23 November 2010
Summary of heuristics meeting. November 17, 2010
Our long term goal is to optimize science observing efficiency by
providing feedback about the current scheduling heuristics (low freq,
high freq, ToO, joint, etc.) subject to various constraints.
In order to make sound recommendations we first need to collect some
data on the efficacy of the current system. It is likely that the data
is only useful starting Nov 16th when the operators took over the
operation of the OST. The D configuration data is not useful, and from
Oct 4-Nov 16th, the C configuration was run in advisory mode.
Ideally, we would also like to be able to simulate the impact of
various heuristics on the observing efficiency. Mark Claussen
expressed an interest in making some simulations. There is also a
long standing interest to carry out a detailed comparison of weather
data (wind, rain, temp) to API data.
We briefly reviewed the SB status report tool. It seems to provide
most of the required information. A request was made to the software
group to provide a capability to extract data from the tool (for
plotting). The main action item is for people to start to use this
tool and start to answer some top-level questions such as:
(1) What fraction of approved projects are getting on the telescope?
As a function of priority? OSRO vs RSRO? LST? Rms phase/wind speed?
(2) What is the average level of completeness of the projects that get
on the telescope? As a fct of priority and project length?
(3) Are more high frequency projects (or projects requesting good
weather) getting observed? What is the rms phase for PST-scheduled
projects versus past projects?
(4) What fraction of low frequency projects getting high frequency
weather (as measured by the API)?
(5) What is the impact of triggered transients and ToOs on observing
efficiency? The prediction is that this may be a problem at the
(6) How likely you are to be scheduled, as a function of SB length in
hours. Is there an optimal SB size in hours to ensure getting on