Duplications from Cycle 2 CfP

Cycle 1 Duplication Checklist

Cycle 2 proposals will be checked for duplication against successful Cycle 1 (though not Cycle 0) projects. The duplication criteria are given in Section 7.2.2 of the Proposer's Guide.

The Proposal Review Committee will make recommendations regarding potential duplications. A list of the metadata from Highest Priority Cycle 1 proposals already archived or designated for transfer into Cycle 2 is linked to below, so that Cycle 2 PIs can avoid proposing for the same observations. PIs should be aware that additional data not included in this list (non-executed Cycle 1 projects that were not designated for carryover, including Cycle 1 Filler projects and approved DDT proposals) might be archived before the Cycle 2 panel review meeting (March 2014), which will also constitute potential duplication against Cycle 2 proposals. The metadata for these (and any successfully executed) observations can be obtained by running an archive query.

More generally, the duplication checklist is complete and accurate within the limits of the available information. These data may be modified if errors are detected during the Phase 2 process or in the course of observing, or by future change requests (although drastic changes are rarely approved).

The duplication checklist is provided in both Excel Workbook (xlsx) and Comma Separated Variable (CSV) text format. It includes one row for each target, offset, or mosaic central pointing. The content is described at the beginning of each file, and includes target names, coordinates, properties of each spectral window, along with the PI-requested resolutions and sensitivities. Observational constraints are not included.

The metadata are primarily drawn from the "Phase 1" data submitted with the original proposals. "Phase 2" metadata (drawn from the Scheduling Blocks created by ALMA staff and approved by PIs) are used when the Phase 1 data are significantly modified (as a result of proposal review process, or from an approved Change Request, or to be consistent with ALMA "best practices").

Cycle 2 PIs should avoid proposing the same targets with similar observational parameters in their Cycle 2 proposals, or should explain clearly why the proposed observations would not constitute a duplication.