10-13-2019, 06:45 PM
randomq - the observatories tend not to do much of the analysis, the expectation is for the team that applied for telescope time will reduce and analyze their own data. The database stuff is more for associating the data with those groups and providing all the other information they need, e.g., weather conditions, image quality, the calibrations they need etc.
If you're interested, you can see our system:
http://omp.eao.hawaii.edu/
but of course, most of it is private. The OMP is a mixture of MySQL and Perl.
For the wide-field data we take, IOW, survey data, then we actually send the raw data off to Cambridge University in the UK who will process the data and then they send the reduced data to Edinburgh where the data are made available to the teams involved in the survey work and after a proprietary period (generally a year), to the public.
We do a preliminary reduction of the data as they are taken and this lets us know in real-time if the data are acceptable (this also goes into the database) so we know that the data will likely pass quality checks, but to process these data properly takes a long time and is not possible to do in real-time, so that's where the other groups come in.
More stuff here if you are really curious:
http://www.ukirt.hawaii.edu/observing/co...kbook.html
When we are in so-called Cassegrain mode, i.e., not wide-field mode, then we expect the astronomers to come out and carry out the observations or at least observe remotely. In those cases, the teams can get both the raw data and usually fully-reduced and publishable data straight from the telescope as we are dealing with much fewer data and our in-house software does a really good job of providing fully-reduced data.
One question I think you're asking is if the software can provide real-time information on what we're detecting. In most cases, no, it really needs a scientist to sit down and look at the data. On the other hand, some things can be automated, especially in wide-field imaging mode. for instance, moving objects such as asteroids and comets can be detected using the software, or basically, any significant changes in an object's brightness.
Essentially, automation can detect changes, but it can't yet tell you if we're detecting water or other chemicals and atoms; that needs the expertise of an astronomer.
If you're interested, you can see our system:
http://omp.eao.hawaii.edu/
but of course, most of it is private. The OMP is a mixture of MySQL and Perl.
For the wide-field data we take, IOW, survey data, then we actually send the raw data off to Cambridge University in the UK who will process the data and then they send the reduced data to Edinburgh where the data are made available to the teams involved in the survey work and after a proprietary period (generally a year), to the public.
We do a preliminary reduction of the data as they are taken and this lets us know in real-time if the data are acceptable (this also goes into the database) so we know that the data will likely pass quality checks, but to process these data properly takes a long time and is not possible to do in real-time, so that's where the other groups come in.
More stuff here if you are really curious:
http://www.ukirt.hawaii.edu/observing/co...kbook.html
When we are in so-called Cassegrain mode, i.e., not wide-field mode, then we expect the astronomers to come out and carry out the observations or at least observe remotely. In those cases, the teams can get both the raw data and usually fully-reduced and publishable data straight from the telescope as we are dealing with much fewer data and our in-house software does a really good job of providing fully-reduced data.
One question I think you're asking is if the software can provide real-time information on what we're detecting. In most cases, no, it really needs a scientist to sit down and look at the data. On the other hand, some things can be automated, especially in wide-field imaging mode. for instance, moving objects such as asteroids and comets can be detected using the software, or basically, any significant changes in an object's brightness.
Essentially, automation can detect changes, but it can't yet tell you if we're detecting water or other chemicals and atoms; that needs the expertise of an astronomer.