Results from the November FT cycle

This month we received 14 proposals and accepted 8 – 5 for GN and 3 for GS.   This was the last month for 21B.  All partner time usage will be reset to 0 for the start of 22A.

As a reminder, Reviewers should aim to use the full range of grades 0-4.  However, if none are particularly Poor or Excellent, you may use the range 1-3.   Assigning only grades 0-1 to proposals will certainly have the appearance of trying to game the system, as proposals with mean scores < 2 cannot be awarded time, and the FT team is likely to question your scoring and your ethics.  Furthermore, scores of 0 should be reserved for proposals with fatal flaws.  Assigning only scores 3-4 will also have the effect of giving a bump to all the proposals reviewed by you over all the other proposals not reviewed by you.

Proposals for the next cycle are due Dec 31.  Successful proposals will be active for the period Feb – Apr.  Please check the detailed 22A instrument schedules here: http://www.gemini.edu/observing/schedules-and-queue

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the November FT cycle

Results from the October FT cycle

This month, we received 17 proposals and accepted 7 for GN and 5 for GS.

Proposals for the next cycle are due Nov 30.  Successful proposals will be active for the period Jan – Mar.  The 22A instrument schedule is not yet available and may not be before the deadline.  At GN, we expect GMOS-N and GNIRS to be available for much of the cycle.  GRACES and NIFS are also available in January at least.  For GS, F2 will not be available for 3 weeks starting January 3 but we otherwise expect GMOS-S and F2 to be available.  Zorro will also be available in January. Please check the detailed schedules here: http://www.gemini.edu/observing/schedules-and-queue

Some reminders:

Subaru affiliates may only apply during odd month cycles, which includes this current (November) call for proposals.  

Make sure to use the correct FT (DARP) template, and ensure your proposal is fully anonymized.  Starting next year we will be rejecting proposals that do not follow the DARP rules.  

Also, please remember that reviewers are expected to review ~8 proposals, and given the fairly small pool of proposals submitted to FT each cycle, many of these are likely to be outside of your field of expertise.  Please do not reject proposal assignments based on your expertise in the field.  On that same note, proposers should remember to make their proposals accessible to non-specialists in your field.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the October FT cycle

Results from the September FT cycle

This month, we received 19 proposals and accepted 5 for GN and 6 for GS.

Proposals for the next cycle are due Oct 31.  Successful proposals will be active for the period Dec – Feb.  The 22A schedule is not yet available and likely will not be before the deadline.  However, for Dec-Jan note that GMOS-N, GNIRS, NIFS, NIRI, Altair, Alopeke, and GRACES will all be available at GN, and GMOS-S, F2, IGRINS, and Zorro will be available at GS.  Make sure to check the 21B telescope schedules for the detailed instrument availabilities in Dec-Jan.  http://www.gemini.edu/observing/schedules-and-queue

As a reminder, make sure to use the correct FT (DARP) template, and ensure your proposal is fully anonymized.  Starting next year we will be rejecting proposals that do not follow the DARP rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the September FT cycle

Results from the August FT cycle

This month, we received 16 proposals and accepted 7 for GN and 4 for GS.

Proposals for the next cycle are due Sep 30.  Successful proposals will be active for the period Nov – Jan.  Please  make sure to see the 21B telescope schedules for instrument availabilities. We occasionally receive proposals for instruments that are not available during the 3 month cycle and these must be rejected.  Also, for this upcoming cycle, please be aware the Gemini South will be in an engineering shutdown for most of November.

As a reminder, make sure to use the correct FT (DARP) template, and ensure your proposal is fully anonymized.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the August FT cycle

Results from the July FT cycle

This month, we received 13 proposals and accepted 5 for GN and 4 for GS.

Proposals for the next cycle are due Aug 31.  Successful proposals will be active for the period Oct – Dec.  Please see the 21B telescope schedules for instrument availabilities. As a remember, make sure to use the correct FT (DARP) template, and ensure your proposal is fully anonymized.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the July FT cycle

Results from the June 2021 cycle

This month, we received 17 proposals and accepted 7 for GN and 4 for GS.  There were a few cases where proposals were not fully anonymized as per the DARP rules (please see the FT DARP rules for more information).  In particular, do not provide direct links to your work or programs on other telescopes, and do not include any previous program IDs (at any telescope).

Proposals for the next cycle are due July 31.  Successful proposals will be active for the period Sept – Nov.  Please see the 21B telescope schedules for instrument availabilities.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the June 2021 cycle

Proposals for the next cycle due June 30

Proposals for the next cycle are due June 30.  Successful proposals will be active for the period August – October.  Please see the 21B telescope schedules for instrument availabilities.

As a reminder for reviewers, please be courteous in your reviews.  You don’t know if the proposal you are reading was written by a veteran astronomer or a graduate student. Please try to provide constructive feedback.  For some tips on how to write useful reviews, please see the FT webpage.  For additional advice, please check out https://www.elsevier.com/connect/reviewers-update/theyve-got-it-all-wrong!-how-to-give-constructive-feedback-in-peer-review2.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Proposals for the next cycle due June 30

Results from the May 2021 cycle

This month we received 18 proposals, accepting 6 at GN and 4 at GS. We are pleased by the compliance and good reception of the DARP. As in the previous month, we remind PIs to make the effort to write proposals for non-specialists in your field, as this increases your chances of good reception by your peers.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the May 2021 cycle

Results from the April 2021 cycle

We have just finished the April FT cycle review process.  We received a total of 20 proposals and were able to accept 5 at Gemini North and 5 at Gemini South.   It appeared that every proposal followed the DARP guidelines this time.  There were some complaints from reviewers that not all proposals were written to be accessible to the non-expert. Please remember, with the fairly small pool of potential reviewers, the reviewers of your proposal are unlikely to be experts in your field.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Results from the April 2021 cycle

April cycle proposals due this Friday

As a reminder, this will be the 3rd month of DARP (Dual anonymous review).  This has so far been going well.  Almost everyone has used the correct DARP template. However, there have been cases where proposers have identified themselves within the text with statements like ‘we did X [ref]’.   Any statement that identifies the proposing team should be avoided. This also includes comments such as ‘student-led project’ which, as one reviewer pointed out, is similar to stating eg ‘female-led’.  However, if the proposal relates to thesis work or any student project, this should be noted.  It is also allowed to mention previous observations which relate to the proposal, as long as the program IDs (or other identifying information) are not explicitly given.  Reviewers are directed to comment on cases of non-anonymity, but to not yet penalize any proposals that were not fully anonymized. This rule will remain in place for the first year of this process, as we work to clarify the DARP dos and don’ts.   Reviewers are also reminded to not go out of their way to identify the proposing team.   Even if you think you know, you may be wrong.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on April cycle proposals due this Friday