NRAO Home  >  Green Bank  |  Wiki Topic:    GB > Observing > TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.1 vs. r1.6)
   Changes | Index | Contents | Search | Go
 <<O>>  Difference Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.6 - 04 Apr 2008 - CarlBignell)
Changed:
<
<

>
>

    • As part of the review process the technical referee must discuss the technical details of the proposal with either the proposal contact person or PI to avoid any misunderstanding about the technical objectives or requirements of the proposal.
Changed:
<
<

>
>

Changed:
<
<

    • The reviews should be completed by the date specified by the schedulear. This will normally be the same date that the scientific reviews are due.
>
>

    • The reviews should be completed by the date specified by the scheduler. This will normally be the same date that the scientific reviews are due.

 <<O>>  Difference Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.5 - 11 Jul 2007 - RonMaddalena)
Changed:
<
<

>
>


 <<O>>  Difference Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.4 - 15 Feb 2007 - CarlBignell)

 <<O>>  Difference Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.3 - 14 Feb 2007 - CarlBignell)
Changed:
<
<

    • If you feel that there is a better observing technique by all means indicate point it out in your review. But if the technique results in going beyond the objective (observationally or scientifically) of the original proposal please indicate that any changes in the objectives must be approved by the schedular for approved projects.
>
>

    • If you feel that there is a better observing technique by all means include it in your review. But if the technique results in going beyond the objective (observationally or scientifically) of the original proposal please indicate that any changes in the objectives must be approved by the schedular to ensure there is no conflict with other proposals.

 <<O>>  Difference Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.2 - 05 Feb 2007 - CarlBignell)
Changed:
<
<

Technical Referee Instructions

>
>

Technical Referee Instructions

Some guidelines should be followed when reviewing GBT proposals for technical feasibility.

  • Guidlines
Added:
>
>

    • These reviews are for technical feasibility only. Do not comment on the science since this aspect is addressed separately by the external scientific referees.
Added:
>
>

    • If you feel that there is a better observing technique by all means indicate point it out in your review. But if the technique results in going beyond the objective (observationally or scientifically) of the original proposal please indicate that any changes in the objectives must be approved by the schedular for approved projects.

    • The technical reviews are passed directly along to all investigators of each proposal (both accepted and rejected) in the final proposal disposition email sent to them. It would behoove the reviewer to be tactful in his/her review.

    • The review for Large proposals must include a more thorough review which encompases not only the technical feasibility of the observations but also of the data processing and other requirements.

  • Completion of the Reviews

    • The reviews should be completed by the date specified by the schedulear. This will normally be the same date that the scientific reviews are due.

 <<O>>  Difference Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions (r1.1 - 05 Feb 2007 - CarlBignell)
Added:
>
>

%META:TOPICINFO{author="CarlBignell" date="1170689822" format="1.0" version="1.1"}% %META:TOPICPARENT{name="WebHome"}% Technical Referee Instructions

-- CarlBignell - 05 Feb 2007


Topic TechnicalRefereeInstructions . { View | Diffs | r1.6 | > | r1.5 | > | r1.4 | More }
Revision r1.1 - 05 Feb 2007 - 15:37 GMT - CarlBignell
Revision r1.6 - 04 Apr 2008 - 19:59 GMT - CarlBignell
Content copyright © 1999-2007 by the contributing authors.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.