IXPE Proposals and Tools: Cycle 11. OverviewIXPE solicits General Observer proposals from the general scientific community. Proposals are solicited via NASA's ROSES grant solicitation process. Approximately 11 Ms of time will be available in the observing period February 1, 2024 to January 31, 2025. Approximately 4 Ms of observing time will be allocated for Large Program (LP) proposals. Additionally, Target of Opportunity (ToO) proposals from known targets and theory proposals are also solicited in this call. Proposers may request a period of up to 6-months for exclusive-use of the IXPE data associated with their proposal. The exclusive-use period will commence upon delivery of the data to the HEASARC, typically within two weeks of the observation. If an exclusive-use period is not requested, the validated data will be made public via the HEASARC archive within two weeks of acquisition. Data from approved LPs will have no exclusive-use period. As part of IXPE Cycle 1, up to 300 ks of NICER observing time will be made available for joint observations with IXPE. General information about the IXPE mission can be found on the IXPE Mission page. More detailed information is available on the IXPE Support Documentation page. Tools and files to assist in proposal preparation are available on the IXPE Proposal page. 2. DeadlineFor IXPE Cycle 1, proposers are strongly encouraged to submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) through NSPIRES. The deadline for the NOI submissions is September 18th 2023. NOIs are non mandatory, and phase I proposals may be submitted even if an NOI has not been submitted. Phase I proposals are due no later than 4:30 pm Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) on October 18, 2023. 3. Notice of IntentThe purpose of the IXPE NOI request is to help inform preparations for the peer review. The critical information we seek are the potential number of proposals, the types of proposals, and basic target information. An NOI may be submitted either by the intended PI for the phase 1 proposal or by someone else associated with the proposal. The latter option may be useful for proposals led by individuals not currently registered in NSPIRES. If using this option, please see item #2 below. One needs first to log into the NSPIRES system. If you don't already have an account, you may create one via the link on the page. Then search for the IXPE announcement using the search box on the page, click on the announcement number, and then click on the Create button. Once a NOI Title has been given on the NSPIRES site, there are 5 Elements to the NOI:
4. Proposal Elements and Submission MethodAdditional details concerning Cycle 1 are given in the IXPE call for proposals. There will be a two-phase proposal process. Phase one is for observing proposals. Phase two is for budget proposals for successful and elgible phase one proposers who were awarded priority A or C targets, or and for successful theory proposals. Proposal submission is done via the HEASARC ARK/RPS on-line system. Hard-copy submission is not required. The following elements are required:
The following should not be submitted:
5. Key details of the proposal formIXPE PIs must first create an ARK account and/or join the IXPE RPS group. Having done so, the IXPE RPS form can be accessed via ARK/RPS. We provide below some key details for IXPE Cycle 1. For further details, consult the ARK/RPS help file. Cover Page
General Form
Target Form
After completing all fields for a proposal in ARK/RPS, use the Verify button to confirm that all required entries exist and conform to the expected format. Forms that pass verification can then be submitted. ARK/RPS allows PIs to continue to modify submitted proposals until the deadline, so there is no penalty for submitting the proposal form early. The LaTeX, PostScript, and PDF buttons of ARK/RPS can be used to generate formatted versions of the proposal forms. Although it is often useful for the PIs to keep formatted copies of the forms for the record, it is not a required part of the proposal submission process. 6. Dual-Anonymous ReviewThe phase-1 proposal review will be done in a dual-anonymous fashion. The overarching objective of Dual-Anonymous Peer Review (DAPR) is to reduce unconscious bias in the evaluation of the merit of a proposal. Under this system, not only are proposers unaware of the identity of the members on the review panel, but the reviewers do not have explicit knowledge of the proposal teams. In order to meet the objectives of dual-anonymous peer review, review panels will be instructed to evaluate the anonymized proposals based on their scientific merit, without initially taking into account the proposing team's qualifications. As a final check, and only after the scientific evaluation is finalized for all proposals, the panel will be provided with the "Expertise and Resources - Not Anonymized" documents. The panel will validate the qualifications of the team in order to allow the reviewers to assess the team capabilities required to execute a given proposed science investigation. Proposers should consult the "Guidelines for Anonymous Proposals" document in the "Other Documents" section on the NSPIRES page of this program element for instructions on writing proposals appropriate for dual-anonymous peer review. The instructions here and in that document supersede the default instructions given in the NASA Guidebook for Proposers and the ROSES Summary of Solicitation. Proposers will also be required to upload a separate "Expertise and Resources - Not Anonymized" document, which is not anonymized. The "Guidelines for Anonymous Proposals" document contains complete information on writing proposals appropriate for a dual-anonymous reviews. Key factors for PIs to keep in mind are:
Additional information may also be found on the web at: https://science.nasa.gov/researchers/dual-anonymous-peer-review. 7. Constraints and Category DesignationsAccepted IXPE observation proposals will recieve either a Category A or Category C designation. Observations with additional constraints (time, phase, coordinated, etc.) will need to be designated Category A in order to guarantee inclusion in IXPE's schedule during Cycle 1. The effect of time contraints will be evaluated by a member of the IXPE technical staff, and their comments provided to the scientific review panel to ensure constraints receive consistent consideration. Constrained Category A observations not scheduled during the cycle may be carried over to the following cycle where warranted by scientific or operational circumstances (e.g., in the case of coordinated observations with other space- or ground-based observatories). Category C observations not scheduled during the cycle will not be carried over to the following cycle. Note that accepted ToOs that are not executed will not be carried over to the following GO cycle. 8. Targets of OpportunityObservers may propose for IXPE Targets of Opportunity for targets with known right ascension and declination to be observed during an anticipated event which occurs at an unknown time or duration (for example, a radio outburst from Cyg X-3). ToO proposals must include a list of pre-defined targets. Such proposals may list a maximum of 6 targets, but require only one or some subset of the proposed targets to be observed. Triggers will only be accepted for targets on the list It is the responsibility of the Principal Investigator (PI) of an accepted ToO proposal to alert the IXPE Science Operations Center when trigger conditions for their accepted ToO have been met. Such ToO observations are triggered by the PI via the IXPE ToO web site. ToO observations will be executed on a best effort basis. IXPE's response to a ToO depends on visibility constraints and when the ToO trigger is received with respect to the weekly planning cycle. Note that the highest priority ToOs triggers are particularly difficult to handle at night and on weekends when the Mission Operations Center is not staffed. These should be avoided in all but the most urgent cases. 9. Scientific Justification - AnonymizedFormat
Content
10. Expertise and Resources - Not AnonymizedPIs are required to upload a one-page "Expertise and Resources - Not Anonymized" document PDF through ARK as a separate upload when submitting the anonymized Scientific/Technical/Management section. (Note that, for IXPE proposals, the page limit for the team expertise document is one page, i.e. further constrained compared to "no more than three pages" from the general guidelines document.) This document provides a list of all team members, their institutional affiliations, roles, expertise, and contributions to the work. The document should also discuss any specific resources that are key to completing the proposed work. This document will be distributed to the review panel after all proposals have been reviewed and rated, only for programs which are in the selectable range. This is to allow the reviewers to assess the team capabilities required to execute a given proposed science investigation. If there are clear, compelling deficiencies in the expertise required to see through the goals of the proposal, the panel may decide to flag the submission accordingly, and provide a detailed justification in its comments to NASA. This review may not be used to flag "up" proposals for having strong team qualifications, nor may it be used to re-evaluate or upgrade proposals. IXPE HelpdeskIf you have any questions concerning IXPE or the IXPE GO program, please use the Feedback form Please be sure to select "IXPE" as the mailing list so that your question can be routed to the correct helpdesk promptly. |