Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


5 mins

1. News & announcements

  • Deadline for registration for the ERS data hackathon coming up on Friday. Several of us have delivered data for this so please sign up if interested (link:

  • Validation of the NIRSpec calibration pipeline: TSO WG has started scientific validation of it, led by L. Ubeda. Having short tag-ups once a week to catch up on this work. This is using the ISIM-CV3 dataset for NIRSpec.
    • MR: "full" is very ambitious, hasn't really been done for a lot of the pipeline. requires a parallel method that tells you what "truth" is. Have so far "over-advertised" that we are validating the pipeline because a lot of work so far wasn't that.
    • TK: sounds like a big extension to pipeline testing work from last summer.
    • NE: clarifies that indeed, it is a step-by-step extension of what's been done. If anyone is interested in joining tag-ups, please let NE know. 

30min2. JDox TSO articles

Proposes that at least 3 additions to TSO JDox be made/at least discussed to be made. The first two are:

  • The exposure limit on the number of frames (
    serverSTScI JIRA
    ). Why & explain workaround.
  • Phase constraint error for some long exposures (
    serverSTScI JIRA
    ). This should be covered by APT as well as TSO.

SK: should not only document it in the TSO pages. but agree, adding a page on some "known issues" in the Methods & Roadmaps
DK: there are other limitations so would be good to also summarise them there
NE: so we need to dig through JIRA and find all these issues, and work with APT team to document properly. Should also involve MO. 
NB these issues will be taken care of by contact scientist, which may be the TSO WG memeber but otherwise do provide support

  •  Nestor Espinoza and Sarah Kendrew will work together to define a handful of TSO WG members to take care of this. They will supervise this part of the work.

The third proposal to add to JDox in one way or another is:

  • JWST TSO Pipeline. how to run it, who to contact for trouble (helpdesk). Should we take the initiative to provide some documentation for how to run the pipeline for TSOs? Particularly important for the transiting exoplanet ERS team. 

NN: came as one of the tasks for each branch (task 66?). has now been split into 2 sections: produce a JDox article with narrative for how to use the pipeline + provide notebooks.

SK: not in favour of writing full pipeline documentation in JDox. In favour of having a page that points people to right resources - readthedocs, notebooks. 

NN: hard to find basic run-through information

NE & NN: exoplanet observers will be very picky and will definitely reprocess their data offline for their analysis and tweak certain steps.

MR: in Spitzer TSOs came in for instruments that already had pipelines. Here were are trying to start from zero and we don't even know how our basic pipeline will work. Achieving an order of mag improvement in stability ahead of time before we have data is extremely challenging at this point.

NE: how do we keep the community up to date on the latest state of the art, what is in the works, etc? 

  • SK: not in favour of JDocs for that as editing process is a but of a pain
  • NN: also important to explain why pipeline does certain things or certain steps are included 
  • MR: it's really hard to predict how and why and what people will need to change
  • NE: so let's document that uncertainty as well. good to be clear about what we do and don't know

NE suggests we take this task ASAP, because when commissioning starts we will not have time for this. The time to do this is now.

  •  Nestor Espinoza  will email Alaina & Amaya & TSO WG and sort out via email how to best handle this. 
5 mins3. Final comments or updates

Nestor Espinoza
  • Discussion went longer than expected on JDox (which is good!) — so no time to discuss updates on 1/f and high-efficiency modes. However, action items are clear on those tasks; Nestor Espinoza will contact the relevant folks on this.

  • Let's meet again in 2 weeks!