Hubble Space Telescope Call for Proposals for Cycle 13
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| Hubble Space Telescope Call for Proposals for Cycle 13 | |||||
| ||||||
6.1 How STScI Evaluates Submitted ProposalsChapter 6:
Proposal Selection
Procedures
6.1.1 The Review Panels
6.1.2 The Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC)
6.2 Selection Criteria
6.1 How STScI Evaluates Submitted Proposals
HST Programs are selected through competitive peer review. A broad range of scientists from the international astronomical community evaluates all submitted proposals, using a well-defined set of criteria (see Section 6.2). They rank the proposals and offer their recommendations to the STScI Director. Based on these recommendations, the STScI Director makes the final allocation of observing time.
6.1.1 The Review Panels
Review panels will consider Regular GO (fewer than 100 orbits; see Section 3.2.1), SNAP, Regular AR, and Theory proposals. Each review panel can recommend Regular GO proposals up to a certain limited number of orbits that it has been allocated. In order to encourage the acceptance of larger proposals, a progressive orbit "subsidy" is allocated to the panels, with orbits in the subsidy coming from outside the direct panel allotment. The algorithm for this "subsidy" has the goal of creating an acceptance rate of submitted programs that is approximately independent of size.
The panel recommendations generally do not require further approval of the TAC (see Section 6.1.2) and scientific balance will be determined within each panel rather than by the TAC. The panels do not decide on Large GO proposals (100 orbits or more; see Section 3.2.4), Treasury GO proposals (see Section 3.2.4), or AR Legacy proposals (see Section 3.4.2), but they will send their comments on these proposals to the TAC for their consideration. Calibration proposals (see Section 3.6) will only be reviewed by the TAC.
Panelists are chosen based on their expertise in one or more of the areas under review by the panel. Each panel spans several scientific categories (as defined in Section 8.8). For example, in Cycle 12 there were three panels dealing with Hot Stars, ISM and Circumstellar Medium; two panels dealing with Star Formation, Cool Stars and Stellar Populations; three panels dealing with Galaxies, AGN and Quasars; two panels dealing with Quasar Absorption Lines and Cosmology; and one panel dealing with the Solar System. The division of scientific categories over panels may be different in Cycle 13, but the breadth of the panels will remain the same. Within a panel, proposals are assigned to individual expert reviewers based on the keywords given in the proposal (see Section 8.9). These keywords should therefore be chosen with care.
6.1.2 The Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC)
The TAC will be composed of a TAC chair and the panel chairs. The primary responsibility of the TAC is to review the Large GO proposals (100 orbits or more; see Section 3.2.2), Treasury GO proposals (see Section 3.2.4), AR Legacy proposals (see Section 3.4.2), any other particularly large requests of resources (SNAP, AR, Theory or pure parallel), and Calibration proposals (see Section 3.6). It will also be the arbiter of any extraordinary or cross-panel issues.
6.2 Selection Criteria
Evaluations of HST proposals are based on the following criteria.
Criteria for all Proposals
- The scientific merit of the project and its potential contribution to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
- The proposed program's importance to astronomy in general. This should be stated explicitly in the `Scientific Justification' section of the proposal (see Section 9.1).
- The extent to which the expertise of the proposers is sufficient to assure a thorough analysis of the data.
- The evidence for a coordinated effort to maximize the scientific return from the program.
- A demonstration of how the results will be made available to the astronomical community in the form of scientific or technical publications in a timely manner.
- A demonstration of timely publication of the results of any previous HST programs.
Additional Criteria for all GO and SNAP Proposals
- What is the rationale for selecting the type and number of targets? Reviewers will be instructed to recommend or reject proposals as they are and to refrain from orbit or object trimming. Therefore, it is very important for you to strongly justify both the selection and the number of targets in your proposal, as well as the number of orbits requested.
- Why are the unique capabilities of HST required to achieve the science goals of the program? Evidence should be provided that the project cannot be accomplished with a reasonable use of ground-based telescopes (irrespective of their accessibility to the proposer).
- Is there evidence that the project has already been pursued to the limits of ground-based and/or other space-based techniques?
- What are the demands made on HST and STScI resources, including the requested number of orbits or targets, and the efficiency with which telescope time will be used?
- Is the project technically feasible and what is the likelihood of success? Quantitative estimates of the expected results and the needed accuracy of the data must be provided.
Additional Criteria for Large GO Proposals, Treasury GO proposals and Legacy AR proposals
- Is there a plan to assemble a coherent database that will be adequate for addressing all of the purposes of the program?
- Will the work of the proposers be coordinated effectively, even though a large team may be required for the proper analysis of the data?
- Is there evidence that the observational database will be obtained in such a way that it will be useful also for purposes other than the immediate goals of the project?
Additional Criterion for SNAP Proposals
- Willingness to waive part or all of the proprietary period. While this is not the primary criterion for acceptance or rejection, it can provide additional benefit to any proposal and will be weighed by the reviewers as such.
Additional Criterion for Calibration Proposals
- What is the long-term potential for enabling new types of scientific investigation with HST, and what is the importance of these investigations?
Additional Criteria for all Archival Research Proposals
- What will be the improvement or addition of scientific knowledge with respect to the previous original use of the data? In particular, a strong justification must be given to reanalyze data if it has the same science goals as the original proposal.
- What are the demands on STScI resources (including funding, technical assistance, and archival/dissemination of products)?
Additional Criteria for Treasury GO and Legacy AR Proposals
- What scientific investigations will be enabled by the data products, and what is their importance?
- What plans are there for timely dissemination of the data products to the community?
Additional Criteria for Theory Proposals
|
|||||
|
Space Telescope Science Institute http://www.stsci.edu Voice: (410) 338-1082 help@stsci.edu |
