TTA Tools: Wednesday, 2 pm MT, 4 pm ET, 12 September 2018


CV-331/GB-137/SO-317, 331 Hub Audio 434-817-6286


  • Allocation Request: use cases (All)
  • Proposals (All)
    • Filler
    • Sponsored
  • AOB


Attending: DanaBalser, JeffKern, AnandCrossley, RyanLynch, LorantSjouwerman, StephanWitz

  • Allocation Request: use cases. DanaBalser summarized the overall proposal structure to start the meeting. LorantSjouwerman questioned how Scheduling Blocks (SBs) were connected. Currently the Program is part of the Project with a link to the SB. LorantSjouwerman will review the draft document and think about these connections. JeffKern suggested that we should modify the GBT structure since we do not plan to create SBs for the GBT. DanaBalser suggested we should have Projects that created Dynamics Scheduling System (DSS) sessions, and that there are no Programs. We then worked through several use cases provided by RyanLynch:
    1. Wide area pulsar survey like GBNCC. Essentially a pointed map. Here there would be one Allocation Request (AR) and 1 Target. The Target field could be specified by a RA, Dec with a range or we could allow the user to specify an LST range. The GBT DSS requires a RA, Dec.
    2. Single pointed observation of pulsar (and possibly multiple frequencies). For one frequency this would be 1 AR and 1 Target. If there were 10 targets all with 3 frequencies then we would need 30 Targets. The user should not need to enter all of these details so the software should provide a way to create these 30 Targets. StephanWitz said that we should provide DMS with some general requirements on how to group this information and some use cases. We also discussed overhead and calibration. For the GBT the sensitivity calculator does not provide an overhead (the mapper does). The VLA ECT does provide an overhead. It assumes a 2 hr SB and then applies a fixed component and then a frequency/configuration component. We agreed that that the user should be able to override this automatic calculation, but LorantSjouwerman noted that under the current system in his experience the user gets this wrong. We should deal with this at the TAC stage if the observatory feels that the user is indeed not correct.
    3. Single pointed observations of multiple pulsars (and possibly multiple frequencies). No real change here. Need to find a way to group them.
    4. Pointed observation of one or more pulsars but with constraints. We discussed several different types on constraints: (i) observe a source with a regular cadence with some error (pulsar monitoring); (ii) a trigger with an irregular cadence (e.g., SN goes off and they want to observer 1 day, 10 days, 1 month, etc.); and (iii) observe at different points in the phase of some orbit (e.g., binary star). We discussed if there was a way to automatically capture these constraints or if a text box was required. RyanLynch was not sure how this was done in the DSS. LorantSjouwerman said this is done manually for the VLA. JeffKern suggested we look at how ALMA deals with this info.
  • Action Items:
    1. Provide a list of observations with different types of constraints and, if possible, a way to automatically capture the constraint (RyanLynch and LorantSjouwerman)
    2. Look at how ALMA captures observing constraints (DanaBalser)

-- DanaBalser - 2018-09-11
Topic revision: r2 - 2018-09-12, DanaBalser
This site is powered by FoswikiCopyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding NRAO Public Wiki? Send feedback