stsci.edu/institute/stuc/may-2014/solar-system.pdf
Дата изменения: Unknown
Дата индексирования: Mon Apr 11 01:37:20 2016
Кодировка:

Solar System Advisory Commi1ee Report Dra5 for STUC presenta:on, 8 May 2014

Philip Nicholson Cornell University

HST proposals submi/ed: Cycles 1-
21
Table 4: Proposal success rates based on number of proposals submitted, including GO, SNAP, archival, and theory
Cycle 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 MCT 18 19 20 21 Cyc 2-
21 Total Number Submi1ed 556 483 424 501 863 1,025 1,298 1,053 914 906 1,078 1,045 905 725 737 821 958 39 1,050 1,007 1,085 1,094 18,010 Total Number Approved 112 141 173 216 352 496 424 295 212 193 198 231 210 208 203 191 228 4 196 199 231 249 4,847 Success Rate R 20% 29% 41% 43% 41% 48% 33% 28% 23% 21% 18% 22% 23% 29% 28% 25% 24% 10% 19% 20% 21% 23% 27% SS Number Submi1ed 46 32 46 59 85 123 64 49 49 60 56 58 43 40 54 43 1 45 40 48 49 1,100 SS Frac:on Submi1ed 10% 8% 9% 7% 8% 9% 6% 5% 5% 6% 5% 6% 6% 5% 7% 4% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 6% SS Number Approved 16 16 26 27 51 37 22 15 14 15 13 23 14 12 22 13 0 15 10 16 16 393 SS Frac:on Approved 11% 9% 12% 8% 10% 9% 7% 7% 7% 8% 5% 11% 7% 6% 11% 6% 0% 8% 5% 7% 6% 8% SS Success Rate R(SS) 35% 50% 57% 46% 60% 30% 34% 31% 29% 25% 23% 40% 33% 30% 41% 30% 0% 33% 25% 25% 33% 36%

GO Orbit allocaFons, Cycles 1-
21
Table 1: GO orbit allocation statistics, Hubble Cycles 120
Cycle Total Requested 10,732 8,169 6,303 8,289 14,272 13,543 21,734 14,005 17,690 16,236 24,667 19,674 17,257 14,190 14,581 16,078 20,630 26,801 23,096 18,659 16,681 19,742 363,029 Total Allocated 1,346 1,380 1,455 2,505 3,359 4,574 3,304 3,314 2,866 2,920 3,130 3,150 4,036 2,948 3,223 3,164 3,411 1,508 2,578 2,554 2,802 3,156 62,707 Success Rate R 13% 17% 23% 30% 23% 34% 15% 24% 16% 18% 13% 16% 24% 21% 22% 20% 17% 6% 11% 14% 17% 16% 17% SS Requested 629 962 502 839 1,156 1,203 619 471 379 363 601 286 245 398 545 564 490 368 379 289 429 11,088 SS Frac:on Requested 8% 15% 6% 6% 9% 6% 4% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% SS Allocated 122 156 172 202 253 421 160 136 96 113 79 98 70 83 220 341 193 0 94 50 84 118 3,260 SS Frac:on Allocated 9% 11% 12% 8% 8% 9% 5% 4% 3% 4% 3% 3% 2% 3% 7% 11% 6% 0% 4% 2% 3% 4% 5% SS success rate R(SS) 24% 18% 40% 30% 36% 13% 22% 20% 30% 22% 16% 24% 34% 55% 63% 34% 0% 26% 13% 29% 28% 29% 1.4 0. 1. 1. 1. 0. 0. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 2. 3. 2. 0. 2. 1. 1. 1. 1. 8 3 3 0 9 9 3 7 7 0 0 6 5 4 0 0 3 0 7 7 6 R(SS)/R

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 MCT 18 19 20 21 Totals

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Cycles 11-
16 -
Solar System GO
submi/ed approved 1 to 5 6 to 11 to 16 to 21 to 31 to 41 to 51 to 61 to 71 to 81 to 91 to 100 151 >201 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 99 to to 150 200

1000 800 600 400 200 0

Cycles 11-
16 -
All GO
submi/ed approved 1 to 5 6 to 11 to 16 to 21 to 31 to 41 to 51 to 61 to 71 to 81 to 91 to 100 151 >201 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 99 to to 150 200 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

Approved frac:on

Cycles 11-
16
Solar System All

Orbits

100 80 60 40 20 0

Cycles 17-
21 -
Solar System GO
submi/ed approved 1 to 5 6 to 11 to 16 to 21 to 31 to 41 to 51 to 61 to 71 to 81 to 91 to 100 151 >201 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 99 to to 150 200

80 60 40 20 0

Cycles 17-
21 -
Exoplanet GO
Submi/ed Approved 1 to 5 6 to 11 to 16 to 21 to 31 to 41 to 51 to 61 to 71 to 81 to 91 to 100 151 >201 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 99 to to 150 200

1000 800 600 400 200 0

Cycles 17-
21 -
All GO
Submi/ed 1 to 5 6 to 11 to 16 to 21 to 31 to 41 to 51 to 61 to 71 to 81 to 91 to 100 151 >201 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 99 to to 150 200 Approved

Approval Frac:on

1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0

Cycles 17-
21
Solar System All Exoplanet

Orbits

Large Orbit allocaFons: Cycles 11-
21
Table 2: Statistics for Large/Treasury GO Solar System proposals

Cycle 11 12 13 14 15

Submi1ed 2 0 1 0 1

Accepted 1 0 0 0 1

Cycle 16 17 18 19 20 21

Submi1ed 2 2 0 0 0 0

Accepted 1 1 0 0 0 0

StaFsFcal summary
There are several broad statements that one can make from these data: · The overall acceptance fracFon for Solar System proposals is higher than the average for all GO proposals, but the proposals generally request less than 15 orbits. · RelaFvely few Solar System proposals requesFng more than 20 orbits were submi/ed for review by the panels: 27 in the range 21-
40 orbits were submi/ed through Cycles 11 to 16 but only 4 were accepted; 13 were submi/ed in Cycles 17 to 21 and none were recommended for approval. · Large or Treasury GO proposals for Solar System science are also rare, but they have a reasonable success rate, with 4 of 8 recommended for approval. · The mode of the size distribuFon for all submi/ed GO programs falls in the second smallest bin (6 to 10 orbits); the mode for the Solar System proposals lies in the same bin in early cycles, but appears in smallest bin in some more recent cycles (Cycles 16, 17 and 21; see Appendix); the mode for exoplanet proposals falls in either the 6-
10 orbit or 11-
15 orbit bin. · Exoplanet proposals have a lower success rate than Solar System proposals, but garner similar total orbit allocaFons since the individual exoplanet proposals tend to be larger.

500

100 100

200 200

300 300

600 600

Fomalhaut planet orbit brown dwarf atm. Heritage M106 galaxy strobing protostarstar MW halo stars' moFon Heritage: space invader oldest nearby star LMC X-
ray source farthest supernova Horsehead nebula/Anniversary comet ISON Hyades WD planet debris Ring nebula structure Proxima Cen. planned obs. T-
Pyx nova TW Hydrae planetary gap Heritage Arp 142 comet ISON movie blue exoplanet Neptune moon Heritage: comet ISON GRB Kilonova Magellanic stream origin Galaxies in Fme M87 black hole jet movie Heritage "caterpillar" nebula ESA -
planetary neb. Alignment Huge Globular Cluster populaFon Water laden asteroids comet ISON Heritage Farthest galaxy (UTX co-
release) FronFer Fields acFve asteroid Milky Wat evoluFon water on exoplanets Europa Plumes

CirculaFon 500 in millions 400 400

0

Hubble press releases can reach hundreds of millions of people

HST News CirculaFon -
Calendar 2013 (Source: Meltwater News)

7-
Jan -
Jan eb eb ebMar Mar 4-
Apr 23-
Ap-
May-
May n 13-
Jun 2-
Ju11-
Jul 25-
Jul 8-
Aug 22-
Aug 2-
Sep 10-
Oc7-
Oc3-
Oc4-
O7-
Nov 2-
Dec 8 5-
F 7-
F 21-
F 5-
7-
4-
Apr 19-
Apr 9 r 23 3-
Ju 4-
Jun 20-
Jun l 15-
Jul 3-
Aug 15-
Aug 29-
Aug 12-
Sep 1 t 2 t 2 t ct 14-
Nov 12-
Dec

Community input & concerns:

· Interest in using HST for some areas is probably reduced by the availability of data from current NASA & ESA missions (eg., Venus, Mars, Saturn), but HST remains criFcal for other targets (Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, TNOs, new comets, etc.), as well as for UV imaging (aurorae). · CollaboraFve style of planetary science ==> fewer proposals submi/ed ==> smaller allocaFons made to HST SS panels. · Small size of SS panel(s) and broad range of proposal subjects (planetary surfaces, atmospheres & magnetospheres; comets & asteroids, etc.) ==> lack of experFse on panels ==> poor decisions and/or ill-
informed comments. Exacerbated by mirror panels since Cycle 17, which dilute experFse across 2 panels. Is the "triage" process well-
informed? · RelaFvely small TAC panel allocaFons for SS science (~80 orbits/ panel?) ==> medium-
size proposals (>20 orbits) are strongly selected against & rarely even submi/ed.

Solar System Proposal Categories

6 5 # accepted 4 3 2 1 0

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 science category 20

Triage: SS/EXP mirror panels
60 Triage level (%) 50 40 30 20 10 0 21 20 19 Cycle 18 17 Panel 1 Panel 2

Figure 1: Triage level for Solar System proposals in Cycle 17 to 21 the horizontal lines mark the levels set for each panel; the histograms show the frac:on of solar system proposals that were marked for triage in each panel.

Median GO proposal size
Median program size: GO proposals
20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 SS submi/ed SS approved All submi/ed All approved Exo submi/ed Exo approved

Orbits

Cycle

Figure 2: Median proposal size for Solar System, Exoplanet and all HST proposals -
Cycles 11 through 21

Proposals to increase SS parFcipaFon in HST science:
· Introduce regular "Planetary Campaigns", some of which might be linked to ongoing NASA missions & others to Decadal Survey objecFves. Past examples: Comet SL-
9 in 1994; IGY auroral campaign in 2013. Future example: Juno mission in 2015/16, which is short on science-
grade opFcal instrumentaFon. · Introduce "IniFaFves" (like the recent UV IniFaFve) relevant to SS science and solicit proposals. A specific example would be regular long-
term monitoring of the outer planets' atmospheres, to look for outbursts, giant storms, etc. · Consider a new class of "Serendipity" proposals, similar to TOO proposals but with zero orbit allocaFon unless the planned event actually occurs. These would be community proposals, with no single PI, and geared to rare events (eg., a spectacular new comet in the Hale Bopp class).

Suggested revisions to the TAC process:
· Recruit external reviewers for SS proposals, to broaden the range of experFse on the panels. Fold external comments into the triage process, if feasible. · Limit preliminary grade assignments (used for triage decisions) to panelists with specific experFse in the relevant subject. · Review conflict-
of-
interest guidelines for panels; are these too strict for scienFfic collaborators, given the relaFvely small field and frequent collaboraFons? Implement a system of backup reviewers in the event of COI rules excluding key panelists. · Augment panels arer proposals are received to fill "gaps" in experFse.

And one more suggesFon...
· Appoint a standing Solar System Advisory C'tee, which can provide suggesFons to the Director for Planetary Campaigns & IniFaFves, and also ensure that these are responsive to the prioriFes established in the recent (& future) SS Decadal Survey report. Eventually, it is anFcipated that these ideas would come from the community itself, as is the case in astrophysics.