[vsnet-chat 933] Re: IBVS policy

[Taichi Kato <tkato>]

Mati Morel wrote:

>        In 1993 I prepared a paper in collaboration with P. Camilleri (of nova
>discovery fame), to report some large amplitude red variables he had found, as 
>a byproduct of his photographic nova patrol. Lists of photographic observations
>were submitted to IBVS, but these proved to rather rough estimates (only 
>accurate to +/- 0.5mag), and we were advised (by the editors) to delete them
>and resubmit the paper. The paper finally appeared as IBVS no. 3923.
>        So, even photographic observations may be rejected, if they are clearly
>of a rough character. I think that the editors are clearly trying to encourage 
    In my opinion, it is not always scientific to exclude observations
simply they have large intrinsic errors.  The data are of scientific quality
when properly accompanied with reasonably achievable, assessable errors.
It simply means that discussions should be done within the quoted errors;
if the quoted errors are sufficient for the requested science, the degree
of the error doesn't matter.

    I'm against the reasoning to reject visual (or sometimes photographic)
observations _simply_ by the quoted or inferred degree of errors.

Regards,
Taichi Kato

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp