Note: This document has recently been modified. Important changes are reflected in bold-italic font.
Use of the Arecibo Observatory (AO) is available on an equal, competitive basis to all scientists from throughout the world to pursue research in radio astronomy, radar astronomy, and atmospheric sciences. Observing time is granted on the basis of scientific merit and broader impacts of the proposed project. Potential users of the telescope should submit a proposal describing their desired observations, the scientific justification, and the broader impact for these. The procedures for submitting proposals, the mechanics of evaluation, and the life-cycle of these proposals, are outlined below.
Following the Senior Review's Report, the overall telescope time available for astronomy will be divided between surveys and other (PI) projects at all right ascensions approximately in the ratio of 80/20. Following guidance from the AUSAC, the Observatory will treat this division as flexibly as possible, seeking to preserve as much time to PI projects as is practical. Hence the 80% of time devoted to surveys will encompass any program (large or small) that can reasonably be described as a survey: it will specifically include non-ALFA projects. Please see section 5.7 for more information.
Additional policies for sub-consortium follow-up observations are now in effect. Please see section 5.8 for details.
Up-to-date information about the status of the telescope and available instrumentation is obtainable at the Arecibo Observatory web page (http://www.naic.edu/). The public information for currently scheduled proposals (http://www.naic.edu/vscience/schedule/tpfiles/) is available on the web. This includes title, abstract, first author, time requested, and instrument setup.
The deadlines for submission are February 1, June 1, and October 1, although proposals may be submitted at any time. Submission for a given deadline implies that the observations are requested to be initially scheduled during the four month period which starts four months after that deadline (see figure). The active time for a given proposal is dependent on its grade and rating, and is described in detail in Section 4. Exception for the above is the Large Proposals, as described in section 5.7.
|
d |
4 months |
|
4 months |
|
4 months | |
|
Proposal submitted for a given deadline |
Refereeing and notification of proposal status |
As many successful proposals as possible (from deadline 1) are considered for the scheduling queue |
Further consideration of proposals (from deadline 1) not scheduled during previous periods |
A proposal is composed of a cover sheet, and a scientific and technical justification. We encourage all potential telescope users to submit proposals electronically. The cover sheet portion of the proposal is to be submitted via a web-based form and consists of a title, abstract, author contact information, time and instrument specifications for the proposed project, RFI considerations, and object(s) to be observed. The scientific and technical justification must be submitted separately as a postscript or a PDF file.
The web-based cover sheet can be accessed from http://www.naic.edu/~astro/proposals/cover.html or through the "Scientific Users" menu on the AO web page. After filling in all the specified information, you may preview a postscript or PDF version of the form to check for completeness and accuracy. This is a LaTeX based form. For those who are familiar with LaTeX, some math-mode code (math symbols, greek letters, etc.) will be accepted. Please do not include any formatting codes, as these will be ignored and may possibly cause processing errors. However, no knowledge of LaTeX is needed to use the form. If you are not familiar with LaTeX, any special symbols, such as dollar ($), number (#), percentage (%), must be preceded by a backslash (\). After submitting your cover sheet, a temporary ID code in the form of Principal Investigator's (PI) last name followed by a 12 digit number, will be assigned to your proposal. After submission, you can use the back buttons to choose preview again if you wish. Your postscript or PDF viewer should let you save a copy. If you have difficulty with the web-based form, contact Ellen Howell at ehowell (append @naic.edu) for assistance.
Email your scientific and technical justification as a postscript or PDF file to proposal (append @naic.edu). They can be sent as attachments, or (for postscript only) as the body of the email. Please do not send gzipped files. The subject of the email should be the temporary ID number assigned to your proposal without any additional text.
If it is difficult to submit your entire proposal electronically, you may submit the cover sheet via the web form and the body of the proposal by mail. Five hard copies of the latter should be sent to the Observatory Director (Arecibo Observatory, HC 3 Box 53995, Arecibo, Puerto Rico, 00612). Both parts should arrive at the Observatory on or before the deadline.
NOTE: Some auxiliary equipment, such as the Photometers or the Ionosonde that are used for atmospheric research, require little user interaction. Other equipment is more complex and requires detailed set-up and operation for an experiment, for example the Fabry-Perot Interferometers or the Lidars. Users who want to utilize these instruments in their studies are strongly encouraged to contact the appropriate staff member to determine the proper configurations for observation. Because most such auxiliary equipment cannot be run unattended, an investigator must be on site to conduct these observations.
Following the submission of a proposal, the PI will be notified and provided with an identification number. If there are no obvious technical problems, the proposal will be sent to anonymous referees (not NAIC staff) with expertise in the proposed field. The referees' recommendations serve to guide the Arecibo Scheduling Advisory Committee (ASAC) in the relative ranking of all proposals. This is used as input for the time allocation and scheduling process.
After the referees' reports are received, the ASAC meets and assigns a letter grade, A, B, or C, to each proposal. Proposers are sent the referee reports and the letter grade, as well as any specific comments or requests for clarification identified by the ASAC.
The proposer will be notified when his or her proposal is scheduled, and assigned a staff scientist who will serve as the contact "friend of the telescope" for the project. Observers are encouraged to contact this person to discuss various details well before the start date of the observations.
It should be emphasized that because of the special requirements of the different research areas which use the telescope, and the semi-transit nature of the instrument, scheduling is a difficult task, and may require interaction between the telescope scheduler and the proposers to ensure the flexibility necessary to accommodate what are often conflicting demands. It is not always possible to schedule in a "linear" fashion strictly following priorities. Depending on circumstances, some proposals will take longer to be placed on the schedule.
The Observatory tries to accommodate the requests and needs of its users, taking into account such factors as the need to coordinate projects with other experiments at other observatories, and the relation of a project to a student's career planning.
The following is a summary of the information that proposers will receive via email:
On the cover sheet you are asked to assign your proposal to one of the following categories:
These are proposals that are generally completed within a one-year period, usually in one or a few observing sessions. Most proposals fall in this category. The narrative of a regular proposal can be up to 3 pages long (including figures, but excluding references and target list).
These are proposals that while not asking for large blocks of observing time, do require a long time-base of observations. Examples are pulsar timing, variability monitoring, sky surveys, atmospheric world days, etc. and, in particular, research associated with PhD theses. Annual progress reports, to be evaluated by referees, are required to continue the observing program. The narrative of a large proposal can be up to 6 pages long (including figures, but excluding references and target list).
Observers having scientific objectives that can be accomplished in 3 hours or less of telescope time are invited to submit a short proposal, which may be submitted at any time (proposal deadline restrictions do not apply). These are currently restricted to radio-astronomical observations applying straightforward techniques, e.g., a determination of the HI spectrum of a galaxy, a small set of galactic HI or OH spectra, or the continuum measurement of source flux densities.
The proposers should submit the cover sheet and a brief justification (one page or less). In absence of conflict, and at NAIC's discretion, the observation will be scheduled at the earliest convenient time. If requested, we would be willing to provide support for observing. Such a service observing would be arranged by a staff scientist, i.e., the designated "friend of the telescope" for the project.
We recognize that observing opportunities occur where the phenomena are short-lived, non-recurring, or of particular interest or urgency. In such cases, the proposers should submit the web-based cover sheet indicating that the submission is an urgent proposal, as well as provide a scientific and/or technical justification. The Observatory Director will respond to the request. If time permits, these proposals will be reviewed by appropriate anonymous outside reviewers.
Users interested in obtaining access to limited amounts of telescope time for "unconventional" observing programs are invited to propose for Director's discretionary time. An "unconventional" program may be exploratory observations to assess a speculative scientific idea, or observations motivated by educational or outreach objectives, for example. Proposals for Director's discretionary time will be reviewed only by the ASAC. The Observatory Director, informed by the recommendation of the ASAC, will decide whether to award time to the proposal.
A proposal may request observations taken simultaneously with a scheduled primary observing project. Control of the telescope remains at all times with the primary experiment. These proposals will be handled in the same way as all others. Scheduling will, of course, depend upon the availability of instrumentation.
All proposals that ask for more observing time than 300-400 hours and, at the NAIC Director's discretion, some proposals requesting less time than this, will initially be evaluated by a "skeptical review", in addition to the normal proposal review process. The panel will be roughly balanced between "experts" in the sub-discipline addressed by the large proposal, and cross-disciplinary "skeptics".
There is already (2007) some difficulty in fitting all of the approved ALFA survey proposals into the telescope schedule. This may be aggravated too, when new large surveys are proposed. A measure of prioritization is therefore needed, when all large proposals can be considered as a set, which for a telescope where access to night-time hours is generally a constraint, requires an annual assessment. Accordingly large proposals, unlike other proposal categories, have one submission deadline per year for expeditious handling: this is February 1st. Large proposals should be submitted by this deadline in order to be skeptically reviewed in August, after going through the usual scientific merit review. Large proposals require an annual report, which will be considered together with those for all other large proposals in August, in order to continue the project. Large proposals submitted at other times will be given the regular scientific merit review in the trimester submitted, but the skeptical review will be delayed until the following August. (e. g. a large proposal submitted on October 1, 2008, will not be skeptically reviewed until August 2009.)
The skeptical review panel will assess:
The skeptical review panel will prioritize the surveys, and suggest time
allocations between those approved for the 12 months following its
deliberations.
The panel will provide the NAIC Director these delibrations and a recommended course of action.
The narrative of a large proposal can be up to 12 pages long (including figures, but excluding references and target list).
The surveys pALFA, ALFALFA, and AGES each requested follow up time last year, which raised operational issues about how to treat these requests most effectively. The experience we gained pointed to concerns about verifying sensitivity limits in a timely manner, speeding publication, and exploiting the 'right' discoveries quickly. On the other hand, the Observatory needs to know what is being done and what resources are needed. In addition there is a need for accountability for the time (no blank time check), and a need for clarity for commensal partners. Further, in the scheduling conditions at the beginning of 2007, execution of the follow up time requests improved telescope throughput.
Policy: Propose separately for Sub-Consortia follow-up observations, to obtain a proposal number. The proposal should briefly outline what is involved, what telescope time is required, and what equipment is needed. Mark the proposal as a sub- consortium follow up proposal on the cover page.
NAIC operating assumptions are then (i) that all such proposals have been blessed by the consortium's PI on behalf of its members; (ii) that the PI is the best judge of its importance in relation to the rapid production of deliverables, and their immediate exploitation; (iii) there are no authorship concerns to be addressed by Arecibo.
Outcome:
Benefits:
On the cover sheet you are also asked to specify the observing time requested in either LST, AST (Atlantic Standard Time = UT - 4 hours), or UT, and specify the number of observing days required for each time interval. The distribution of days, constraints due to object availability, or spacing of days can be described in a text window below the time intervals. For example, you may need 3 contiguous days in a one-month window, or 3 days, spaced 2 days apart for timing of a particular object's activity. Describe constraints as succinctly and completely as possible. The time requested and its distribution must be supported in the scientific justification part of the proposal. You may also note the minimum usable block of time for this project that is acceptable to you.
We encourage the PI or a collaborator to be in residence during observations. However, we recognize that this may not always be possible and may sometimes be inefficient as with routine monitoring programs. Therefore, there is the option of requesting In Absentia or Remote observing.
In Absentia observing is intended to provide greater operational flexibility for scientists who either:
The observations will be carried out by the telescope operator according to the PIs instructions. Therefore, the PI should send, well in advance, detailed and clear procedural instructions and relevant information to the email address observe (append @naic.edu). The operator will initiate observing runs, communicate with investigators as necessary, and seek advice from NAIC scientific and technical staff. However, the observatory operator or the staff are not responsible of monitoring data quality. In absentia observing is appropriate for observing programs that are simple and straight-forward to operate. Complicated observing programs are not suited to In Absentia observing.
We define observing programs as remote when the minute-to-minute conduct of the program is dictated from a remote site via electronic access. The telescope operator always retains final control and responsibility for the security of the telescope. Unless the observers have recent experience running essentially identical observations for a different program, the observers must begin their program in residence at Arecibo to work out their program details. It is the responsibility of the PI that the observers understand how to perform the observing program and are aware of any changes in the user interface. Remote observers should provide backup plans for circumstances that interrupt remote telescope control (e.g. communications dropout) so as to insure a successful completion of the observing session. Remote observing simplifies travel logistics, but transfers more of the responsibility for successful observations from the Observatory to the PI.
More information on remote observing is available at the Remote Observing with the Arecibo Telescope (http://www.naic.edu/~astro/remote.shtml).
Remote observers must provide contact information in an email to remote (append @naic.edu) for the person who will actually do the observations at least three working days before the scheduled date of observation.
Observers are scheduled on the telescope with the understanding that they pursue the program described in their observing request. Observers wishing to deviate from their original program, exchange time with other observers, or make use of unassigned telescope time, should seek the consent of the Arecibo Observatory Director. In cases of emergency or last minute changes, contact the telescope operator.
Under normal circumstances, observers will have exclusive rights to their data for a period of 18 months. The PI can request an extension of this period by one year by writing a letter to the Observatory Director stating the reasons for which this is requested.
If two or more proposals request time to observe the same source or region of sky to achieve essentially the same scientific objectives, they are in conflict. In this case the ASAC has the discretion to recommend the resolution to this conflict. The NAIC Director will have the final authority in resolving conflicts.
For visiting scientists from US based institutions who have an approved research program at the Observatory, the NAIC will partially reimburse transportation costs associated with the conduct of the research program. For each observing program scheduled at the Arecibo telescope, reimbursement may be requested for one investigator to travel to Arecibo to observe, and for one to travel to Arecibo to reduce data (effectively two per project). Reimbursement may be requested for an additional investigator to either observe or reduce data provided that he or she is a student, graduate or undergraduate. In addition, in some cases, NAIC will provide travel support for research on archival Arecibo data. The reimbursement for all travel will be for the actual cost of economy airfare, up to a limit of $1000 per investigator. Lodging costs for students may be waived if requested in advance and approved by the Observatory Director. No reimbursement is available for meals or rental cars. However, there is a cafeteria on site and a car available for visitors to use while staying in the Visiting Scientist Quarters. Reimbursable costs will be those allowed by Cornell University policy. Per NSF requirements, no travel support is provided for investigators not based in the USA. To request travel support, contact Carmen Segarra at csegarrs (append @naic.edu).
The NAIC will contribute towards the publication costs of results from observations carried out at the Arecibo Observatory. You should notify the Observatory when a manuscript has been accepted and send three preprints to the Arecibo Observatory Library, or email the astro-ph link of the manuscript to library (append @naic.edu), prior to publication.
The manuscript should contain the following acknowledgment at the point in the text where the Observatory is first mentioned, preferably in the form of a footnote, or according to journal format: "The Arecibo Observatory is part of the National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, which is operated by Cornell University under a cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation".
When requested, for papers reporting original observations made with the Arecibo telescope, NAIC will pay 100% of the page charges for all authors at a US scientific or educational institution. For publications with authors based outside the US, support will be prorated in proportion to the fraction of non-US authors. In addition, in some cases, NAIC will provide page charge support for publications based on the Observatory's archival data. Page charge support requests should be forwarded to Carmen Segarra at csegarra (append @naic.edu).
In addition to the facility equipment provided by NAIC, observers may bring their own special purpose equipment. We encourage such initiatives by providing space, power, and access to the IF signal, etc. Telescope position and other monitoring data can be made available. Advance arrangement should be made with the Observatory Director in Arecibo, to guarantee a smooth installation.
If you are willing to permit unrestricted access to your equipment and provide full user documentation, it can be converted to 'facility' status; a significant benefit to all parties. The Observatory may then take over routine maintenance. Such arrangements are handled on a case-by-case basis. The technical specifications will be circulated via Newsletter, the WWW, and other means, so that the equipment becomes available to all who wish to use it. No co-authorship or other obligations are incurred, though professional courtesy warrants acknowledgment in publications resulting from use of such equipment.
In order to improve our facilities and services, we request observers who have completed an observing session to provide us with feedback about their experience. Please use the On-line Feedback Form (http://www.naic.edu/~astro/obs_comment.html) to send us your comments.