USIC Splinter Session on Optical Interferometry in the Next Decade

1. USIC Splinter Session on Optical Interferometry in the Next Decade M. J. Creech-Eakman (NMT/MROI) on behalf of USIC

2. Primary Mission: A consortium of US-based optical/infrared interferometer groups focused on how we might best position the (ground-based) field for a positive outcome in the next Decadal Review. • And a Secondary Mission: • Work with other organizations and institutions to develop funding opportunities in order to provide access to the US optical interferometry observatories. • Define a role for current interferometers…towards building the next generation interferometers. • Collaborate on both technology development and science. http://usic.wikispaces.com/ USIC Splinter Session

3. CHARA H. McAlister T. ten Brummelaar ISI C. Townes MROI M. Creech-Eakman E. Bakker NPOI T. Armstrong D. Hutter PTI/KI/NExScI R. Akeson KI S. Ragland LBTI P. Hinz NOAO (observing) S. Ridgway NASA-Goddard (observing) D. Leisawitz Who is on the USIC Board? USIC Splinter Session

4. Who else participates in the USIC? • Working group (6) members: 34 individuals including USIC board members • Tucson Workshop, Nov 2006 • Splinter Sessions at previous AAS and SPIE meetings: Over 100 individuals on mailing list USIC Splinter Session

5. Astro2010 Decadal Structure Executive Committee Survey Committee Subcommittee on Science Subcommittee on State of the Profession Subcommittee on Programs • Study Groups • Computation, Simulation & Data • Infrastructure • Private and International Partnerships • Education and Public Outreach • Astronomy and Public Policy • Science Frontiers Panels • Planetary System and Star Formation • Stars and Stellar Evolution • The Galactic Neighborhood • Galaxies across Cosmic Time • Cosmology and Fundamental Physics • Programmatic Prioritization Panels • Radio, Millimeter, Submillimeter from Ground • Optical and IR Astronomy from Ground • Electromagnetic Observations from Space • Particle Astrophysics and Gravitation Oversight Line Output Feed USIC Splinter Session

6. Charges to Committees/Panels • Five Science Frontiers Panels (SFPs): • “…charged with recommending an integrated scientific observational and theoretical research program in their assigned research areas. … The reports from the SFPs will call out up to four central questions that are ripe for answering and one general area where there is unusual discovery potential. The SFPs will write panel reports containing detailed science cases. While observational and theoretical capabilities for realizing the science should be addressed, Panel advocacy of specific new activities will be avoided. “ USIC Splinter Session

7. Charges continued… • Four Programmatic Prioritization Panels (PPPs): • “…charged with recommending to the Survey Committee a prioritized, balanced, and integrated research program which includes a rank ordering of research activities and a balanced technology development program. …The recommendations from the PPPs will be informed by the SFPs’ recommendations.” USIC Splinter Session

8. Charges continued… • Study Groups (SGs): • “…will assist the Subcommittee on State of the Profession by gathering current information on infrastructure, broadly defined. The SGs will be a set of community activities, operating under terms of reference provided by the State of the Profession subcommittee. The SGs will prepare factual reports for submission to the State of the Profession Subcommittee with data and information presented mostly in tabular and graphical form. “ USIC Splinter Session

9. Preliminary Timeline • Late Dec – Call for NoI from research activities submitting to PPP. Deadline is Jan 14 for NoI. • Late Dec – Call for Science White Papers. Window is Feb 9-15. • Q1-09 – Policy papers call. • Q1-09 – PPP papers call. • Q2-09 – Invitations for presentations to PPP. • June, 09 – PPP workshops at AAS meeting. • Survey Committee Incremental Meetings – Dec 5-6, 08; Jan 9-10, 09; May 11-12, 09 (Town Hall); Sept, 09 • Final Survey Committee meetings are Oct-Dec, 2009. USIC Splinter Session

10. Chair – Blandford EO – Hillenbrand Subcommittee on Science: Haynes (VC), Bildsten, Carlstrom, Harrison, Heckman, Lunine, Toomre, Tremaine Subcommittee on State of the Profession: Huchra (VC), Elmegreen, Frieman, Kennicutt, McCammon, de Grasse Tyson Subcommittee on Programs: Rieke (VC), Battel, Max, Ritz, Turner, Vanden Bout, Young NRC Staff: Shapero, Smith, Moloney, Sponberg, Reimer, Dewhurst, Lang, Chamberlain, Knutsen, McFall, Dolan Astro2010 Committees/Membership USIC Splinter Session

11. Where can USIC community contribute? Executive Committee Survey Committee Subcommittee on Science Subcommittee on State of the Profession Subcommittee on Programs • Study Groups • Computation, Simulation & Data • Infrastructure • Private and International Partnerships • Education and Public Outreach • Astronomy and Public Policy • Science Frontiers Panels • Planetary System and Star Formation • Stars and Stellar Evolution • The Galactic Neighborhood • Galaxies across Cosmic Time • Cosmology and Fundamental Physics • Programmatic Prioritization Panels • Radio, Millimeter, Submillimeter from Ground • Optical and IR Astronomy from Ground • Electromagnetic Observations from Space • Particle Astrophysics and Gravitation Already formed Places where we can provide input USIC Splinter Session

12. The USIC’s process: • We have assembled 6 working groups to address needs and contributions of ground-based optical/IR interferometric community • Each group had preliminary discussions in Nov/Dec and developed an abstract and outline of their deliberations. • Final paper (to Programmatic Panel) to be developed and submitted by timeline outlined by Decadal Committee. USIC Splinter Session

13. Science Opportunities for Interferometry in the Upcoming Decade:Millan-Gabet Operational Funding Requirements and Funding Models for Array Facilities:Akeson Science-driven Enhancements of Array Facilities:Armstrong US Community Demand for Interferometry:Wizinowich Models for Community Access to Private Facilities:Creech-Eakman Roadmap for the Future Development of Interferometry:Mozurkewich White Paper Working Groups and Leads USIC Splinter Session

14. Findings and Recommendations(Presented for Review and Discussion) USIC Splinter Session

15. Millan-Gabet, Haniff, Monnier, Mourard, Muterspaugh, Pott, Stencel, Tycner, Woillez Addressed a series of 6 questions related to: The Decadal strategy in the Tucson Workshop report Weaknesses/strengths of current community Most interesting science areas today in opt/IR int. Most important enhancements needed Most active/productive science areas in next decade Most effective way to get non-interferometrists to use optical interferometers in their research I: Science Opportunities for Interferometry in the Upcoming Decade USIC Splinter Session

16. Summary of “Science” Results • Related to Tucson report: • Bring current facilities to full capability • Emphasize community access and use by non-experts • Demonstrate community-wide support for existing and future facilities • Weaknesses/Strengths • W: restricted access, user-friendliness and data reduction tools, too many competing teams, inadequate basic funding, no common-user facility approach, dominated by technical interests • S: good talent which is flexible and evolves quickly, effective publicizing of successes, this process USIC Splinter Session

17. Summary of “Science” Results cont • Best science: • Spans the gamut: disks, planet formation, evolved stars, binaries, brown dwarfs, AGN and narrow-angle astrometry applied to several problems • Needed enhancements: • Facilities underfunded/understaffed, proof of OVLA concepts, more automation, user-friendly observing prep. and data-reduction tools, restructure/re-emphasize/defund certain facilities USIC Splinter Session

18. Summary of “Science” Results cont • Most active/interesting science coming up: • Hard to predict….dependent on capabilities • Exoplanets and proto-planetary disk dynamics • General relativity tests • Follow the European vision • Involving other astronomers: • Publishing good papers • Developing user friendly planning/reduction tools • Developing a “National Interferometry Center” USIC Splinter Session

19. Akeson, Bakker, ten Brummelaar, Creech-Eakman, McAlister, Ridgway, Wizinowich The optical/infrared interferometry community should advocate for a source of steady funding for the current and under-development arrays as this is lacking in the programs offered at the NSF and NASA. This funding would allow continued scientific investigations and improvements of the existing facilities. Additionally, a longer-term operational funding model would allow many of the existing arrays to support users from the community. Possible models for such a program are discussed, in particular using existing programs at NSF as examples. II. Operational Funding Requirements andFunding Models for Array Facilities USIC Splinter Session

20. Operational Funding Specifics • Describes a range of facilities available in next decade and how PI and facility-class provide different opportunities to the community • Discusses funding models • Gaps in current paradigm for O/IR interferometry • Possible other models – TSIP, URO-style • Describe community access that will be provided • Determined via a request to current/near-term facilities to describe funding needs and observing time that could be provided in return USIC Splinter Session

21. Armstrong, Berger, Elias, Hummel, Leisawitz, Perrin, Ragland, Woillez, Young Considered enhancements to current array facilities based on science areas in which contributions are expected to be made in the upcoming decade. stellar surface imaging, polarimetry, circumstellar disks, fundamental parameters from binaries, extra-solar planets from either binary studies or astrometry III. Science-driven Enhancements of Array Facilities USIC Splinter Session

22. Summary of Science-driven Enhancements • Increased sensitivity • AO on CHARA/MROI/NPOI 1.8m to take advantage of visual wavelengths with multi-r0 • Increased backend capabilities • Higher dynamic range (500-1000) • Higher spectral resolution (R~1000-2000; R~15000-30000) • IR and visual operations • Polarization capabilities • Group-delay tracking • Improved UV Coverage • Quasi-redundant spacing for stellar surface imaging • Wide-range of UV spacings • Long-baselines USIC Splinter Session

23. Wizinowich, van Belle, Creech-Eakman, Danchi, Hutter, McAlister, Ridgway (w/ contributions from Hale, Monnier, Parvin, ten Brummelaar and McMahon) Produces a table of existing facilities and capabilities Lists uniqueness of optical interferometry compared to any other techniques available Discusses community access to current/near-term facilities Outlines the current demand by: Science performed, nights of observing, ALTAIR survey responses, VLTI demand and US use Discusses expected future demand Comparisons to development of radio interferometry and AO Suggests conducting a survey like NOAO surveys IV. US-Community Demand for Interferometry USIC Splinter Session

24. US Community Demand Statistics • CHARA – 269 nights in 2008 among 52 proposals and 65 investigators; oversubscription of about 2.4:1 • NPOI – 2/3 of nights are dedicated to wide-angle astrometry and are oversubscribed 2:1 • KI – NASA/NOAO oversubscription for 2009A was 3.1:1 • 10% of ALTAIR survey respondents identified NIR interferometry as important for their near-term research • VLTI time in 4 years: 194 MIDI from 72 PIs and 141 AMBER from 66 PIs; PIs in 15 different countries; 6 US-based PIs; 91 total publications from 54 different first authors USIC Splinter Session

25. Creech-Eakman, Lane, Hyrenevych, Mourard, McAlister, Ridgway, Townes (Wizinowich) Goals of permitting/encouraging community access increasing user community, gain access to public funding, plan for next facility, proposing something worthy of Decadal Models for access collaboration, invitation, DDT, private contributions, public funding, user-support personnel, archival access Types of considerations needed to facilitate access training, housing, data planning and reduction tools, TACs, funding support V. Models for Community Access to Private Interferometry Facilities USIC Splinter Session

26. Mozurkewich, Berger, ten Brummelaar, Buscher, Eisner, Muterspaugh, Pott, Woillez Made some assumptions about why interferometry is important and what we might want to build in the future to develop the roadmap Developed a straw-man design as a WAG Discussed major avenues of technology development needed to make this happen VI. Roadmap for the Future Development of Interferometry USIC Splinter Session

27. Roadmap continued • Assumptions about future facility: • Imaging facility which is less-expensive than a space-based facility • Promise of interferometry goes beyond resolution of an equivalent large aperture and includes in particular a high level of calibration advantage • A strong science case will be needed with a likely break-point somewhere in the 15-17th mag range USIC Splinter Session

28. Roadmap continued • Straw-man WAG Design (could serve as a starting point for costing) • 10-30 3-4m diameter movable telescopes with AO and LGS; with total collecting area comparable to Keck observatory • Vacuum feed • Delay Lines – technology TBD • Tip-Tilt at backend to take out residuals • Beam combination in non-redundant rows of apertures with orthogonal spectral dispersion including photometric channels – the remainder (R, rates, etc) TBD • As wide a wavelength range as possible • Potentially adding a dual-feed mode USIC Splinter Session

29. Roadmap continued • Technology development in next decade • Sensitivity is most important design goal, with this in mind, in decreasing order of importance: • Good AO/LGS on large, portable telescopes • Beam combination – beyond what has been done yet • Other considerations: high-reflectivity, low-dispersion mirrors, better detectors, low-loss single-mode fibers, delay lines USIC Splinter Session

30. Overall Common Recommendations/Findings • We do not believe it is time to advocate for a new facility for this Decadal • We are mostly understaffed and not currently delivering our fully advertised capabilities • We need a common funding supply for operational support and enhancements • We need better/more-common preparation/data-reduction tools • We need to provide more community access and actively build the user community USIC Splinter Session

31. Overall Common Recommendations/Findings continued • We may wish to advocate for a “National Interferometry Center” in the US. • The need for optical/IR interferometry will increase over the coming decade • There will be continued science breakthroughs as interferometers increase sensitivity and efficiency • There is a need for continued technology development and a desire to advocate for a new ground-based facility in the following Decadal USIC Splinter Session

32. Timed Next Steps for the USIC • Respond to Decadal Programmatic NoI – Jan 14 • Submit at least one Science Paper** - Feb 15 • Submit Programmatic White Paper on Ground-Based Opt/IR Interferometry - TBD • Potentially launch on-line survey for more community feedback (?) • Potentially try to address the Decadal panel in person in Q2, 09 (?) • Potentially host a Town Hall meeting (?) USIC Splinter Session

33. Potential Ways to Submit Science White Papers – for Discussion • Submit one all-encompassing paper on O/IR int. capabilities to all Science Panels (7 pages) • Submit a focused paper to each relevant panel (potentially 28 pages) • Submit one or two focused papers, plus advocate for a few paragraphs within papers already being submitted (14 pages plus a few dozen paragraphs) USIC Splinter Session

34. General Questions for Consideration: • How should we approach the submission of Science White Papers given the timeline? • Have we discussed all the elements that are likely needed for the Programmatic paper? • Are there areas that would be best left-out of the Programmatic paper? USIC Splinter Session

35. Community Feedback Please identify yourself, speak up, and try to keep your comments to a few minutes so everyone can have a chance to speak. USIC Splinter Session

36. What can you the individual do now? • If you are already involved, remain engaged; if you are not involved, please consider helping us. • Speak to Decadal members. • Publish your interferometric results. Participate/host a town hall meeting. Add interferometry results to your talks/courses. Advocate to your colleagues. Attend conferences outside of traditional “Interferometry” groups. • If you would like to join a USIC working group to help with writing any sections, contact me right after this meeting. USIC Splinter Session