Re: GSC 00279 00321

["James Bedient" <bedient@hawaii.rr.com>]

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
>
>
>
>