[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GSC 00279 00321 paper
Ok, here is my new draft:
http://www.lolife.com/gsc279-321/paper.pdf
I read a bunch of IBVS articles. Many are doing science beyond my means,
but it was very helpful. I also found many similar RR Lyrae papers which
seems consistent with this star.
I have used the feedback from the TASS list to help formulate my theory
but I haven't found anyone willing to sign their name to this thing, so in
terms of the type of variable, I am doing the best I can.
I added references to TASS. I could not find anything published on the
Mark IV so I referenced a Mark III paper. Please let me know if there is a
more appropriate reference.
I rewrote my title and abstract. I am putting more emphasis on TASS, since
that is where the discovery came from. Let me know if this makes anyone
uncomfortable.
Once I incorporate any additional feedback from y'all, I'm going to
convert it to TeX and submit to the IBVS and see what happens. I
appreciate all your help and patience.
Cheers,
Michael Koppelman
On Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 10:23 AM, aah@nofs.navy.mil wrote:
> Michael K. wrote:
>> 0. Read and re-read the Editorial Notes and authors instructions at IBVS.
> Also look at about a hundred of the existing, recent IBVS articles.
> These
> will give you a flavor of the kind of information generally presented.
>> 1. Figure out what kind of variable it is.
> Most important step. You really should not submit an article to IBVS
> or elsewhere on an individual star without a thorough study. This means
> light curve, classification and some analysis such as period
> determination,
> period changes (for known stars) and perhaps some modelling if it is
> a run-of-the-mill eclipsing variable. Less information won't mean a
> rejected paper, but more information is the right way to go for
> maximal scientific value. Sometimes this means collaborating with
> others
> who might have skills that you are missing, or delaying publication
> until
> more data is acquired.
>> 2. Do a better job of references.
> See #0
>> 3. Get consistent on nomenclature.
> For TASS, a better way of identifying the filters is
> Johnson V and Cousins Ic filters
> We don't have a journal reference for the Mark IV survey yet, but you
> can always reference Michael R.'s PASP paper or my JAAVSO paper to
> indicate prior instrumentation and current direction.
>> 4. Get a better title and abstract.
> Not absolutely necessary, but helpful for the reader. Usually the
> paper contains the star identification in the title, such as
> "The Variability of GSC 00279-00321" or
> "GSC 00279-00231: a new W UMa eclipsing binary"
>> 5. Get it in TeX format (which I was planning on doing once I had it
>> finished).
> Note: IBVS will accept other formats, usually plain ascii and html.
> Most journals will now accept Microsoft Word as well. Figures
> can be in postscript or gif/jpeg. However, TeX is
> the default format for all astronomical publications, so it pays
> to learn at least enough TeX to take an existing paper and modify
> it to your needs (a highly recommended technique for IBVS since
> you can get the TeX source to all papers at their web site).
> There are several on-line TeX tutorials.
>
> Not mentioned, but #6: keep submitting rough drafts to the list!
> There are several people here who have published hundreds of scientific
> papers and can guide you through the process (but keep a *very* thick
> skin!). It is far better for TASS to be careful on the first few
> publications so that the quality and information content are high,
> indicating good research; and that all descriptions are technically
> correct
> (such as the filter descriptions or method of astrometric/photometric
> calibration). To some extent, reputations of people associated with
> TASS (and TASS itself) are on the line, so everyone should be
> considerate of the group as a whole, even if it is an individual's
> paper. I usually recommend that someone's first scientific publication
> be a joint publication with other team members so that they don't have
> to learn all of the publication steps by themselves. This is
> certainly not a hard-and-fast rule, though!
> Arne
>
>
Michael Koppelman <michael@clockwork.net>
CTO
Clockwork Active Media Systems
Expertise in the Internet Marketplace
http://www.clockwork.net/
(763)443-2048