[Lofarpwg] LOFAR2.0 PSR/FRB/Fast Transients EoIs

Wed Nov 10 13:30:04 UTC 2021

Hello All,

thanks for the discussion.
Andrea -- indeed, we have spoken about the possible census. I am not sure
if we decided something, but indeed, I would also prefer to have it in the
survey EoI - the reason being that, for the monitoring, I'd prefer to keep
topics that require long-term campaigns. However, we can discuss about it.
I am not adverse to a "Census EoI", as there are many other science topics
that would use single-shot and maybe long-track observations (e.g., single
pulse analysis and alike)
Aris -- we will make sure of helping each other targets :-)

Cheers
Caterina

On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 11:01, Aris Karastergiou <
aris.karastergiou at physics.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I am following this conversation with interest. I think the key will be in
> the details. For MeerKAT, we opted for a single long (to get enough single
> pulses) pass of 1000+ sources, which didn't take up that much time,
> followed by monthly monitoring of several hundred, with the minimum
> integration time that gives us good fidelity. The value of 8h per source
> can be debated.
>
> The high-level arguments about the science you are putting forward are
> interesting, but ultimately the objectives of searching and timing are the
> same: to understand pulsars and where they sit in a variety of problems in
> physics. In my opinion therefore, these campaigns need to be optimized in a
> practical way, maximizing the return from each and helping each other's
> objectives.
>
> Not particularly useful, but those are my thoughts anyway.
>
> Cheers,
> Aris
> ------------------------------
> *From:* lofarpwg <lofarpwg-bounces at astron.nl> on behalf of Possenti,
> Andrea <andrea.possenti at inaf.it>
> *Sent:* 10 November 2021 09:04
> *To:* Joris Verbiest <joris.verbiest at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* fgl2bf at astron.nl <fgl2bf at astron.nl>; Alessandro Ridolfi <
> alessandro.ridolfi at inaf.it>; Ziggy Pleunis <ziggypleunis at gmail.com>;
> e.vanderwateren at science.ru.nl <e.vanderwateren at science.ru.nl>;
> lofarpwg at astron.nl <lofarpwg at astron.nl>; Pilia, Maura <maura.pilia at inaf.it
> >
> *Subject:* Re: [Lofarpwg] LOFAR2.0 PSR/FRB/Fast Transients EoIs
>
> hi Joris and Cees,
>
> I really  do not disagree with any of you and I see good reasons for both
> visions.
> Science-wise I'm  more on Cees' (and my original) view (most science, with
> some notable
> exceptions, is overlapping among monitoring and long tracks on known
> sources, although on different timescales),
> while on the implementation plan, I'm much more inclined on Joris' view,
> especially since
> doing 1000 sources  with the monitoring will be  practically very  hard if
> not impossible.
>
> Maybe an intermediate option could be to ask for the Census-1000 pulsars
> as a "piggy
> back" program for the survey EoI, while keeping the description of the
> related science
> and motivations in the "monitoring" EoI.
>
> Anyway, just a second order thing. What's important is to have that
> implemented somewhere.
>
> Andrea
>
>
> Il giorno mer 10 nov 2021 alle ore 09:54 Joris Verbiest <
> joris.verbiest at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
> Hi Cees,
>
> Just to quickly point out that I don't think I agree.
>
> I do agree that scientifically there is a match with some of the science
> goals of the monitoring campaign and those of the long-track census; but at
> the same time a major goal of pulsar surveys is exactly charting the
> population of source out there -- meaning that there is an excellent
> scientific match there as well.
>
> Also, in terms of required observations, the survey and the long-track
> census are perfectly matched, whereas the difference with the monitoring
> campaign could not be larger.
>
> So I personally very much think the long-track census would be a logical
> part of the survey EoI -- but not of the monitoring EoI.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Joris
>
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 20:38, Cees Bassa <bassa at astron.nl> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrea,
>
> On Mon, 2021-11-08 at 23:07 +0100, Possenti, Andrea wrote:
> > I think that reading also the similar doc for the monitor EoI will be
> > beneficial to answer your questions.
> > At the moment, I'm just wondering if the 2nd sub-theme in the search
> > EoI might not be more appropriate
> > for the parallel monitor program. Of course one can sell that as a
> > "search" for single pulses and other
> > as yet unassessed phenomenologies, but at the very end the telescope
> > will look at already known sources.
>
> Looking at the notes I took of both the searching and monitoring
> discussions, the "1000 pulsar census with 8h per source" was mentioned
> as part of the monitoring program. To me that seems the logical
> location to add this; it is a bit different to the monitoring done for
> timing, but it is a better match than searching.
>
> Regards,
>    Cees
>
> _______________________________________________
> lofarpwg mailing list
> lofarpwg at astron.nl
> http://mailman.astron.nl/listinfo/lofarpwg
> <http://mailsweeper.astron.nl:32224/?dmVyPTEuMDAxJiYwNTYyNmVhOWVjOTFiYThlYj02MThCOEI0Q18yNTYxOF81OTNfMSYmYTY1ZDY4OWJkNDZlMDhlPTEyMzMmJnVybD1odHRwJTNBJTJGJTJGbWFpbG1hbiUyRWFzdHJvbiUyRW5sJTJGbGlzdGluZm8lMkZsb2ZhcnB3Zw==>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lofarpwg mailing list
> lofarpwg at astron.nl
> http://mailman.astron.nl/listinfo/lofarpwg
>

-- 
Dr. Caterina Tiburzi
Post-doctoral researcher
Veni fellow

ASTRON, the Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy
Oude Hoogeveensedijk 4, 7991 PD
Dwingeloo, the Netherlands

E-mail: tiburzi at astron.nl
Telephone: 0031 (0)521 595 773
Skype: caterina.tiburzi84
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.astron.nl/pipermail/lofarpwg/attachments/20211110/facaf6de/attachment.html>