SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Robin Leadbeater
Posts: 1926
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:41 pm
Contact:

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by Robin Leadbeater »

This supernova features in a recent publication. There is a S&T article about it here
https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-n ... speed-bump
The original paper is here
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3 ... 213/ac7235
and includes the two 2SPOT spectra submitted to TNS but with no specific acknowledgement as far as can see. (I think this is a problem with TNS as there is no simple way to contact the person submitting spectra, though I guess the details could have been obtained by contacting TNS direct)
LHIRES III #29 ATIK314 ALPY 600/200 ATIK428 Star Analyser 100/200 C11 EQ6
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk
2SPOT
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:40 am
Contact:

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by 2SPOT »

Hi Robin,

Thanks for this information, I was not aware of this publication.
Indeed I find it not very nice not to have quoted and/or thanked the 2SPOT team for having made about 30% of the spectra in this publication. This does not motivate to deposit spectra in TNS where our team was mentioned in full, but TNS does not give any means to dialogue with the people who deposit spectra in this database, which is probably why the authors of the publication did not contact us.

Here's the spectra in TNS
Image

and a copy of the table in this publication

Image

On the positive side, the other spectra were made with large telescopes such as the NTT (3.58m), BAADE (6.5M) and the SALT (11m), probably with spectrographs more resolving than the ALPY 600, but it shows that spectra made with small instruments by amateurs are a useful contribution to this kind of publication.

Olivier Garde (2SPOT team)
2SPOT : Southern Spectroscopic Project Observatory Team
Website : http://www.2spot.org - Observatory Site : Deep Sky Chile https://www.deepskychile.com/fr/
Suport our action : https://www.helloasso.com/associations/ ... mulaires/2
Robin Leadbeater
Posts: 1926
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:41 pm
Contact:

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by Robin Leadbeater »

Some professionals do make the effort though. For example I was contacted by the lead author of this paper for permission to use my classifying spectrum of SN 2018gwo on TNS and I was made a co-author and invited to comment on the paper before publication
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A ... D/abstract

(All my fits files have my email address in the header so there is no excuse not to contact me but in this case he must have tracked me down via my observatory website as he used the address there. Top marks !)

Cheers
Robin
LHIRES III #29 ATIK314 ALPY 600/200 ATIK428 Star Analyser 100/200 C11 EQ6
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk
Tom Love
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:57 am

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by Tom Love »

There's an interesting question here about what is reasonable acknowledgement, and when authorship is appropriate. It seems to me that when you have supplied data your effort should, of course, be explicitly noted and a brief mention in the acknowledgements section at the end alongside the various sources of grant funding etc is the least that one should expect. As observers we have, after all, contributed something at direct cost to us in time, and often in money as well.

Authorship is trickier. For what it's worth, I tend to think that simply providing data shouldn't usually pass the threshold for authorship on a substantive paper. I would expect to have some involvement in the analysis, or at the very least in taking measurements from the spectra, or being involved in discussing the findings as the paper is prepared, or something like that if I'm going to be a coauthor. And I think it's reasonable to expect professional researchers to support that kind of participation, if they're using data we have given them. This kind of interaction is how we have the opportunity to learn about the science, and for me is the most rewarding part of the exercise. Of course there will always be a range, and some professional researchers will take the time to involve you, and some won't. There's probably not much we can do about that.

For brief reports, like ATELs, then I think contributing data passes the threshold for authorship, since these are mostly about presenting new data and getting it on the record.

I'd be very interested to hear of other people's views on this. Particularly in light of the IAU recently setting up a committee to support pro-am collaboration. https://www.iau.org/science/scientific_ ... roups/330/
-------------------------------------------------
Martinborough, New Zealand. Alpy, Lhires RC12
Ernst Pollmann
Posts: 461
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 7:16 pm

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by Ernst Pollmann »

Some professionals do not see the sole (often too willing) provision of observation data as a reason for co-authorship.
They are eager to get dates from us, and that's about it in many cases.
One more reason for "professional amateurs" to scientifically interpret and publish their own data.
Ernst Pollmann
Tom Love
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:57 am

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by Tom Love »

I agree Ernst, and I have been lucky enough to have strong involvement in the various publications I've been part of. But when someone just takes the data and makes no effort to provide any other involvement, I think that is unfortunate. I wonder if the IAU pro-am committee should be encouraged to develop some guidelines for professional researchers on appropriate and ethical use of amateur data. I might suggest it.
-------------------------------------------------
Martinborough, New Zealand. Alpy, Lhires RC12
2SPOT
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:40 am
Contact:

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by 2SPOT »

Of course, It is necessary to distinguish between the spectra acquisition part and the interpretation part and therefore to know if one will just be cited for the data produced or co-author of the publication if one has been involved in the analysis of the spectra.

After all, in this particular publication there is only reference to the TNS database and none of the authors of our spectra have been cited, even though our names appear in TNS.

It would probably be necessary to create a 2SPOT structure in TNS, but I don't know if this is possible and how to do it?

There were only 7 spectra made on this supernova, so very few spectra (probably because the target is in the southern hemisphere which is less covered than the north). The "rarity" of the spectra produced should have made the authors worry about who made them?
2SPOT : Southern Spectroscopic Project Observatory Team
Website : http://www.2spot.org - Observatory Site : Deep Sky Chile https://www.deepskychile.com/fr/
Suport our action : https://www.helloasso.com/associations/ ... mulaires/2
Hamish Barker
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2019 12:11 am

Re: SN 2021aefx in NGC1566 (Dorado)

Post by Hamish Barker »

Did anyone contact the paper authors to ask if they had tried to contact 2spot group? Perhaps there is a chance to add a proper acknowledgement to the online version of the paper. Shapee who is one of the authors is involved with asassn and therefore would be aware of the need to acknowledge observational data sources.
Post Reply