Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities

[jasondrhodes]

I was asked to lead a section (chapter or appendix) on coordination with other facilities. Right now this is limited to WFIRST and Euclid, but others could be included.

-WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees. Suggest new opsim run by @egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first 2500 square degrees.

-WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields, maybe coordinated with @rhiannonlynne & Neil Brandt

-Euclid additional overlap area between -5<DEC<30, to AB~24.5 in 4 bands, with a time calculation by Tony Tyson

[egawiser]

The new OpSim addition has been suggested; see https://github.com/LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy/tree/master/opsim

[drphilmarshall]

Hi @jasondrhodes - Thinking a bit about the LSST/WFIRST overlap, and how it should fit into the LSST Observing Strategy white paper. I think what we want to do is first identify a few science sections that can be written that involve using both LSST and WFIRST data, and quantify them with some metrics. These sections should then appear in the correct chapter. Once we have them, we can then think about pulling their results together in a short discussion in the "Tensions and Tradeoffs" chapter at the end.

So, to that end, here's your short list of science areas again - can you please help me edit it into set of science projects please? I'll tag some people so they can comment. Even getting one of these written up as a white paper section would be great. Which is the highest priority science case, in your mind?

• WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees (to be captured in a new opsim run proposed by @egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first N years). Science cases:
  • Joint LSST+WFIRST WL analysis. Metric: $\sigma_{sys}$? DETF FoM? @jasondrhodes @jmeyers314
  • Joint LSST+WFIRST LSS analysis? Metric? @egawiser?
• WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields. Science cases:
  • Joint LSST+WFIRST SN cosmology analysis. Metric? (Follow SN chapter). @MichelleLochner ?
  • Joint LSST+WFIRST microlensing analysis. Who can investigate this, @lundmb ?

[jasondrhodes]

Phil- Some comments are embedded below.

From: Phil Marshall [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:26 PM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

Hi @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes - Thinking a bit about the LSST/WFIRST overlap, and how it should fit into the LSST Observing Strategy white paper. I think what we want to do is first identify a few science sections that can be written that involve using both LSST and WFIRST data, and quantify them with some metrics. These sections should then appear in the correct chapter. Once we have them, we can then think about pulling their results together in a short discussion in the "Tensions and Tradeoffs" chapter at the end.

This sounds good. Can you remind me of the time scale for this effort? I will be out of email/phone contact Nov 14-30 but can work on this when I return.

So, to that end, here's your short list of science areas again - can you please help me edit it into set of science projects please? I'll tag some people so they can comment. Even getting one of these written up as a white paper section would be great. Which is the highest priority science case, in your mind?

The highest priority is justifying reaching full LSST depth over the ~2300 square degree WFIRST High Latitude Survey on a time scale faster than 2032. I think we would like to see this depth in ~ 2027.

· WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees (to be captured in a new opsim run proposed by @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first N years). Science cases:

 *   Joint LSST+WFIRST WL analysis. Metric: $\sigma_{sys}$? DETF FoM? @jasondrhodes<https://github.com/jasondrhodes> @jmeyers314<https://github.com/jmeyers314>
 *   Joint LSST+WFIRST LSS analysis? Metric? @egawiser<https://github.com/egawiser>?

I think we could probably simplify this and justify this on photo-z arguments alone. LSST photometry is a requirement for WFIRST. WFIRST photometry would be a significant enhancement for LSST photo-zs, but not a requirement (obviously). What are your thoughts?

· WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields. Science cases:

 *   Joint LSST+WFIRST SN cosmology analysis. Metric? (Follow SN chapter). @MichelleLochner<https://github.com/MichelleLochner> ?

I’ve asked Saul Perlmutter, Alex Kim, and Charlie Baltay to coordinate on the WFIRST side of this question. People should feel free to contact them directly, but please keep me in the loop.

 *   Joint LSST+WFIRST microlensing analysis. Who can investigate this, @lundmb<https://github.com/lundmb> ?

I’ve asked David Bennett to coordinate on this on the WFIRST side. Please feel free to contact him and keep me in the loop.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-155977121.

[astrostubbs]

We should add coordination of photometric calibration...

Christopher Stubbs
Samuel C. Moncher Professor of Physics and of Astronomy
17 Oxford Street
Harvard University
Cambridge MA 02138
stubbs@physics.harvard.edu

If you think this email is terse, see http://emailcharter.org

On Nov 12, 2015, at 11:19 AM, jasondrhodes notifications@github.com wrote:

Phil- Some comments are embedded below.

From: Phil Marshall [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:26 PM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

Hi @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes - Thinking a bit about the LSST/WFIRST overlap, and how it should fit into the LSST Observing Strategy white paper. I think what we want to do is first identify a few science sections that can be written that involve using both LSST and WFIRST data, and quantify them with some metrics. These sections should then appear in the correct chapter. Once we have them, we can then think about pulling their results together in a short discussion in the "Tensions and Tradeoffs" chapter at the end.

This sounds good. Can you remind me of the time scale for this effort? I will be out of email/phone contact Nov 14-30 but can work on this when I return.

So, to that end, here's your short list of science areas again - can you please help me edit it into set of science projects please? I'll tag some people so they can comment. Even getting one of these written up as a white paper section would be great. Which is the highest priority science case, in your mind?

The highest priority is justifying reaching full LSST depth over the ~2300 square degree WFIRST High Latitude Survey on a time scale faster than 2032. I think we would like to see this depth in ~ 2027.

· WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees (to be captured in a new opsim run proposed by @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first N years). Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST WL analysis. Metric: $\sigma_{sys}$? DETF FoM? @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes @jmeyers314https://github.com/jmeyers314
• Joint LSST+WFIRST LSS analysis? Metric? @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser?
  I think we could probably simplify this and justify this on photo-z arguments alone. LSST photometry is a requirement for WFIRST. WFIRST photometry would be a significant enhancement for LSST photo-zs, but not a requirement (obviously). What are your thoughts?

· WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields. Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST SN cosmology analysis. Metric? (Follow SN chapter). @MichelleLochnerhttps://github.com/MichelleLochner ?
  I’ve asked Saul Perlmutter, Alex Kim, and Charlie Baltay to coordinate on the WFIRST side of this question. People should feel free to contact them directly, but please keep me in the loop.
• Joint LSST+WFIRST microlensing analysis. Who can investigate this, @lundmbhttps://github.com/lundmb ?
  I’ve asked David Bennett to coordinate on this on the WFIRST side. Please feel free to contact him and keep me in the loop.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-155977121.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[jasondrhodes]

Chris- Do you feel like that is a necessary part of photo-z (i.e. would already be covered when doing optimal photo-z determination) or will there be other requirements in that area that go beyond photo-z?

Thanks,

Jason

From: Christopher Stubbs [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 8:20 AM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

We should add coordination of photometric calibration...

Christopher Stubbs
Samuel C. Moncher Professor of Physics and of Astronomy
17 Oxford Street
Harvard University
Cambridge MA 02138
stubbs@physics.harvard.edumailto:stubbs@physics.harvard.edu

If you think this email is terse, see http://emailcharter.org

On Nov 12, 2015, at 11:19 AM, jasondrhodes <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Phil- Some comments are embedded below.

From: Phil Marshall [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:26 PM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy <ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.commailto:ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) <jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.govmailto:jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

Hi @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes - Thinking a bit about the LSST/WFIRST overlap, and how it should fit into the LSST Observing Strategy white paper. I think what we want to do is first identify a few science sections that can be written that involve using both LSST and WFIRST data, and quantify them with some metrics. These sections should then appear in the correct chapter. Once we have them, we can then think about pulling their results together in a short discussion in the "Tensions and Tradeoffs" chapter at the end.

This sounds good. Can you remind me of the time scale for this effort? I will be out of email/phone contact Nov 14-30 but can work on this when I return.

So, to that end, here's your short list of science areas again - can you please help me edit it into set of science projects please? I'll tag some people so they can comment. Even getting one of these written up as a white paper section would be great. Which is the highest priority science case, in your mind?

The highest priority is justifying reaching full LSST depth over the ~2300 square degree WFIRST High Latitude Survey on a time scale faster than 2032. I think we would like to see this depth in ~ 2027.

· WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees (to be captured in a new opsim run proposed by @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first N years). Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST WL analysis. Metric: $\sigma_{sys}$? DETF FoM? @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes @jmeyers314https://github.com/jmeyers314
• Joint LSST+WFIRST LSS analysis? Metric? @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser?
  I think we could probably simplify this and justify this on photo-z arguments alone. LSST photometry is a requirement for WFIRST. WFIRST photometry would be a significant enhancement for LSST photo-zs, but not a requirement (obviously). What are your thoughts?

· WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields. Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST SN cosmology analysis. Metric? (Follow SN chapter). @MichelleLochnerhttps://github.com/MichelleLochner ?
  I’ve asked Saul Perlmutter, Alex Kim, and Charlie Baltay to coordinate on the WFIRST side of this question. People should feel free to contact them directly, but please keep me in the loop.
• Joint LSST+WFIRST microlensing analysis. Who can investigate this, @lundmbhttps://github.com/lundmb ?
  I’ve asked David Bennett to coordinate on this on the WFIRST side. Please feel free to contact him and keep me in the loop.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-155977121.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-156153850.

[astrostubbs]

It's actually more an issue for supernovae than it is for photo-z's, sorry if my comment was out of place.
C

Christopher Stubbs
Samuel C. Moncher Professor of Physics and of Astronomy
17 Oxford Street
Harvard University
Cambridge MA 02138
stubbs@physics.harvard.edu

If you think this email is terse, see http://emailcharter.org

On Nov 12, 2015, at 11:37 AM, jasondrhodes notifications@github.com wrote:

Chris- Do you feel like that is a necessary part of photo-z (i.e. would already be covered when doing optimal photo-z determination) or will there be other requirements in that area that go beyond photo-z?

Thanks,

Jason

From: Christopher Stubbs [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 8:20 AM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

We should add coordination of photometric calibration...

Christopher Stubbs
Samuel C. Moncher Professor of Physics and of Astronomy
17 Oxford Street
Harvard University
Cambridge MA 02138
stubbs@physics.harvard.edumailto:stubbs@physics.harvard.edu

If you think this email is terse, see http://emailcharter.org

On Nov 12, 2015, at 11:19 AM, jasondrhodes <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Phil- Some comments are embedded below.

From: Phil Marshall [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:26 PM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy <ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.commailto:ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) <jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.govmailto:jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

Hi @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes - Thinking a bit about the LSST/WFIRST overlap, and how it should fit into the LSST Observing Strategy white paper. I think what we want to do is first identify a few science sections that can be written that involve using both LSST and WFIRST data, and quantify them with some metrics. These sections should then appear in the correct chapter. Once we have them, we can then think about pulling their results together in a short discussion in the "Tensions and Tradeoffs" chapter at the end.

This sounds good. Can you remind me of the time scale for this effort? I will be out of email/phone contact Nov 14-30 but can work on this when I return.

So, to that end, here's your short list of science areas again - can you please help me edit it into set of science projects please? I'll tag some people so they can comment. Even getting one of these written up as a white paper section would be great. Which is the highest priority science case, in your mind?

The highest priority is justifying reaching full LSST depth over the ~2300 square degree WFIRST High Latitude Survey on a time scale faster than 2032. I think we would like to see this depth in ~ 2027.

· WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees (to be captured in a new opsim run proposed by @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first N years). Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST WL analysis. Metric: $\sigma_{sys}$? DETF FoM? @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes @jmeyers314https://github.com/jmeyers314
• Joint LSST+WFIRST LSS analysis? Metric? @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser?
  I think we could probably simplify this and justify this on photo-z arguments alone. LSST photometry is a requirement for WFIRST. WFIRST photometry would be a significant enhancement for LSST photo-zs, but not a requirement (obviously). What are your thoughts?

· WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields. Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST SN cosmology analysis. Metric? (Follow SN chapter). @MichelleLochnerhttps://github.com/MichelleLochner ?
  I’ve asked Saul Perlmutter, Alex Kim, and Charlie Baltay to coordinate on the WFIRST side of this question. People should feel free to contact them directly, but please keep me in the loop.
• Joint LSST+WFIRST microlensing analysis. Who can investigate this, @lundmbhttps://github.com/lundmb ?
  I’ve asked David Bennett to coordinate on this on the WFIRST side. Please feel free to contact him and keep me in the loop.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-155977121.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-156153850.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[jasondrhodes]

Chris- I do think that it is important to include here. I just wanted to know where to ‘place’ it!

Jason

From: Christopher Stubbs [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 8:38 AM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

It's actually more an issue for supernovae than it is for photo-z's, sorry if my comment was out of place.
C

Christopher Stubbs
Samuel C. Moncher Professor of Physics and of Astronomy
17 Oxford Street
Harvard University
Cambridge MA 02138
stubbs@physics.harvard.edumailto:stubbs@physics.harvard.edu

If you think this email is terse, see http://emailcharter.org

On Nov 12, 2015, at 11:37 AM, jasondrhodes <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Chris- Do you feel like that is a necessary part of photo-z (i.e. would already be covered when doing optimal photo-z determination) or will there be other requirements in that area that go beyond photo-z?

Thanks,

Jason

From: Christopher Stubbs [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 8:20 AM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy <ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.commailto:ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) <jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.govmailto:jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

We should add coordination of photometric calibration...

Christopher Stubbs
Samuel C. Moncher Professor of Physics and of Astronomy
17 Oxford Street
Harvard University
Cambridge MA 02138
stubbs@physics.harvard.edumailto:stubbs@physics.harvard.edumailto:stubbs@physics.harvard.edu%3cmailto:stubbs@physics.harvard.edu

If you think this email is terse, see http://emailcharter.org

On Nov 12, 2015, at 11:19 AM, jasondrhodes <notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com%3cmailto:notifications@github.com>> wrote:

Phil- Some comments are embedded below.

From: Phil Marshall [mailto:notifications@github.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 6:26 PM
To: LSSTScienceCollaborations/ObservingStrategy <ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com<mailto:ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.commailto:ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com%3cmailto:ObservingStrategy@noreply.github.com>>
Cc: Rhodes, Jason D (3268) <jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.govmailto:jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov%3cmailto:jason.d.rhodes@jpl.nasa.gov>>
Subject: Re: [ObservingStrategy] Chapter or appendix on coordination with other facilities (#114)

Hi @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes - Thinking a bit about the LSST/WFIRST overlap, and how it should fit into the LSST Observing Strategy white paper. I think what we want to do is first identify a few science sections that can be written that involve using both LSST and WFIRST data, and quantify them with some metrics. These sections should then appear in the correct chapter. Once we have them, we can then think about pulling their results together in a short discussion in the "Tensions and Tradeoffs" chapter at the end.

This sounds good. Can you remind me of the time scale for this effort? I will be out of email/phone contact Nov 14-30 but can work on this when I return.

So, to that end, here's your short list of science areas again - can you please help me edit it into set of science projects please? I'll tag some people so they can comment. Even getting one of these written up as a white paper section would be great. Which is the highest priority science case, in your mind?

The highest priority is justifying reaching full LSST depth over the ~2300 square degree WFIRST High Latitude Survey on a time scale faster than 2032. I think we would like to see this depth in ~ 2027.

· WFIRST wide survey (High Latitude Survey) of 2300 square degrees (to be captured in a new opsim run proposed by @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser to examine covering this area to full depth in first N years). Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST WL analysis. Metric: $\sigma_{sys}$? DETF FoM? @jasondrhodeshttps://github.com/jasondrhodes @jmeyers314https://github.com/jmeyers314
• Joint LSST+WFIRST LSS analysis? Metric? @egawiserhttps://github.com/egawiser?
  I think we could probably simplify this and justify this on photo-z arguments alone. LSST photometry is a requirement for WFIRST. WFIRST photometry would be a significant enhancement for LSST photo-zs, but not a requirement (obviously). What are your thoughts?

· WFIRST deep fields including supernova and microlensing fields. Science cases:

• Joint LSST+WFIRST SN cosmology analysis. Metric? (Follow SN chapter). @MichelleLochnerhttps://github.com/MichelleLochner ?
  I’ve asked Saul Perlmutter, Alex Kim, and Charlie Baltay to coordinate on the WFIRST side of this question. People should feel free to contact them directly, but please keep me in the loop.
• Joint LSST+WFIRST microlensing analysis. Who can investigate this, @lundmbhttps://github.com/lundmb ?
  I’ve asked David Bennett to coordinate on this on the WFIRST side. Please feel free to contact him and keep me in the loop.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-155977121.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-156153850.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/114#issuecomment-156159469.