Incorporating the white papers into the COSEP v2

As noted in the call for white papers, there is some overlap between the COSEP ( and the white papers submitted in response to this call.

We are hoping to resolve this overlap by consolidating the topics (and metrics) described in the white papers into the COSEP - (per this line from the call):

“We anticipate that the performance evaluation components of the white papers solicited here
will also be added to the COSEP, to provide a comprehensive reference point for survey strategy

To make it explicit, this means that:

  • we’d like to make the submitted white papers (or sections of them) public
  • it would be great if you wanted to help incorporate white papers (especially if you only want to use specific portions) into the COSEP - we can help figure out how to make this as painless as possible
  • if you just want to say “add any or all of this to the COSEP as you see fit”, that’s totally ok too … just please be sure to send us your source files for the white paper when you submit it as well as the compiled PDF. You’ve already done a lot of work writing the white paper, and we will primarily be pasting your work (science justification + performance evaluation) into the COSEP in an appropriate place. We can send you a link to review the resulting additions to the COSEP when it’s ready.

Please let me know about any comments or concerns.


Thanks @ljones! I made a start on the v2 COSEP here - for anyone not familiar with this marvelous living document, please do follow that link, give comments on my proposed structure, and take a look round its GitHub repo.

Are these instructions stated in the White Paper Call? I couldn’t find this listed in there. Did I miss it?

This seems a bit late to be asking this if it’s not a direction in the call for white papers. What about people who are submitting outside LSST science collaboration white papers and don’t use LSST community? I recommending making this a step after the white paper deadline, where project emails the submitting authors after the submission date making this request rather than adding this as a step we need to do at submission.

Sorry if that wasn’t clear – it is indeed a step AFTER submission of the white papers, and is (as stated above) voluntary. We’d love to have help to do this and putting everyone’s white papers into the COSEP, but it’s not required … if people do not want their white papers to be public, then we won’t use any of it (but this does leave us wondering a bit how to make sure we’re incorporating these metrics in the long term, after the family of runs created in response to the white papers is completed), but as long as they’re willing to make it public, just sending us the latex would be a fine minimal step. We’ll follow up with the submitted white papers to see what people want to do.

The most important part I wanted to make clear here was that we WOULD like to make all of the white papers public.

Phil is just preparing the COSEP for this step … and also doing the work to change its name from the previously “Observing Strategy Whitepaper” to the “Community Observing Strategy Evaluation Paper” (COSEP). Because “the observing strategy white paper” was obviously a bit confusing.

Hi, @drphilmarshall and @ljones this came up in the last chairs PST call. Any updates on this?

1 Like