![]() ![]() “Reviewers are asked to grade each proposal based on three criteria: (1) impact within subfield, (2) out-of-field impact, and (3) suitability for the observatory For external panels, proposals are ranked using submitted grades. Each panel is given an allocation of telescope time, for which it can recommend observing programs. Very small proposals, are graded asynchronously by external panelists, whereas larger programs are reviewed by discussion panels. “Once the proposals have been submitted, the STScI JWST Science Policies Group sorts the proposals by type and/or size and by scientific category. STScI instituted DAPR in 2016 in support of the Hubble Space Telescope Cycle 26 TAC and has found that DAPR has decreased a previously-seen disparity in proposal selection rate for male and female investigators and has encouraged many more students to apply for telescope time. The peer-review process is carried out such that the proposers don’t know who is reviewing the proposals, and the reviewers don’t know who wrote the proposals, a process called Dual-Anonymous Peer Review (DAPR). Each reviewer is assigned to a topical panel reflecting their scientific expertise. ![]() “To select the programs that will be executed, STScI recruits hundreds of members of the international astronomical community to serve on the Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC). Together, the submitted proposals requested more than 35,000 hours of telescope time, far exceeding the 5,000 hours of telescope time available to be allocated. The proposals covered all topics in astronomy and astrophysics from solar system bodies, exoplanets, supernova remnants, and merging neutron stars to nearby and distant galaxies, supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies, and the large-scale structure of the universe. For Cycle 2, a record-breaking 1,600 proposals were submitted by more than 5,450 scientists from 52 countries including the United States, ESA (European Space Agency) member states, and Canada. Archival proposals request support to analyze already existing observations, develop theoretical models to interpret observations, and/or develop scientific software to facilitate data analysis. “For every year of regular operations, STScI plans to issue a Call for General Observer and Archival proposals from the international astronomical community to solicit ideas for new observations and archival studies to be executed in the upcoming year. This announcement was the culmination of a peer-review process to select the most scientifically compelling programs, which began with the submission of observing and archival proposals on January 27. “On May 10, the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI), the science operations center for NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope, announced the scientific program for Cycle 2, the second year of regular operations. We asked Christine Chen, associate astronomer and JWST Science Policies Group lead at the Space Telescope Science Institute, to describe the selection process to determine the targets Webb will observe. This week, astronomers around the world are celebrating the announcement of the next cycle of Webb observations. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |