DIF-C-HRIV-2-EPOXI-GARRADD-V1.0 [Raw Data] DIF-C-HRIV-3/4-EPOXI-GARRADD-V1.0 [Calibrated and Resampled Data] Review Result: Certified. Symbol Key: o = Lien open x = Lien resolved or closed ! = Lien rejected or declined + = Comments (by SMcLaughlin unless otherwise indicated) Catalog ======= ! In the dataset.cat file description, please add full citations to the Calibration papers (i.e., as footnotes in the text in addition to the REFERENCE objects that also exist). + Rejected by PI and archive lead. The correct and full citations are already in ref.cat. x There needs to be a reference to the source of the pole definition for Garradd and ISON in some appropriate place. [Note that the SPICE kernels likely involved have not been reviewed.] + Done. x There is a known issue with a solar flare that significantly affects data on a particular date. This should be noted in the data set descriptions for all affected data sets. + Done. Added paragraph from Tony in overview section of dataset.cat. x In dataset.cat. the CITATION_DESC year must be '2014' since this is when the data were reviewed and released to the public. + Done. Documents ========= x Ensure these data sets have the latest versions of these document files: day_of_year_calendar.lbl epoxi_cal_pipeline_summ.lbl epoxi_sis.lbl instruments_hampton.lbl pdsdd_epoxi.lbl quaternion_desc.lbl + Done. x In epoxi_sis.pdf: x This document says labels for HRIV, MRI, and ITS level 3/4 data, PDS keyword PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT contain FLAT_PRO= FLATCONS= FLATTEMP= CALWINDW= CALWINPY= but the sample labels in the SIS's 4.4.4.1 and 4.4.4.2 do not. x p. 27: "DIF-L-HRII-3_4-EPOXI-LUNAR-CALS-V1.0" should have a / not a _ i.e. "DIF-L-HRII-3/4-EPOXI-LUNAR-CALS-V1.0" x epoxy_sis.pdf pages 47-9 the figures are misaligned with the text. This needs to be corrected in every copy of the document in all data sets. + Done, except for the item about PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT. That PDS keyword will contain different processing keywords because the calibration pipeline performs different steps for the VIS HRIV, MRI, and ITS CCDs and the IR spectrometer. For example, the FITS header keywords FLAT_PRO, FLATCONS, FLATTEMP, CALWINDW, & CALWINPY only apply to IR calibration, so those values are never included in PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT. However, we noted this difference in the description of PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT in the SIS. For last item, had to print the Word file as a Postscript to force alignment of figure pieces with text, then distilled the Postscript to PDF/A. x There are summary files with names like hriv_3_4_epoxi_garrad.pdf. In at least some of these labels in some data sets, the Julian Date field is described as being in the form YYYYMMDD. This needs to be fixed if it applies to this data set. + Done. x The BODY_POSITIVE_POLE_CLOCK_ANGLE or whatever it’s called, is stated to an unrealistic degree of precisicion for comets Garradd and ISON. It should certainly not be stated in these data to more accuracy than integer degrees. But in the document directory the table that lists geometry gives the same clock angle for this value as for the celestial north clock angle. If the value is not applicable, or otherwise unknown/unknowable, then the appropriate constant needs to be defined and used. + Done. BODY_POSITIVE_POLE_CLOCK_ANGLE is not really known for comet Garradd and ISON. Project revised data labels and geometry tables to use an appropriate value unknown. x In places that describe the file naming convention, there needs to be a clear indication of which time (beginning, middle, end) is used for creating the file name. + Not applicable. Mid-obs is used in the filenames and for grouping products into DOY directories, and this is already called out in the EPOXI SIS and dataset.cat files! Please read the metadata and documentation. x There is a mention of transfer smear, but no indication of how to deal with it in the raw data. This information is in the Klaasen papers, but if possible there should be a cross-reference to this information where transfer smear is mention in this summary document. Alternately, reference those papers for more details at the top of the document. + Done. Referenced cal papers for more details at the top of this document. CALIB/ ====== x abscalvs/hrivis_100801_1_0_1.lbl is missing RECORD_TYPE = FIXED_LENGTH + Done. x lindn/hriir_100928_1_1.lbl: AXIS_NAME = ("LINE_SAMPLES", "LINES", "PER_PIXEL_LINEARITY_COEFFS") is legal, but "SAMPLE" and "LINE" (singular) are much more common. + Mmm, this lien is for IR. However, changed AXIS_NAME values to the singular form in labels in drkmodel/ and xtalk/. x In calib/drkmodel/hrivis_020601_2_3.lbl: x The Eg equation in the code sample has a different exponent than in the equation above. 10^-4 is correct. x The descriptive paragraph says the code fragment calculates DN/s, but in fact the unit of the actual result is DN. x The pixel size is stated as being in mm, but the code would require microns to produce reasonable results. + Done. x In calib/xtalk/hrivis_071004_3_3.lbl - Last line in the NOTE field is missing an adjective (Note: "A ROTATE is always performed [?] a SHIFT.") - Consider removing the derivation in the NOTE field to a separate document and just referencing it, and noting in the label that the cross-talk is not generally relevant/significant (if that is, indeed, the case). + Done. Fixed NOTE: Rotate is performed *before* a shift. Project will keep the derivation in the NOTE field to match xtalk labels in other datasets archived for EPOXI. However stated in this label that the derivation is included because the process is complicated (cross-talk removal can be relevant depending on exposure time and source brightness). x In the PSF file, the image looks like it is off by one line (possibly to center it?). This should be explained if it is real, and corrected if not. + Done. This is not a problem. Noted in dataset.cat that the HRIV PSFs are very non-circular due the focus problem, and the pixelization can lead to offsets of the center in one direction or another. Referred reader to LINDLERETAL2007, LINDLERETAL2013 and BARRYETAL2010 for more info. DATA/ ===== x The BODY_POSITIVE_POLE_CLOCK_ANGLE or whatever it is called, is stated to an unrealistic degree of precisicion for comets Garradd and ISON. It should certainly not be stated in these data to more accuracy than integer degrees. But in the document directory the table that lists geometry gives the same clock angle for this value as for the celestial north clock angle. If the value is not applicable, or otherwise unknown/unknowable, then the appropriate constant needs to be defined and used. + Done. BODY_POSITIVE_POLE_CLOCK_ANGLE is not really known for comet Garradd and ISON. Project revised data labels and geometry tables to use an appropriate value unknown. x In the reduced data products SNR_IMAGE extensions, the SNR values appear to be quantized. Is this reasonable? + Done. Yes, B.Carcich and K.Klaasen confirmed this is reasonable and is documented in the new Appendix A to the EPOXI Cal Pipeline Summary document.