210 likes | 294 Views
How will the AVO affect you?. Gerry Gilmore IoA, Cambridge, UK. The AVO Context. Exclusive groups [eg, Carnegie/Caltech in optical-IR; Aus in radio] evolve into public-access multi-national projects: VLA, ALMA, HST, CERN, ELT? Public Money open access
E N D
How will the AVO affect you? Gerry Gilmore IoA, Cambridge, UK
The AVO Context • Exclusive groups [eg, Carnegie/Caltech in optical-IR; Aus in radio] evolve into public-access multi-national projects: VLA, ALMA, HST, CERN, ELT? • Public Money open access • AVO intrinsically multinational: builds on the inherently international internet/grid. • AVO exists since software is now a cost/design driver for all major projects and archives • Applies the new eScience paradigm • But how will we live with this?
AVO: the big effect • AVO will succeed if everyone gets more from it than their own input multipartner involvement an essential requirement: • YAY for IVOA • Perhaps the biggest effect is sociological: international cooperation in AVO is critical. • This raises lots of management issues. • And many implications for users
The best effect of AVO • CCDs revolutionised astronomy: with enhanced precision and accuracy at affordable cost. • CCDs are the default choice. • AVO could be the software equivalent of CCDs : essential, provided by professionals, better than any alternative. • AVO success means it is used more than it is discussed
The AVO today • Generic justification for public funding AVO is essential to allow effective public access to processed data longevity of research use • This implies significant continuing support and development AVO career paths, AVO management structures… • And decision making challenges: there is no single PI Institution/group; who decides? • Where is AVO on the Schilizzi list? • We’ve never done this before! Though many national-scale successes
One effect of AVO • Where funding systems demand public access, or science needs more people [too much data, many possible applications, political funding…] AVO is the viable response mechanism. Already much quoted! • LHC-grid, human genome,… model • Driving sociological change to Big Science • Do we want this? Can we avoid it?
AVO: the big pluses • It is timely: the grid must be good for more than faster spam… • It is a strong community development mechanism, open to poorer countries [NB, this is not necessarily seen as a positive point] • Enlarging and strengthening the international community strengthens all of astronomy: we start to repay society by skill training, astronomy moves away from being an expensive luxury
The effect of AVO: one example • The current European political fashion is to expand high-technology support for less-rich countries YAY, YAY, YAY !! • Providing effective access to state of the art data and tools, and relevant training, is our response: ergo AVO • One effect of AVO will be to enlarge and strengthen the community, without requiring permanent migration of scientists • Not necessarily considered a positive… • This implies much more scientific competition…
IS AVO a free lunch for most? • If so, it will fail. • AVO must retain active participation by most potential user communities if it is to be used and developed. How? • Does this create a monster, and inhibit future individual creativity? • Most great ideas, as for AVO, come from a few exceptional people (PIs): too rigid a structure prevents this in future • BUT standards are essential for applications • And AVO is a very good idea.
AVO as the international standard • Standards Imperialism is a risk • But standards are essential, and can work: eg FITS, astrometric reference systems • And local interfaces `adaptors’ do work • A challenge: hardware can change rapidly; software is an integral, and is expensive. • Is this a serious constraint on future development?
AVO Imperialism? • A massive infrastructure demands applications (shuttle fleet ISS?; armies wars?) • Will AVO drive funding agencies too far from PI-led, science-driven projects? • This is a real risk, but not immediate: astronomy already decided to make this the `survey decade’: we need AVO to deliver the science products, and learn from experience.
The effect of AVO: another example • Major investment in one technology leaves others unbalanced: there are now many 8-10m telescopes, but too few surveys • Hence we are entering the `survey decade’ • 318 papers on astroph with `survey’ in the title in the last 5 months • HDF, 2dF, CDF, GOODS, SDSS, WMAP, CFH, OGLE, 2MASS, radio, IR, molecular,… • Dramatic science advances!! But so far very little real cross-wavelength science (modulo qso, grb,…), and all `point’ sources.
ISOCAM and SCUBA surveys: new tools for huge complex data sets and maps are already essential
Matching multi-wavelength data sets is possible only for a very expert large team: until AVO
A possible inverse effect • Will AVO mean large consortia are no longer essential for multi-wavelength projects? • This will `empower the individual’ • But may isolate the individual • And limit science to range of astrophysics knowable by small groups • Sociological/political reactions here…
An effect of AVO? • No small research group will have the expertise to really understand the limitations of the datasets AVO makes available • Will large expert data centres (CDS, IPAC,…) become even more necessary: how are these to be funded, if their role is international helpline support? • Need they exist as entities? Linux model? Virtual institutes? • Now look at a proposed example
A survey path • WASP: wide angle survey for planets; • WFCAM: UKIRT large survey, from 1/04; • VISTA: UK-ESO IR survey, [plus VST 04] • Eddington: ESA asteroseismology and planet finding mission • GAIA: HST resolution all-sky imaging + astrometry • Still points, but phase-space
Projects on this scale demand GRID-AVO technologies, and demand accumulating expertise. We have no choice.Their affordability is a real effect of AVO on astronomy
An AVO effect • Most large projects reinvent costly wheels [``not invented here’’ syndrome] • Retaining the knowledge to manage very large projects implies continuity and structures, not `isolated’ PI-led teams • The tension between infrastructures and creativity is always evolving • Can AVO be the first distributed observatory?
The effect of AVO • AVO will certainly democratise astronomy • Powerful tools can dominate powerpoint • AVO needs to empower, not limit • AVO will break the multi-wavelength access barrier, and allow more complexity • There are sure to be serious errors from this! • Poor or inappropriately calibrated data can be used unknowingly in a complex system. • This will be a huge challenge for referees.
AVO effects • Truly allow multi-wavelength astronomy reduce conservatism, great for ALMA • Access many more archives new science opportunities in discovery space • Reduce the finance barrier empower the community, increase competition • Perhaps reduce need for huge science collaborations?