Re: GSC 00279 00321

[Michael Koppelman <lolife@bitstream.net>]

Jim, I can't thank you enough for this. It is very helpful and "right on". I
did read the instructions for authors on the IBVS site, but apparently not
thoroughly enough.

So my to-do would be something like this:

0. Read and re-read the Editorial Notes and authors instructions at IBVS.
1. Figure out what kind of variable it is.
2. Do a better job of references.
3. Get consistent on nomenclature.
4. Get a better title and abstract.
5. Get it in TeX format (which I was planning on doing once I had it
finished).

I think I can handle all of this with the possible exception of #1. Any
co-authors lurking out there that want to help me with the variable
identification?

Thanks all,
Michael Koppelman


On 6/4/02 5:12 AM, "James Bedient" <bedient@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:

> Hello Michael,
> 
> I'm no expert, just another amateur who'se been down this road.  I had a paper
> published in IBVS last year (5164) and it was a very educational process.
> I've got another in the hopper now, waiting to hear from the editors.  These
> are my random thoughts:
> 
> The first thing to do is read very carefully the Editorial Notes section of
> the IBVS website - that will tell you a lot of what they will look for.  Then
> read the instructions for authors very carefully as well.  Then read a bunch
> of the other IBVS papers for style and content.
> 
> As to your paper, the first thing to do is decide what kind of a variable it
> is.  A paper that just says "there's a variable" really doesn't have a lot of
> value (as IBVS says in their editorial notes).  Hit the books and come up with
> a theory... then try to shoot holes in it.  For example, your star looks like
> a delta Scuti, but the the V-I you give is 0.77, which pushes it to very late
> F, almost G type, according to Zombeck - and the book I have says DSCTs are
> A0-F5.  That's just on the basis of the once-over I gave it, I don't know much
> about DSCTs - there may be other research that indicates differently - you'd
> have to research that.  Every time you give some parameter, check to make sure
> it's within bounds for whatever type of star you say it is.  Give references
> where appropriate.
> 
> Most papers will discuss the analysis of the light curve, and present the
> power spectrum, or whatever was used to determine the period, and usually
> include an ephemeris.
> 
> Where you refer to TASS Mark IV, I'd give a reference - if there is one, or
> the URL of the TASS site if there isn't.  Similarly, if you used Vizier or
> Aladin, I'd acknowledge them.  Most projects like that include a section on
> how they like to be acknowledged.  Vizier's is very simple, ``This research
> has made use of the VizieR catalogue access tool, CDS, Strasbourg, France'' as
> is ADC's, "This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System
> Bibliographic Services."
> 
> I would probably use a more descriptive title, like most IBVS papers, like,
> "GSC 00279-00321: a New Delta Scuti Variable" and flesh out the abstract to
> something like "CCD observations of GSC 00279 00321 show it to be a Delta
> Scuti-type pulsating variable star with 0.127-day period."  It's really handy
> to have a descriptive abstract like that when you're perusing a list of papers
> on ADC or in the library, also helps search tools, etc.
> 
> You might also standardize your nomenclature, you use GSC 00279 00321 in one
> place, and GSC 279:321 in another.  Most catalogues will tell you what the
> "correct" format is, the GSC readme file specifies, "Note on GSC: the GSC
> Identification is made of a plate number (5 digits) and star number on the
> plate (5 digits); note that, in the literature, a dash separates generally the
> two parts."  Of course, scanning the IBVS, I see many different ways, so I
> don't think they insist on a specific method, but I see IBVS converts it to
> "GSC xxxxx-yyyyy" when they link to SIMBAD, and SIMBAD uses it that way, too.
> 
> IBVS likes figures submitted in both jpg and ps format if possible.  There is
> a handy DOS utility called jpeg2ps that will take a jpg and generate an eps
> (encapsulated postscript) file for you.  Search for it on the net or I can
> e-mail a copy to you.
> 
> Having to write down what you think and justify it in writing makes for a
> tremendous learning experience.  You'll learn a lot about the trade, so go for
> it and enjoy it.  Don't expect an overnight process - I spent about 4 months
> on my first effort, and rewrote entirely a couple of times.  Then once I sent
> it in, I went two rounds of revision with the IBVS editors, who, by the way
> are VERY nice folks and very helpful in their suggestions.  I think I started
> writing in January and the thing was accepted in September.
> 
> Of course, once it's published, you will see many things you'd like to change!
> 
> Aloha,
> 
> Jim B.
> Honolulu, Hawaii
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Koppelman" <lolife@bitstream.net>
> To: "TASS" <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 6:48 PM
> Subject: Re: GSC 00279 00321
> 
> 
>> Here is my first attempt at a paper:
>> 
>> http://www.lolife.com/gsc279-321/paper.pdf
>> 
>> I copied the format from here:
>> 
>> http://www.konkoly.hu/cgi-bin/IBVS?5216
>> 
>> 
>> I'd like comments from y'all if possible on where I'm off base and where I
>> need more or less and the like.
>> 
>> Thanks to John's AVE tutorial it is starting to make more sense. I can't get
>> away from the 0.127 period, even when I fold in one minimum from the TASS
>> data. I should try it with all the TASS data to be sure.
>> 
>> I don't now how to tell what kind of variable star this is. It's very short
>> period excludes many types but I don't know enough to make a theory as to
>> what type it is. That is why I do not address that in the paper.
>> 
>> I no longer think this star is the X-ray source 1RXS J115752.7+062658. It is
>> off by 22 arcseconds in the Aladin viewer. That seems too far away but I
>> don't know for sure.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> Michael Koppelman
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>