DIF-C-HRIV-3/4-9P-ENCOUNTER-V3.0 Review Result: Certified. Symbol Key: o = Lien open x = Lien resolved or closed ! = Lien rejected or declined + = Comments (by SMcLaughlin unless otherwise indicated) Catalog ======= ! In the dataset.cat file description, please add full citations to the Calibration papers (i.e., as footnotes in the text in addition to the REFERENCE objects that also exist). + Rejected by PI and archive lead. The correct and full citations are already in ref.cat. x In dataset.cat. the CITATION_DESC year must be '2014' since this is when the data were reviewed and released to the public. + Done. x In dataset.cat, the description of the east flip for lookback images is incorrect. (In the paragraph beginning, "Using this convention for Tempel 1 approach images...".) See Jianyang's slide 17 for the geometry and correct orientation. + Done. x In dataset.cat, REFERENCE_KEY_ID = "HAMPTONETAL2005" shows up twice + Done. It's supposed to be "KLAASENETAL2005", which no one caught. ;) x The required instrument_host catalog file is missing for the impactor. + Rejected. The impactor is not the host for this instrument, and was never required in the past. This is a PDS validator bug. x In hriv.cat: REFERENCE_KEY_ID = "BARRYETAL2010" is not found in ref.cat. If this is the same reference as already exists in the PDS catalog, add that REFERENCE object. Otherwise, change the REFERENCE_KEY_ID to a unique value and supply the corresponding reference object. + Done. Added to ref.cat. x In dif.cat: REFERENCE_KEY_ID = "RIEBER&SHARROW2009" is not found in ref.cat. If this is the same reference as already exists in the PDS catalog, add that REFERENCE object. Otherwise, change the REFERENCE_KEY_ID to a unique value and supply the corresponding reference object. + Done. Added to ref.cat. x In voldesc.cat: x This data set is NOT an amalgam of physical volumes, so the VOLUME_ID must be valid - it may not end in 'X'. x VOLUME_VERSION_ID must be set with respect to the final, valid VOLUME_ID. + Done. Documents ========= x Ensure these data sets have the latest versions of these document files: day_of_year_calendar.lbl epoxi_cal_pipeline_summ.lbl epoxi_sis.lbl instruments_hampton.lbl pdsdd_epoxi.lbl quaternion_desc.lbl + Done. x In epoxi_sis.pdf: x This document says labels for HRIV, MRI, and ITS level 3/4 data, PDS keyword PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT contain FLAT_PRO= FLATCONS= FLATTEMP= CALWINDW= CALWINPY= but the sample labels in the SIS's 4.4.4.1 and 4.4.4.2 do not. x p. 27: "DIF-L-HRII-3_4-EPOXI-LUNAR-CALS-V1.0" should have a / not a _ i.e. "DIF-L-HRII-3/4-EPOXI-LUNAR-CALS-V1.0" x epoxy_sis.pdf pages 47-9 the figures are misaligned with the text. This needs to be corrected in every copy of the document in all data sets. + Done, except for the item about PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT. That PDS keyword will contain different processing keywords because the calibration pipeline performs different steps for the VIS HRIV, MRI, and ITS CCDs and the IR spectrometer. For example, the FITS header keywords FLAT_PRO, FLATCONS, FLATTEMP, CALWINDW, & CALWINPY only apply to IR calibration, so those values are never included in PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT. However, we noted this difference in the description of PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT in the SIS. For last item, had to print the Word file as a Postscript to force alignment of figure pieces with text, then distilled the Postscript to PDF/A. x There are summary files with names like hriv_3_4_epoxi_garrad.pdf. In at least some of these labels in some data sets, the Julian Date field is described as being in the form YYYYMMDD. This needs to be fixed if it applies to this data set. + Done. x There are summary files with names like hriv_3_4_epoxi_garrad.pdf. In at least some of these labels in some data sets, the Julian Date field is described as being in the form YYYYMMDD. This needs to be fixed if it applies to this data set. + Done. x In places that describe the file naming convention, there needs to be a clear indication of which time (beginning, middle, end) is used for creating the file name. + Not applicable. Mid-obs is used in the filenames and for grouping products into DOY directories, and this is already called out in the EPOXI SIS and dataset.cat files! Please read the metadata and documentation. x There is a mention of transfer smear, but no indication of how to deal with it in the raw data. This information is in the Klaasen papers, but if possible there should be a cross-reference to this information where transfer smear is mention in this summary document. Alternately, reference those papers for more details at the top of the document. + Done. Referenced cal papers for more details at the top of this document. ! Need a high-level pointer to the observation log in hriv_encounter_data_summary.pdf, to help new users find data of good quality. + Declined. There is a pointer in the "Required Reading" section of dataset.cat. CALIB/ ====== x 3 of the 9 PSFs look like they are shifted by one line (possibly to center them?). This should be explained if it’s real, and corrected if not. + Done. This is not a problem. Noted in dataset.cat that the HRIV PSFs are very non-circular due the focus problem, and the pixelization can lead to offsets of the center in one direction or another. Referred reader to LINDLERETAL2007, LINDLERETAL2013 and BARRYETAL2010 for more info. x In abscalvs labels, the table description needs to take into account dividing by exposure time, and do so in a manner that avoids confusing users reading the table and column descriptions. + Done. Improved the table descr. Also done for MRI and ITS Tempel1 datasets. x In calib/drkmodel/hrivis_020601_2_3.lbl: x The Eg equation in the code sample has a different exponent than in the equation above. 10^-4 is correct. x The descriptive paragraph says the code fragment calculates DN/s, but in fact the unit of the actual result is DN. x The pixel size is stated as being in mm, but the code would require microns to produce reasonable results. + Done. DATA/ ===== x Some images seem to show the same SNR/Image issues around impact time as the ITS 64x64 data do. Yan provided this specific problematic image for investigation: dif-c-hriv-3_4-9p-encounter-v3.0/data/rad/2005/185/hv05070405_9000984_001_r.fit + Done. B.Carcich and K.Klaasen confirmed this is reasonable. It is documented in the new Appendix A to the EPOXI Cal Pipeline Summary document.