1. Gemini Observatory Report to the AURA Board 6 th February 2002

2. Highlights The AURA Review and the Gemini observing system Actions for AURA

3. …GG Tau Dan Potter, U of H Gemini/Hokupa’a in K band Tidally truncated circumbinary disk Keplerian disk extent ~ 180- 260 AU Resolved imaging polarimetry of system Nature of irregularities?

4. Two ultracool companions to the young star HD130948 Potter et al. 2001, ApJ submitted Pair has same proper motion as primary Gravitationally bound pair Very low mass ultracool objects Pair separation = 0.134+/- 0.002” Binary = 1.13 M sun total Semi-major axis = 2.4 AU period ~ 10 yr Primary < 1 Gyr

5. H=8 at 5 min

6. …two ultracool companions: KECK/NIRSPEC spectroscopy NIRSPEC fed by AO KI, FeH, H 2 O bandheads Both objects are dL2 Contracting BDs M B =0.075 M sun M C =0.065 M sun First two BDs imaged around a G-type star

7. Binary Brown Dwarf: 2M1426 Close et al. (ApJL 2001 in press) Hokupa’a on Gemini first ever to lock on a Brown Dwarf 2M1426 is a very tight binary (3 AU) with a ~12 yr period

8. … binary brown dwarf 2M1426 system M8.5 primary L1 secondary DUSTY models leads to a primary of 0.074 M sun and a secondary of 0.055 M sun Fairly low mass companion for a BD

9. Crossing the BD desert in 15 Sge Liu et al. 2002, ApJ, in press 0.06 M sun (48 M jup ) L dwarf companion HR 7672; 14 AU from star Gemini/Hokupa’a. BD can exist that close to the main star.

10. Wolf-Rayet exports dust to the ISM Tony Moffat et al. (U of Montreal) Some Pop I WR stars are prolific dust producers WC : T = 2.5 – 6 x 10 4 K Dust shells to R ~ 10 3-4 R* First imaging of WR dust envelopes in the mid IR Extended dust envelope formed in wind-wind collision zone of P~25 yr WR+O binary. Dust production is ~10 -6 M sun yr -1. 20% of “large grain” dust can escape from very hot stars into the ISM

11. NIRI Status Science Verification data acquired in 2001 distributed to various teams NIRI data processing IRAF package about to be distributed Supernova Satie Z=1.05 J~24 mag 2.5 hrs int. time (out of 8 hours total) f/6 camera 0.5 arcsec image quality Awaiting acceptance… Supernova “Satie” Gemini Observatory NIRI SV Team

12. Gemini Multi-Object Spectrograph – 5.5’ x 5.5’ FWHM 0.50” g’, r’, i’ 1868 galaxies in the 5.5’x5.5’ field RXJO142+2131; z = 0.28

13. GMOS: object selection and examples of spectra

14. Gemini South AURA Dedication of Gemini South a great success – thank you AURA!

15. Gemini South Dedication Gemini’s AD’s at work…. A big “thank you” to Marylu Evans! - for herding, then re-herding the cats

16. Gemini South ‘comes on line” NGC 6357 Star-forming Region in Scorpius NS14 Bipolar Nebula Recent (last night) Phoenix run was reporting 0.22 – 0.35” (K)

17. NGC 253 An edge-on starburst galaxy Active nucleus observed at 4  m

18. The Galactic Center at Br-   the power of IR optimization Gemini South + ABU + fast tip/tilt Brackett  FWHM ~ 0.35” 1 minute integration Simons & Becklin 1992 IRTF - L’ - Protocam 16,000 images shift/add An entire night….

19. Recommendations of AURA’s Gemini Commissioning Review R1 — Establish, measure, publicize and use clear metrics and milestones whereby commissioning progress can be quantified both for the benefit of the Gemini team and that of the broader Gemini community. R2 — The schedule of telescope use on both Mauna Kea and Cerro Pachon must preserve, at all times, the flexibility to immediately attend to the repairs of unexpected system faults. This strategy must be maintained until the facility is "fully operational", i.e. the values of the metrics show all the performance goals to have been met. R3 — Scheduling of instruments must primarily be guided at this time by their suitability and readiness to explore and test system's performance. Visitor instruments must be scheduled only when required for the commissioning of future, similar, facility instruments. R4 — All science scheduling of the telescope must be in the queue mode or, for visitor instruments, in service observing mode. The intent here is to maintain the flexibility to revert to engineering work when required and to minimize the impact of visiting observers on the staff.

20. Metrics - How do we quantify the scientific success or impact of an Observatory? The elements of this system under direct Gemini Control Strategic planning and execution of instrumentation & development programs Queue scheduling Classical scheduling Projects transformed to sequence of observations Telescope reliability Over subscription rate Observing efficiency Processing pipelines & quality assessment Data archive or data mortuary Number of publications Number of citations Instrument sensitivity Quantifiable Scientific Impact Number of large projects “Abingdon” workshops, new GSC (SWG’s), and Gemini Board Observatory gaining experience in both classical and queue scheduling, repeat rate in queue < 3% Conceptual design for Gemini Science Archive complete by CADC, Victoria This is the Observatory’s operational challenge, improving performance, reliability and efficiency of the observing process Gemini Board has funded IDF & FDF programs. Good project management applied across IDF & FDF + incentives (guaranteed time) National Time Allocation Process & ITAC Scientific outreach and Call for Proposals

21. Metrics – target clear weather reliability (telescope + instruments) 2002A2002B2003A2003B2004A 20 100% Science availability 40 60 80 Gemini South Gemini North 98% requirement goal Clear weather reliability Gemini North (telescope only) Instrument commissioning Telescope engineering/maintenance

22. Metrics – target observing efficiency [shutter open]/[elapsed time] Operational facility instruments 2002A2002B2003A2003B2004A 20 100% Science availability 40 60 80 85% goal requirement Observing efficiency Telescope engineering/maintenance Instrument commissioning

23. Total clear weather efficiency target and observing effectiveness Define requirement as a fraction (percentage) of total clear weather time available, excluding the time used for instrument commissioning  0.9 x 0.98 x 0.85 = 0.75 (if engineering, reliability and efficiency targets are met)  75% of all available clear time should be used collecting ‘science photons’ Define “observing effectiveness” of queue observing: The probability that the Observatory can complete highly ranked projects by matching observations to required atmospheric conditions  Queue simulations show that projects in ranking band 1, 95% of programs completed, band 2 (80%), and band 3 (50%) when scheduled as queued observations compared to 40% probability under classical scheduling (subject to random weather/atmospheric conditions)  Predicted observing effectiveness of Band 1 queued scheduled projects ~ 0.71  Predicted observing effectiveness of classically scheduled projects ~ 0.75 x 0.4 = 0.3

24. Benefits of Queue observing arise for three reasons: Benefits of Queue observing arise for three reasons: The Gemini instruments – like those of all new generation telescopes -- are complex machines and require training (and re-training). Gemini staff astronomers (and frequent visitors) can achieve and maintain a thorough level of understanding to operate the facility instruments at optimum efficiency. In the Classical mode, astronomers execute one program (or perhaps a backup program). In the Queue mode, each night is planned with between 6 to 9 programs; of these, parts of 2 up to 6 programs are executed in any given night. The key is that the queue allows for an optimal match between the science requirements of TAC approved programs, sky conditions and Right Ascensions. In rapidly evolving conditions, the Gemini astronomers can interact with the PIs to explore a possible relaxation of the required conditions and are able to propose slight modifications in the way programs are executed. This again increases the probability of obtaining data matching the basic requirements of the PIs.

25. Initial GMOS Queue Results Observing efficiency in sequenced GMOS observations in imaging and MOS mode ~ 80%-85% MOS acquisition < 10 mins. (required offsets ~ +/- 0.3”) First GMOS Queue Run: “I have been observing on many ground-based telescopes for more than 32 years. I confess that from being a doubter of queue programming, I have swiftly become a full convert to the extraordinary advantages of queue observing. I am convinced that the Queue mode observing does double the amount of useful data coming from the new generations telescopes as compared to their use in a classical mode with visiting observers.” Dr. Jean-Rene Roy

26. In this globally competitive environment AURA Board should conclude: 1.Gemini is beginning to produce world-class results  Both Keck and ESO are exploring “time swaps” with Gemini North  2002-2003 will be critical years for the Observatory, we will be ramping up the Gemini science operations and the Gemini science production “machine”. This success will in large part rely on a continued commitment by the largest partner, the US, both in terms of supporting this new way of doing facility based international astronomy, and through a continued partnership with the USGO and US instrument groups.

27. In this globally competitive environment AURA Board should conclude: 2.Gemini does represent a “non-traditional” approach to groundbased observational O/IR astronomy. However providing the broad US Community access to “an astronomy machine” and a fully supported groundbased archive (vis a vie ESO-VLT) is an essential element within the “diversity” of the US System Gemini complements not competes with Keck, Magellan, HET, LBT etc.

28. In this globally competitive environment AURA Board should conclude: 3. Continued competitiveness will rely on: Groups (national/international consortia) focused on producing 8m class facility instruments  Traditional groundbased models are failing  Infrastructure requirements alone are beyond many University groups, many groups are only “one deep” Action: AURA should examine and encourage more cooperative models for building “world-class” 8m-10m scale instruments and find ways to develop the next generation of instrumentalists The US community must become more fully enrolled in the opportunities, techniques and technologies for Adaptive Optics required to deliver forefront science in this new groundbased era.  Current funding models (PI grants) produces diverse but sub-critical results Action: AURA should support and promote a coherent AO Road Map within the US