Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 20:04:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Luisa 
Subject: image assessments


hi guys -

my preliminary assessment is that there are definitely some problems with 
row number/object number issues. it may be worse than even that. no one 
should have been assigned internal numbers 28 through 34. looking in the 
assignments sheet from jackie, no one WAS assigned numbers 28 through 34, 
at least as far as i can tell. and yet, there are notes on these objects. 
they don't have initials, so maybe it was me, showing how the process was 
done...? except that most of the 40s through the 70s have comments too, 
and only a few of them should have been assigned. so this isn't just a +2 
offset of the id number sort of issue.

some of the ones that seemed to be 'off' were ones that *I* had copied and 
pasted in for Lauren, so i went to check. #1286 was definitely in the list 
that i got from lauren, but does not appear to have been assigned (to her 
or anyone). i don't want to pick on lauren, but she's the only one from 
whom i have a notes spreadsheet, just by coincidence.

so, what was really inspected? the source number as given? as pasted into? 
or one of the other ones as assigned? it just makes me very ... worried. 
my fear is, among other things, is that someone took their short list of 
~50 sources and copied row 47 from their spreadsheet into row 47 of the 
googledoc without regard to the source numbers.

I'm trying to figure out the best way to most efficiently check these and 
look for problems. the ones that stand out are the ones that have notes 
but shouldn't. we don't have a easy way of identifiying the ones that have 
notes but the wrong ones.

i *don't* think i should take the header out so that the row number 
matches the source number (because then people will be confused about 
which columns are which, but i can freeze the source number column so it 
doesn't move. i also froze the header row.

i got frustrated with how slow googledocs was working for me this 
afternoon, so i exported it into excel and was playing with it quite a bit 
this afternoon, moving some stuff from col I into J, for example. i added 
a column on why the object was of interest (col M) and col N is the 
sources i mentioned above that seem to be orphaned, e.g., i don't 
understand why anyone looked at them, and worry that something got copied 
into the wrong place. i copied this spreadsheet into another tab of the 
googledoc -- it's in the tab "with some updates 9/10/12".  and it's this 
incarnation in which i've frozen the source number column and header row.

So. this week, in addition to strikes and other mayhem, you guys have a 
big assignment in making all those SEDs (and for two of you, the 
abstracts).  at this point, that should take priority.

I don't want to just dismiss the work you've done on this part of this 
project, so I can think of 5 options for the next steps:

option 1) you go back and at least spot check your objects in the "with 
some updates" tab in the google doc. this may require going back to the 
original assigned numbers from Jackie. potential for failure: you already 
have a lot to do this week.

option 2) you send me some version of the xls in which you have your final 
notes, and *I* will at least spot check your objects in the "with some 
updates" tab in the google doc. potential for failure: i can only match 
the object numbers you give me. if you checked objects not on your 
assignment list, or your notes make it LOOK as if you checked objects not 
on your assignment list, then I won't be able to reconstruct the error, 
(and it's dependent on me having time to do this).

option 3) you send me some version of the xls in which you have your final 
notes, and I will send you back someone else's xls and you can spot check 
someone else's objects in the "with some updates" tab in the google doc. 
potential for failure: same as BOTH above.

options 4 & 5) we take the shortlist of ~200 objects that have a "whyhere" 
tag in "column M" of the new spreadsheet tab (ignoring the "(seren old cat 
num)" value, which was my abbreviation late today for "serendipitously 
assigned number from the old IRAC catalog from last year") and go through 
and either (option 4:) copy over from your notes or (option 5:) RECHECK 
those objects. this should reduce the work load by about a factor of 2-3, 
assuming the 'extra' objects were more or less equally distributed among 
all of you.


option 2 is the easiest for you... but it also runs the risk of it being a 
better use of my time to redo all the image inspection myself, which i 
don't want to do because you all put a lot of work into this.

can you think of something better? votes? suggestions? should we defer 
this discussion to the telecon this week?


cheers,
luisa


Dr. Luisa Rebull            Research Scientist, Spitzer Science Center
Caltech M/S 220-6           voice 626-395-4565
1200 E. California Blvd.
Pasadena, CA 91125