Next Generation
Keck AO: Science Case
Contents:
Overview
Overview
- Subcommittee Charter
and Tasks
Draft charge and
tasks for AOWG subgroups:
The Keck AO Working
Group is currently defining the science case and examining performance
trade-offs for a next-generation adaptive optics system. This system
would be based on a core multi-laser guide star tomography system
called KPAO, optimized for high Strehl ratio in the infrared (~70-90%)
and moderate Strehls in the visible (~20-40%), perhaps down to H_alpha
(6563A). The field of view of KPAO would be narrow (e.g. of order
15 arc sec at K). KPAO’s infrared performance would be a substantial
advance over the current Keck AO system, provide a much more stable
PSF. In addition, the system will open the door to diffraction-limited
optical imaging with Keck’s 10-meter aperture.
Potential extended
missions for the next-generation AO system include wider-field correction
in the IR (fields up to a few arc min in diameter) using either multi-conjugate
AO or multi-object AO, or alternatively a narrow-field enhancement
designed to give higher (and less variable) Strehl performance in
the visible. In each of these cases there is added cost and complexity,
which must be traded against scientific benefits.
In order to explore
these trade-offs in quantitative terms, the AO Working Group has assembled
three subgroups: Extragalactic Science, Galactic Science, and Planetary
Science. We are asking each subgroup to identify two to four key topics
that can be opened up by next-generation Keck AO, to seek input from
other members of the community, and to do the following:
- For each of
the key topics, establish what the most compelling science case
would be for the KPAO "core" narrow-field system, using
computer simulations of KPAO performance together with quantitative
analysis of issues such as required photometric accuracy, required
Strehl ratios, and the effects of temporal and spatial variability
of the PSF, surface density of objects on the sky, and number of
potential targets.
- For each of
the key topics, examine the astronomical issues associated with
potential extended missions: implementation of wider fields of view
(up to a few arc minutes), and enhanced performance at visible wavelengths.
Compare the ability for the wider-field IR extension and the narrow-field
visible-light extension to address each of the key topics for the
subgroups. For the visible-light extension in particular, quantify
the science return as a function of observing wavelength and Strehl.
- Identify the
most appropriate new science instruments, or modifications to existing
instruments, to go behind the AO system for each of the key science
topics.
- Consider the
larger context of planned space- and ground-based capabilities.
- Coordinate
with the KPAO technical working group to identify key instrumental
issues and simulation needs.
- Present conclusions
in a written report, including two to four pages of text on each
key science case, as well as an introduction and summary. This should
be a document suitable for an independent science review, for example
by the Keck Science Steering Committee or an NSF Review Panel.
- Timeline
Proposed
timeline for developing the science case:
December
Goal: Establish science subcommittees
- Finalize
draft charter and tasks for subcommittees and proposed membership,
and timeline.
- Distribute
invitation package to proposed subcommittee members & call
members.
- Membership
finalized.
Jan-Feb
Goal: Subcommittees start work & identify science cases
to pursue & questions that need to be answered by both science
& technical teams.
- Early Jan:
First telecons for each individual science sub-group. Bi-weekly
telecons thereafter?
- AOWG co-chairs
should also attend.
- By 1/27/06,
each science team submits a set of technical questions to the
technical team via Wizinowich. Technical team to respond within
1 month.
- The subgroups
are encouraged to meet in person at key junctures.
Mar-Apr
Goal: Understand and document science cases. Include interactions
with technical team to ensure implications are understood on both
sides.
- 3/30/06
- Face-to-face meeting of science & technical teams.
- 4/30/06 -
Each science team chair submits a draft science case document
to AOWG for review.
May
Goal: Unite science cases into a single science case document.
- 5/5/06 -
AOWG telecon used to discuss science cases.
- 5/30/06
- Final draft science case document distributed to AOWG.
June
Goal: Presentation and approval by SSC.
- 6/2/06 -
AOWG telecon used to discuss compiled science case document.
- 6/7/06 -
Completed science case document sent to SSC co-chairs for SSC
distribution.
- 6/21/06
- AOWG presentation of science case to the SSC.
July
Goal: Preparation of glossy science case for proposal
Background
Materials
- Committees
Solar
System
- Subcommittee
Members -
Franck Marchis (chair), Antonin Bouchez, Mate Adamkovics, Joshua
Emery, Keith Noll
- Background
Materials
- Products
- Meeting Summaries
Galactic
- Subcommittee
Members - Mike Liu (chair), Bruce Macintosh, Andrea Ghez,
Tom Green, Lynne Hillenbrand, Jessica Lu, Stan Metchev, Nevin Weinberg
- Background
Materials
- Products
- Meeting Summaries
Extragalactic
- Subcommittee
Members - Claire Max (chair), Aaron Barth, Rich Dekany,
Richard Ellis, David Koo, James Larkin, Chuck Steidel, Tommasu Treu
- Background
Materials
- Products
- Meeting Summaries
Technical and
Science Instrument(s)
- Subcommittee
Members - Antonin Bouchez, Rich Dekany, Ralf Flicker, Don
Gavel, David Le Mignant, Bruce Macintosh, Keith Matthews, Peter
Wizinowich (chair)
- Background
Materials
- Science Team
Priorities - Meeting Summaries
- Products
- Point Design
- Meeting Summaries
CfAO
Retreat Meeting
Last Updated:
7/13/06
|