1 / 15

Tracking Chandra Science Productivity

Tracking Chandra Science Productivity. Publication Metrics. Paul J. Green (CDO). special thanks to John Bright, Arnold Rots, and Sherry Winkelman (Archive Group) and Mihoko Yukita (CDO). Chandra Bibliography Database. Archive Group – A. Rots, S. Winkelman, J. Bright.

ferrol
Download Presentation

Tracking Chandra Science Productivity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Tracking Chandra Science Productivity Publication Metrics Paul J. Green (CDO) special thanks to John Bright, Arnold Rots, and Sherry Winkelman (Archive Group) and Mihoko Yukita (CDO)

  2. Chandra Bibliography Database Archive Group – A. Rots, S. Winkelman, J. Bright • Queries the ADS weekly: (Title or Abstract) contains (AXAF OR Chandra OR X-ray) • Requires additional human scanning, culling, and categorization. • Database now current and backfilled. • Allows public searches that link data ←→literature • CXC internal also links to PropDB, allows many statistics to be derived

  3. Tabulated Bibliographic Categories • Presents specific Chandra observations • Refers to published Chandra results • Predicts Chandra results (could be either astrophysical theory or data extrapolation) • Describes instrumentation, software or operations • Cannot be classified and any of these FLAGS may accompany the above categories A) Complementary observations B) Simulations or Follow-up Analysis C) Astrophysical theory that explains Chandra results D) Instrument flags (ACIS, HRC, HETG, LETG, HRMA, PCAD, EPHIN) E) Operations F) Software

  4. Definition of "Chandra Paper" Presents specific Chandra observations explaining theory, or followup • Category 1 + (all, any, none) • Category 2 + (flag A, B, or C required) • in other words 1 + (2A, 2B, or 2C)

  5. Currently Available Categoriesand Variables • Science Category • Proposal Category (VLP, LP, GTO, GO, TOO, DDT, CAL)† • Exposure Time • N papers • N citations † These are mutually exclusive definitions in the Chandra databases, e.g., a TOO from a General Observer is not also counted as a GO.

  6. SCIENCE CATEGORIES • 1. Solar System • 2. Stars and WD • 3. WD Binaries and CVs + BH and NS Binaries • 4. SN, SNR and Isolated NS • 5. Normal Galaxies: Diffuse Emission + Normal Galaxies: X-ray Populations • 6. Active Galaxies and Quasars • 7. Clusters of Galaxies • 8. Extragalactic Diffuse Emission and Surveys + Galactic Diffuse Emission and Surveys

  7. Proposal Categories Mutually exclusive in the Chandra databases † • GO • GTO • TOO • DDT • LP(first defined for Cycle2) • VLP(first defined for Cycle5) N.B.V/LP status is optional even over the nominal 300/1000ksec limits. For complete stats, best to tally by exposure time. † e.g., a TOO from a General Observer is not also counted as a GO.

  8. Totals by Proposal Cycle PAPERS CITATIONS

  9. Totals by Proposal Cycle • Includes • Refereed Chandra papers only • Statistics through May 26 2004 • Includes all proposal types GO, GTO, TOO, DDT (no CAL) • Statistics best for Cycle1 • Strong ramp-down, reflected strongly in ksec-1 plots as well

  10. Citations per ksec by Cycle • How would you know that statistics are best for Cycle1? • check linked plot data • check totals plots

  11. Example of Linked Plot Data # Values for Citations_by-cycle.txt # Cycle Citations N_Proposals Cycle1 10401 312 Cycle2 3985 278 Cycle3 474 304 Cycle4 9 258 Cycle5 0 90 • Statistics best for Cycle1

  12. Totals by Exposure Time Σ(Papers referring to any Chandra Target in an Approved Program) in bins by Total Program Approved Exposure Time Σ(Citations to Papers referring to any Chandra Target in an Approved Program) in bins by Total Program Approved Exposure Time

  13. Citations/ksec by Exposure Time with Cycles ΣNi=1{(Citations to Targets in each Program)/(Total ksec in Program)}/N Appears as if short observations have greatest impact/ksec.

  14. Large Projects Have Longer Citation Lag

  15. Conclusions • Short exposures appear to provide a larger science return per ksec. • Relative productivity (papers) and impact (citations) of larger projects appears to have a longer latency. • Some results have large impact but do not produce large Npapers or Ncitations

More Related