sloan digital sky survey publication policy n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Sloan Digital Sky Survey Publication Policy PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Sloan Digital Sky Survey Publication Policy

Sloan Digital Sky Survey Publication Policy

2 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Sloan Digital Sky Survey Publication Policy

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Sloan Digital Sky Survey Publication Policy Scott Dodelson

  2. SDSS: 2.5 meter telescope in New Mexico designed to map the sky Telescope operates in two modes: photometric & spectroscopic

  3. 25 institutions in collboration, ~200 PhD’s

  4. Publications to Date • ~1300 using SDSS data • More than 37,000 total citations [catching up to Witten!]

  5. History • Publication policy was drafted by Collaboration Council, with representatives from every SDSS institution. Began by looking at COBE policy. • Worked out over a year with wide input. • Since it was adopted, there have been only minor changes, though there have also been "implementation customs" that go beyond the original document or emphasize or de-emphasize some of the formal procedures (hence the "informal guide").

  6. Author Order • Alphabetical on data release papers • On other papers, "analysis" group authors order themselves and appear first, other authors are listed alphabetically after the analysis group

  7. Builders • Those who made major contributions to the project (>~ 2 years worth, roughly 100 people) and are automatically entitled to request co-authorship on any paper based on non-public data, by virtue of their contribution to the creation of the data set. • Builders initially proposed by Collaboration Council members and then approved by project management; list has grown modestly over time.

  8. Technical References All papers are required to reference the project's appropriate technical papers. Thus, those who contributed the technical infrastructure of the project are recognized through highly cited publications, in addition to (in some cases) builder status.

  9. Web Posting & Review Policy • Papers internally posted for 3 weeks before publication to allow input and co-authorship requests. The latter can come from builders or from non-builders who feel they have made a significant contribution to the paper (perhaps in the form of a relevant infrastructure contribution). Builder requests are automatically approved; others can in principle be denied by the primary authors, with an appeals process in place, but in practice this has never happened. • Most aspects of this are automatic, but the publication coordinators check that papers are in compliance with the publication policy, in particular that they reference all of the required technical papers (and the first posting of a paper rarely does).

  10. Random Example

  11. How well has this policy worked? • Non-alphabetical ordering has arguably encouraged people to initiate new projects • Builders and technical referencing has adequately recognized infra-structure contributions • Number of authors/paper has declined with time • Broad participation encouraged for key projects • Remarkably few disputes