“Through the distributed peer review system, the community completed the impressive number of 14,960 reviews in a couple of months,” signaled Carpenter. For this cycle, 1,016 astronomers reviewed 1,497 proposals requesting less than 25 hours of observing time. “The feedback from the reviewers was overwhelmingly positive as they thought dual-anonymous made the process fairer and allowed them to focus on the science and not the proposal team.”Īfter the successful introduction of distributed peer review in the Cycle 7 ACA stand-alone Supplemental Call, ALMA applied this method for the first time in the main call for Cycle 8, for proposals requesting less than 25 hours on the 12-m Array or less than 150 hours on the Morita Array. “The vast majority of the community adapted to the guidelines and anonymized their proposals successfully,” explains Andrea Corvillón, the Proposal Handling Team Lead. The Observatory instituted a dual-anonymous proposal evaluation process to reduce biases and make the review process as fair as possible for all users. In previous cycles, ALMA has carefully monitored the results of the proposal process to identify systematics in the proposal rankings. Note: subscription rates do not apply for Open Skies since all regions contribute observing time for proposals from PIs who are not affiliated with any of the ALMA regions. Regional distribution of all submitted proposals and the proposals recommended for scheduling with grades A and B, and Grade C. Summary of submitted and accepted proposals “In the coming months, a detailed analysis of the distributed peer review process will be made available.” Our objective is to examine the potential biases in the review results and carefully consider the feedback from the reviewers and the proposal teams,” commented John Carpenter, ALMA Observatory Scientist and leader of the revised proposal review process. “Given the significant innovations in the proposal review process, we are conducting a detailed analysis of the results. The ongoing travel restrictions imposed by the pandemic forced the panel reviews to happen virtually.

Atacama Compact Array, or ACA) in standalone mode, more than one thousand astronomers participated in the review process to help determine ALMA’s observing program for the new cycle.įor the first time, ALMA required proposals written in a dual-anonymous fashion, where the identity of the proposal team remains hidden to the reviewers. With the introduction of distributed peer review and the continuation of panel reviews for proposals over 25 hours in the 12-m Array, or in excess of 150 hours in the Morita Array (aka. The proposal review process had unprecedented participation by the community. The total requested time for observations using the ACA 7-m array and Total Power array is about five times the available time, also significantly more than the requested time in previous cycles. With 4,300 hours available on the 12-m Array, Cycle 8 was one of the most competitive ALMA cycles to date. It was extraordinary in many aspects:ĭespite the challenging work conditions imposed by the pandemic, the community submitted 1,735 proposals that requested over 26,000 hours on the 12-m Array, far exceeding the time requested in previous cycles (19,148 hours requested in cycle 7). The original Cycle 8 proposal process was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and restarted in 2021. “ALMA is indebted to the community for their enthusiasm and support for this new process.” “Any proposal review process relies on the support and commitment of the community, especially in Cycle 8 with distributed peer review and the need for virtual panel meetings,” explains ALMA Director Sean Dougherty. The proposal review process selected 253 high-priority programs that ALMA will observe beginning October 2021. On August 6, 2021, the C圜all for Proposals results were announced to the astronomical community, completing a process that started last December with its pre-announcement.

Iobserve review