The people that create the Virtual Observatory standards, organised in the IVOA, meet twice a year: Once in spring for a five-day meeting (this year it happened in Paris), and once in autumn for a three-day meeting back-to-back to ADASS, the venerable (this year it’s the 29th installment) meeting of people dealing with astronomy and computers.
We’re now on day three of ADASS, and for me, so far this has been more or an endless hackathon, with discussing and hacking on things like mirrors for DFBS, ADQL 2.1, the evolution of IVOA vocabularies (more on this soon somewhere around here), a vocabulary of object types, getting LAMOST 5 published properly in the VO, the measurements data model, convincing more registries to push out space-time coverage for their resources (I’m showing a poster on that), and a lot more.
So, getting to actually listen to talks during ADASS almost is something of a luxury, and a mind-widening at that – I’ve just listend to a talk about effectively doubling the precision of VLBI geodesy (in this case, measuring the location of radio telescopes to a few millimeters) by a piece of clever software, and before that I could learn a bit about how complex it is to figure out how much interference something emitting radio waves will cause in some other place on earth (like, well, a radio telescope). In case you’re curious: A bit more than a year from now, short papers on the topics will appear in the proceedings of ADASS XXIX, which in turn you’ll find in the ADASS proceedings collections (or on arXiv before that).
Given the experience of the last few days, I doubt I’ll do anything like the live blog from Paris linked above. I still can’t resist mentioning that at ADASS, I’m having a poster that’s little more than an ad blitz for STC in the registry.
Update (2019-10-13): Well, one week later I’m sitting in the closing session of the Interop, and I’ve even already given my summary of Semantics activities during the interop. Other topics I’ve talked about at this interop include interoperable authentication (I’m really interested in this because I’d like to enable persistent TAP uploads, where your uploaded tables are still there for you when you come back), a minor update to SimpleDALRegExt (which is overall rather technical and you probably don’t want to look at), on the takeup of new Registry tech (which might come over as somewhat sad, but considering that you have to pull along many people to have changes in “the” Registry, it’s not so bad at all), and on, as Mark Taylor called it, operational identification of server software (which I consider entertaining in its somewhat erratic narrative).
And now, after 7 days of essential nonstop discussion and brainstorming, I’m longing to slump into a chair on the train back to Heidelberg and just enjoy the landscape rolling by.
And, of course, there’s a puzzler again: you could win a beautiful towel if you solve a little VO-related problem. This year’s puzzler is about where in the sky you’ll see “nebulae” (in the classic sense defined by NGC) batched together most closely. If you’ve been following this blog for a while, it shouldn’t be too hard, but to participate you’d have to find someone in Stuttgart to hand in your solution.
If you are in Stuttgart: As usual, we’ll be giving hints during the coffee breaks on Tuesday and Wednesday. So, be sure to visit our booth.
DaCHS is developed on Debian, and Debian is the recommended deployment platform. Hence, a new major release of Debian (where major means for them: We may break stuff) is always a big thing for me. And so it was with the release that came in July, codenamed “buster”. Both on the “big thing” and on the “break” counts. This posting gives DaCHS deployers some background for their buster upgrades. Astronomers not running Debian themselves won’t risk missing anything if they skip this post.
So, after I upgraded the first thing I noticed is that DaCHS would no longer even start because astropy (which it needs, in particular, because that’s where pyfits sits these days) was gone. Simple explanation: Upstream astropy doesn’t support python2 any more, and so Debian buster only has python3-astropy.
Moving DaCHS to python3, unfortunately, isn’t that easy; a major dependency, nevow (essentially, a web framework), isn’t ported yet, and porting it is a major thing. Believe me, I’ve tried. The nasty thing, in particular, is that twisted, which lies below nevow still, hands up lots of byte strings. And in python3, b"a"!="a". You wouldn’t believe how many interesting bugs that simple truth introduces when you got a library that handed out “just strings” in python2 and now byte strings in python3. Yikes.
Update (2019-08-28): After quite a bit of experimentation, I finally gave up on providing a python2 version of astropy through release, because for a complicated set of reasons (including numpy declaring a conflict with existing astropys in buster) it is impossible to provide a package that works in buster and doesn’t break stretch. So, for buster only you’ll have to have a second (or, if running beta, third) gavo line in your sources.list (or equivalent):
deb http://vo.ari.uni-heidelberg.de/debian buster-foreports main
The instructions at our APT repository have been updated, so you won’t have to bookmark this particular page.
But that wasn’t the end of it. Buster comes with Postgres 11, which I look forward to in particular because it supports parallel query execution. That could help us quite a bit, given out large catalogs that quite often we want to run sequential scans on. But of course this means upgrading postgres. And attempting to do that on my development machine immediately hit a wall. What’s nice is that the q3c and pgsphere extensions that we’ve had to push out ourselves so far are now part of Debian main. What’s rather fatal is that our pgsphere extensions dealing with HEALPixes and MOCs aren’t part of the buster pgsphere package (the reasons for that are tedious and arcane and have to do with OpenSSL and the GPL).
Also, the pgsphere package coming with buster is called postgres-pgsphere, which is rather unfortunate as it’s missing the version indication. So: If you find it on your system, remove it right away. It will conflict with the one true pgsphere package (postgresql-11-pgsphere). That one you’ll get from us, and it has the HEALPix stuff built in. TL;DR: run apt install postgresql-q3c postgresql-11-pgsphere before following the postgres update recipe linked above.
There’s a bit more to upgrading the database this time. Because of fairly low-level cleanup in Postgres itself. you’re risking index corruption on string indices. Realistically, for almost anything you’ll have, it’s unlikely that you’re affected (it’s essentially about non-ASCII in strings), but then it’s better to be safe than sorry, and hence you should say
reindex database gavo
first thing after you’ve upgraded to Postgres 11 (which you should really do once the box is on buster). Only if you have very large tables it might be worth it to restrict the index regeneration to indices that could actually need it; see the postgres link above for how to do that.
One last thing on Postgres upgrades: I’ve not quite tried to work out why, but probably depending on your /etc/hosts DaCHS on buster is much more likely to connect to your database using IPv6 than it was before. Many older Postgres configurations won’t let you in then. If that happens to you, just edit /etc/postgresql/11/main/pg_hba.conf and add a line
host all all ::1/32 md5
(or something less permissive if you prefer).
The next buster-related shock was when TOPCAT’s TAP uploads stopped working while my regression tests didn’t find anything wrong. After a bit of cursing I eventually figured out that that’s not actually buster’s fault but twisted’s, which in a commit from May 2018 broke chunked uploads (essentially, that’s when you’re not saying up front how large your upload will be). I’ve filed a bug report on twisted, but we can’t really wait until any sort of fix will be ready and have a broken TOPCAT-DaCHS relationship until then, so for now we’re also shipping a fixed twisted package. If you’re running DaCHS without our repository enabled, you will have to patch your the twisted code itself. The bug report tells what to do (no warranties, though, because I’m not entriely sure why they changed it in the first place; it’s a very small change, though).
[Update (2019-08-14) scratch the part with the fixed twisted packages. They’re too much trouble on stretch systems. You can keep using them on buster boxes if you want, though. The most recent stable release monkeypatches the problem out of presumably broken twisteds, and so will the next beta.]
I hope you’re not totally discouraged now, because upgrade you should (though perhaps not right before going on vacation) – distribution upgrades are unavoidable if you want to run services for decades, and that’s definitely a goal within the VO. See the Debian release note for Debian’s take on dist upgrades, which arguably is a bit more alarmist than it would need to; a lean, server-only system typically is really simple to upgrade.
Given the relatively large number of Debian packages we override in buster, I’ll be particularly grateful if you complain early about breakage you observe (ideally use the dachs-support mailing list, but see Support for alternatives), and as usual you are encouraged to try the upgrade first on a development system if you have one. Which you should.
On June 30, a small project we’ve done together with the Armenian Virtual Observatory has ended. Its objective was to publish the spectra from the First Byurakan Survey (the DFBS) in a VO-compilant way. The data comes from one of the big surveys with Schmidt telescopes that form a sizable part of the observational heritage from the second part of the 20th century (you’re still using a few of them daily if you tell Aladin to show a DSS plane).
In this case, spectra from objects on the entire northern sky off the milky way down to about 18th mag were obtained. In a previous cooperation between Armenian and Italian astronomers a good decade ago, the plates were digitised and calibrated, and spectra were extracted. However, they resided behind a web interface so far, which made them somewhat clumsy to work with.
Have a glance at the tutorial – you see, while the Byurakan survey certainly is a valuable resource by itself, I happen to believe at this point it’s particularly valuable because with the next Gaia data release (planned for next year), a deluxe version of it will come: Gaia’s RP/BP spectra will be all-sky, properly calibrated, and quite a bit deeper, but still low-resolution. So, if you’re just waiting for such a data collection, you can train your methods right now on the DFBS.
I recently got embarrassed by ADQL NULLs, i.e., the magic value indicating that a value in a given column is missing. And since that’s a common source of errors when writing ADQL queries, I’ll take this as a cue for a blog post.
The concrete background is fairly technical and registry-ish; suffice it to say that some data providers who implemented interfaces conforming to some standard didn’t properly say so in their registry records. Back in RegTAP 1.0 (that’s the standard that says how a client like TOPCAT talks to the VO Registry), I decided to work around that by fudging the pattern for how to discover those interfaces so they’d still be found.
In RegTAP 1.1, which is now under review by the VO community, I wanted to do away with that workaround. But would that break anything? This question translates to “are there vs:ParamHTTP interfaces that don’t have a role attribute of std”. Whatever “ParamHTTP” and “role attribute” actually mean, just appreciate that it looks like it might translate into SQL like
select * from rr.interface
and not intf_role='std'
I ran that query, rejoiced because it didn’t return anything, removed the workarund from the standard, and then was shot down when I read Mark’s mail (politely) saying I’m wrong and there are services still requiring the workaround. As usual: If a query returns what you expect, be double careful.
What went wrong? Well, NULL semantics. You see, in SQL NULL is never equal to anything, not even itself (it’s like NaN in IEEE floats in that: try n = float('nan');print(n==n) in Python and look again if you’re cool about it). It’s also not unequal. Don’t take my word for it. Try
select * from tap_schema.schemas where NULL=NULL
select * from tap_schema.schemas where NULL!=NULL
– you’ll get empty results in both cases.
What does that mean for science queries? Well, whenever there’s NULLs in columns (and the only safe assumption for now is that they may hide in there; we should probably add nun-null as a column property in the tap schema and in VODataService some day), you need to be careful in particular with inverted logic.
Here’s an example: Suppose you want to investigate NGC objects brighter than 10 mag in B in one bin in everything else in another. The ones brighter are simple:
select count(*) from openngc.data where mag_b<10
(try it on the TAP server at http://dc.g-vo.org/tap, it’s 383 in the current release). It becomes difficult for “the rest”. If you write
select count(*) from openngc.data where not mag_b<10
select count(*) from openngc.data where mag_b>=10
you’ll get (for the current release) 10887. However, the whole catalogue has 13954 entries, so there’s 13954-10887-383=2684 rows missing. Your “rest” has missed everything for which mag_b isn’t given. Sure enough,
select count(*) from openngc.data where mag_b is null
(and this is the only good way to compare against null) gives 2684.
The right way to say “anything for which mag_b is not smaller than 10” thus is
select count(*) from openngc.data
or mag_b is null
Morale: Unless you’re sure there are no missing values (i.e., NULLs) in a column you’re looking at, think about what these mean to your research (or other) question: Should these rows just vanish? Then you usually don’t need to do anything and the SQL semantics magically do the right thing (which is why things are defined as they are). If, however, the corresponding rows would mean something to your question, you need to be explicit, and you must have some condition involving IS NULL or IS NOT NULL.
The trouble, of course, is that just knowing this still isn’t enough. You need to remember it in the right moment. Or you’ll share my fate of suffering some public embarrassement.
Almost a year has passed since release 1.2 of DaCHS – I’ve let the normal autumn release slip last year because there weren’t so many release-worthy new features in DaCHS at the traditional release time (i.e., after the College Park interop), and also because running betas when you do need a new feature is a fairly stable thing by now.
But here it finally is: Release 1.3 (tarball for the die-hard self-builders; everyone else just switches back the release branch as necessary and then runs an update/upgrade cycle).
Columns can now be hidden from TAP/ADQL (and other interfaces) by setting hidden="True".
There is now a setting [web]maxSyncUploadSize=500000 (meaning: about 500 kByte) as the default upload limit on sync queries. In compensation, clients uploading too much now receive a more useful error message (except it doesn’t reach TOPCAT users most of the time because it does chunked uploads). To get back the behaviour of 1.2 (which is probably ok if you can live with the occasional resource hog), add maxSyncUploadSize=20000000 to your /etc/gavo.rc.
Adding support for https (certificate reading, certificate updating with letsencrypt, registering alternate endpoints, no WebSAMP with https). See HTTPS in DaCHS on this blog for details.
New source_table and preview columns in obscore. If you’re using the various obscore mixins, this should be automatic. If you have defined views manually, you will have to amend these (and have a broken obscore until a dachs upgrade ran without error).
No longer producing arraysize="1" in VOTables for scalars (except char, for compatibility with a legacy TOPCAT workaround; see VOTable 1.3 Erratum 3 for background information).
Support for draft TIMESYS in VOTable (with STC 2 annotation; ask about details if you’re interested. This is for draft VOTable 1.4 and probably only relevant to you if you’re publishing time series).
You can now add targetType and targetTitle properties to URL-valued columns to help Aladin figure out what to do with URLs (see Datalinks as product URLs in the reference documentation).
New gavo_transform, gavo_ipix, and gavo_urlescape ufuncs for ADQL, fixed gavo_urlescape to have acceptable performance.
//soda#sdm_genDesc now matches accref rather than pubDID by default. If you use Datalink with SSA and have a custom pubDID schema (or no index on accref), add a useAccref="False" to your descriptorGenerator statement.
There is now a --foreground option for dachs serve start. This is mainly to play nice with systemd, and indeed, the Debian package now comes with a systemd unit file. I’m not terribly familiar with systemd, so please have an eye on DaCHS controlled by systemd and let me know if you see something that’s not as it should be.
Fixes for various bugs (most notably: escaped quotes in ADQL, WCS in SIAP cutout products) and many minor improvements. Check out the source tree (still via subversion) and read the changelog if you want to know the whole truth.
On systems running from the Debian package, the update should be automatic with the next system upgrade. However, you’ll be saving yourself quite a bit of headache if you check the health of your installation before the upgrade; see Upgrading DaCHS in the operator’s guide on how to upgrade professionally.
About every six month, the people making the standards for the Virtual Observatory meet to sort out the next things we need to tackle, to show off what we’ve done, and to meet each other in person, which sometimes is what it takes to take some excessive heat out of a debate or two. We’ve talkedaboutInterops before. And now it’s time for this (northern) spring’s Interop, which is taking place in Paris (Program).
This time I thought I’d see if there’s any chance I can copy the pattern I’m enjoying at Skyweek now and then: A live blog, where I’ll extend the post as I go. If that’s a plan that can fly remains to be seen, as I’ll give seven talks until Friday, and there’s a plethora of side meetings and other things requiring my attention.
Anyway, the first agenda item is a meeting of the TCG, the Technical Coordination Group, which is made up of the chairs and vice-chairs of the IVOA’s working groups (I’m in there as the vice chair of the semantics WG). We’ll review how the standards under review progress, sanction (or perhaps defer) errata, and generally look at issues of general VO interest.
Update (2019-05-12, 10:50): Oh dang, my VOResource 1.1 Erratum 1 hasn’t quite made it. You see, it’s about authentication, i.e., restricting service access, which, in a federated, interoperating system is trickier than you would think, and quite a few discussions on that will happen during this Interop. So, the TCG has just decided to only consider it passed if nothing happens this week that would kill it. To give you an idea of other things we’ve talked about: Obscore 1.1 Erratum 1 and SODA 1.0 Erratum 1 both try to fix problems with UCD annoation (i.e., a rough idea what it is) not directly related to the standards themselves but intended to help when service results are consumed outside of the standard context, and RegTAP 1.0 Erratum 1 fixes an example in the standard regulating registry discovery that didn’t properly take into account my old nemesis, case-insensitivity of IVOA identifiers. So, yay!, at least one of my Errata made the TCG review.
Update (2019-05-12, 12:15): Yay! After some years of back and forth, the TCG has finally endorsed my Discovering Data Collections note. This is another example of the class of text you don’t really notice. It’s supposed to let you, for instance, type in a table name into TOPCAT and then figure out at which TAP service to query it. You say: I can already do that! I say: Yeah, but only because I’m running a non-standard service, which I’d like to cease at some point.
Update (2019-05-12, 15:55): The TCG meeting slowly draws to an end. This second half was, in particular, concerned with reports from Working and Interest Groups; this is, essentially, an interactive version of the roadmaps, where the various chairs say what they’d like to do in the six month following an Interop. The one from after College Park (VO insiders live by Interops, named by the towns they’re in) you could read at 2018 B Roadmap in the IVOA Wiki – but really, as of next Friday, you’d rather look at what’s going be cooked up here (which will be at 2019 A Roadmap).
Update (2019-05-12, 16:30) It’s now Exec, i.e., the governing body of the VO, consisting of the principal investigators (or, bosses), of the national VO projects (I’m just sitting in for my boss, really). This has, for instance, the final say on what gets to be a standard and what doesn’t. This is, of course, a bit more formal than the hands-on debates going on in the TCG, so I get to look around a bit in the meeting room. And what a meeting room they have here at Paris observatory. Behind me there’s a copy of Louis XIV’s most famous portrait (and for a reason: Louis XIV had the main part of the building we’re in built), along the walls around me are the portraits of the former directors of Paris observatory (among them names all mathematicians or astronomers know: Laplace, Delaunay, Lalande, the Cassinis, and so on), and above me, in the meeting room’s dome, there’s an allegoric image of a Venus transit that I can’t link here lest schools block this important outreach site. What a pity we’ll have to move into a tent when everyone else comes in tomorrow…
Update (2019-05-13, 9:11) The logistics speech is being given by Baptiste Cecconi, who’s just given the carbon footprint of this meeting – 155 tons of CO2 for travel alone, or 1.2 tons per person. That, as he points out, is about what would be sustainable per year. Well, they’re trying to make amends as far as possible. We’ll have vegetarian-only food today (good for me), and locally grown food as far as possible. Also, the conference freebie is a reusable cup so people won’t produce endless amounts of waste plastic cups. I have to say I’m impressed.
Update (2019-05-13, 9:43): One important function of these meetings is that when software authors and users sit together, it’s much easier to fix things. And, first success for me this time around: The LAMOST services at the data center of the Czech academy of sciences do fast positional searches now; you’ll find them by looking for LAMOST in TOPCAT‘s SSAP window, in Aladin 10, in Splat, or really whereever clients let you do discovery of spectral services in the VO.
Update (2019-05-13, 10:59):Next up: “Charge to the Working Groups”. That’s when the various working group chairs give lightning talks on what’s going to happen in their sessions and try to pull as many people as they can. Meanwhile, in the coffee break, I’ve had the next little success: With the people involved, we’ve worked out a good way to fix a Registry problem briefly described by “two publishing registries claim the same authority” (it’s always nice to pretend I’m in Star Trek) – indeed, we’ll only need a single deletion at a single point. Given the potential fallout of such a problem, that’s very satisfying.
Update (2019-05-13, 14:07): While the IG/WG chairs presented their plans, the Ghost of Le Verrier (or was it just the wind?) occasionally haunted the tent, which gave off dreadful noises. And after the session, I quickly ported the build infrastructure for the future EPN-TAP specification (SVN for nerds; previously in this blog for the rest of you) to python 3. Le Verrier was quiet during that time, so I’m sure the guy who led the way to the discovery of Uranus approved.
Update (2019-05-13, 14:29): Mark SubbaRao from Chicago’s Adler Planetarium is giving a plenary talk (in other places, this might be called a “keynote”) on Planetaria and the VO. And he makes the point that there’s 150 million people visiting a plenetarium each year, which, he claims, is a kind of outreach opportunity that no other science has. I’d not bet on that last statement given all the natural history museums, exploratoria, maker faires and the like, but still: That the existence of planetaria says something about the relationship of the public with astronomy is an insight I just had.
Update (2019-05-13, 15:07): So, you think you just sit back and enjoy a colourful talk, and then suddenly there’s work in there. Specifially, there’s a standard called AVM designed to annotate astronomical images to show them in the right place on a planetarium dome (ok, FITS WCS can do that as well) and furnish it with other metadata useful in outreach and education. As Registry and Semantics enthusiast, I immediately clicked on the AVM link at the foot of http://www.data2dome.org and was greeted by something pretty close to a standard IVOA document header. Except it declares itself as an “IVOA draft”; such a document category doesn’t really exist. Even if it did, after around 10 years (there are conflicting date specs in the document) a document shouldn’t be a “draft” any more. If it’s survived that long and is still used, it deserves to be some sort of proper document, I think. So, I took the liberty of cold-contacting one of the authors. Let’s see where that goes.
Update (2019-05-13, 16:29): We’ve just learned about the standardisation process at IPDA (that’s a bit like the IVOA, just for planetary data), and interestingly, people are voting there on their standards – this is against the IVOA practice of requiring consensus. Our argument has always been that a standard only makes sense if all interested parties adopt it and thus have to at least not veto it. I wonder if these different approaches have to do with the different demographics: within the IPDA, there are far fewer players (space agencies, really) with much clearer imbalances (e.g., between NASA and the space agency of the UAE). Hm. I couldn’t say how these would impact our arguments for requiring consensus…
Update (2019-05-13, 17:11): Isn’t that nice? In the session of the solar system interest group, Eleonora Alei is just reporting on her merged catalog of explanets – which is nice in itself, but what’s pleasant for me is to learn she got to make this because of the skills she learned at the ASTERICS school in Strasbourg last November. You see, I was one of the tutors there!
Update (2019-05-14, 8:50): Next up is the first Registry session, with a talk on how to get the information on all our fine VO services into B2Find, a Registry-like thing for the Eurpean Open Science Cloud as its highlight. I’ll also present my findings on what we (as the VO) have gotten wrong when we used “capabilities” do describe things, and also progress on VODataService 1.2; this latter thing is, as far as users are concerned, mainly about finally enabling registry searches by space, time, and spectral coverage.
Update (2019-05-14, 14:11): So, I did run into overtime a bit with my talks, which mostly is a good sign in Interops, because it indicates there’s discussion, which again indicates interest in the topic at hand. The rest of the morning I spent trying to work out how we can map the VO Registry (i.e., the set of metadata records about our services) into b2find in a way that it’s actually useful. I guess we – that’s Claudia from b2find, Theresa as Registry chair, and me – made good progress on this, perhaps not the least because of the atmosphere of the meeting: In the sun in the beautiful garden of Paris observatory. And now: Data Models I.
Update (2019-05-14, 14:51): Whoops – Steve just mentions in his talk on the Planetary Data System that there’s ISO 14721, a reference model for an Open Archival Information System. Since I run such an archive, I’m a bit embarrassed to admit I’ve never heard of that standard. The question, of course, being if this has the same relationship to actually running an Archive as ISO 9001 has to “quality” (Scott Adams once famously said something to the effect of: if you’ve not worked with ISO 9001, you probably don’t know what it is. If you have worked with ISO 9001, you certainly don’t know what it is).
Update (2019-05-15, 9:30): I’ve already given my first talk today: TIMESYS and TOPOCENTER, on a quick way to deal with the problem of adjusting for light travel times when people have not reduced the times they give to one of the standard reference positions. There’s more things close to my heart in this session: MOCs in Space and Time, which might become relevant for the Registry [up-update: and, wow, of quick searches against planetary or asteroid orbits. Gasp]; you see, MOCs are rather compact representations of (so far only spatial) coverages, and the space MOCs are already in use for the Registry in the rr.stc_spatial table on the TAP service at http://dc.g-vo.org/tap. The temporal part of STC-based discovery is just intervals at this point, which probably is good enough – but who knows? And I’m also curious about Dave’s thoughts on the registration of VOEvents, which takes up something I’ve reviewed ages ago and that went dormant then – which was somewhat of a pity, because there’s to this day no way to find active VOEvent streams.
Update (2019-05-15, 14:18): After another Exec session over lunch I ran over to a session somewhat flamboyantly called “TAP-fostered Authentication in the Server-Client scenario“. This is about enabling running access-controlled services, which I’m not really a fan of; but then I figure if people can use VO tools to access their proprietary data, chances are better that that data will eventually be usable from everyone’s VO tools. Data dumped behind custom-written web pages will much less likely be freed in the end, or so I believe. Anyway, I’m now in the game of figuring out how to do this, and I’m giving the (current) Registry perspective. The main part of the session, however, will be free discussion, a time-honored and valuable tradition at Interops.
Update (2019-05-16, 9:00): I’m now in the Theory session, where people deal with simulated data and such things (rather than, as you might guess, with the theory of publishing and/or processing data). The main reason I’m here is that theory was an early adopter of vocabularies. Due to my new(ish) role in the semantics WG, I’ll have to worry about this, because things changed a bit since they started (I’ll talk about that later today) – and also, some of their vocabularies – for instance, object types – are of general interest and shouldn’t probably be theory-only. Let’s see how far my charm goes…
Update (2019-05-16, 12:20): I was doing a bit of back-and-forth between a DAL session (in which, among other things, my colleague Jon gave a talk on a machine-readable grammar for ADQL and Dave tells us how ADQL 2.1 goes on (previously on this blog), and a code sprint the astropy folks have next to the conference, where we’ve been discussing pyVO’s future (remember pyVO? See the update for yesterday 11:16 if not).
Update (2019-05-16, 14:27): Again, in-session running: I gave a quick talk on how we’ll finally get to do data collection-based discovery (rather than service-based, as we do now; lecture notes) and then walked through the garden of Paris observatory to the semantics session, where I joined while people were still discussing the age-old problem of enumerating the observatories, space-probes, and instruments in the world (an endeavour that, very frankly, scares me a tiny bit because of its enormous size). After talks on the use of vocabularies in CAOM2 (Pat) and theory (Emeric), I’ll then do my first formal action in the semantics WG: I’ll disclose my plans for specifying how the IVOA should do vocabulary work in the future.
Update (2019-05-16, 17:56): So, the afternoon, between my talks in Registry II and Semantics, planning for the Semantics roadmap (this is something where WG chairs say what they’re planning until the next Interop; more on this, I guess, tomorrow), talking with the theory people about how their vocabularies will better integrate with the wider VO, and passing on pyVO to core astropy folks, was a bit too busy for live-blogging. I conclude with a “splinter” on the development of Datalink. This is pure discussion without a formal talk, which, frankly, often is the most useful format for things we do at Interops, and there’s almost 20 people here. In contrast to yesterday’s after-show splinter (which was on integration of the VO Registry with b2find), I’m just a participant here. Phewy.
Update (2019-05-17, 8:52): We’re going to start the last act of Interops, where the working group chairs report on the progress made during the interop. That, at the time of writing, only three WGs already have their slide on it shows that that’s always a bit of a real-time affair – understandibly, because the last bargains and agreements are being worked out as I write. This time around, though, there’s a variation to that theme: The astropy hackathon that ran in parallel to the Interop will also present its findings, and I particularly rejoice because they’re taking over pyVO development. That’s excellent news because Stefan, who’s curated pyVO for the last couple of years from Heidelberg, has moved on and so pyVO might have orphaned. That’s what I call a happy end.
Update (2019-05-17, 13:01): So, after reviews and a kind good-bye speech by the Exec chair Mark Allen – which included quite a bit well-deserved applause for the organisers of the meeting –, the official part is over. Of course, I still have a last side-meeting: planning for what we’re going to do within ESCAPE, a project linking astronomy with the European Open Science Cloud. But that’s not going to be more than an hour. Good-bye.
At the Astroplate conference I blogged about recently, the people behind APPLAUSE gave a couple of talks about their Data Release 3. APPLAUSE is a fairly massive endeavour to make available data from some of the larger plate archives in Germany, and its DR3 even hit the non-Astronomy press last February.
Already for previous APPLAUSE releases, I’ve wanted to bring this data (or rather, its metadata) to the VO, but it never quite happened, basically because there was always another little thing that turned out to be too tedious to work out via mail. However, working out things interactively is exactly what conferences are great for. So, the kind APPLAUSE folks (thanks, Taavi and Harry) and I used the Astroplate to map their database schema (“schema” is jargon for what boils down to the set of tables and columns with which they describe their data) to the much simpler (and, admittedly, less powerful) IVOA Obscore one.
Sure, Obscore doesn’t deal with multiple exposures (like when the target field and the north pole were exposed on one plate to help precision photometry), object-guided images, and all the other interesting techniques that astronomers applied in the pre-digital age; it also doesn’t usefully cope with multiple scans of the same plate (for instance, to correct for imprecisions in the mechanics of flatbed scanners). APPLAUSE, of course, has to cope with them, since there are many reasons to preserve data of this kind.
Obscore, on the other hand, is geared towards uniform discovery, where too funky datasets in all likelihood cause more harm than good. So, when we mapped APPLAUSE to Obscore, of the 101138 scans of 70276 plates that the full APPLAUSE holds in DR3, only 44000 plate scans made it into the Obscore table. The advantage: whatever can be sensibly mapped to Obscore can now be queried together with all the other data in the world that others have published through Obscore.
You can immediately see the effect when you run the little python program doing the global discovery we gave in our plates tutorial. Here’s what it prints now (values from pre-APPLAUSE-in-Obscore are in square brackets):
Column t_exptime: 3460 values
Min 12, Max 15300, Mean 890.24 [previous mean: 370.722]
Column em_mean: 3801 values
Min 1.8081e-09, Max 9.3e-07, Mean 6.40804e-07 [No change: Sigh!]
Column t_mean: 4731 values
Min 12564.5, Max 58126.3, Mean 49897.9 [previous mean: 51909.1]
Column instrument_name: 4747 values
Matches from , Petzval, [Max Wolf's residence in
Heidelberg, Maerzgasse, Wolf's Doppelastrograph,
Heidelberg Koenigstuhl (24), Wolf's
Doppelastrograph,] AG-Astrograph, [Zeiss Triplet
15 cm Potsdam-Telegrafenberg], Zeiss Triplet,
Astrograph (four 10-cm Tessar f/6 cameras),
[3.5m APO, ROSAT PSPCC, Heidelberg Koenigstuhl
(24), Bruce Astrograph, Calar Alto (493),
Schmidt], Grosser Refraktor, [ROSAT HRI,
DK-1.54], Hamburger Schmidt-Spiegel,
[DFOSC_FASU], ESO 1-metre Schmidt telescope,
Great Schmidt Camera, Lippert-Astrograph, Ross-B
3", [AZT 22], Astrograph (six 10-cm Tessar f/6
cameras), 1m-Spiegelteleskop, [ROSAT PSPCB],
Astrograph (ten 10-cm Tessar f/6 cameras), Zeiss
Column access_url: 4747 values 
So – for the fields selected in the tutorial, there are 15% more images in the global Obscore image pool now than there were before APPLAUSE, and their mean observation date went a bit farther into the past. I’ve not made any statistics, but I suspect for many other fields the gain is going to be much higher. For a strong effect, try some random region covered by the Bamberg Sky Patrol on the southern sky.
But you have probably noticed the deep sigh in the annotations to the statistics above: Yes, we don’t have the spectral band for the APPLAUSE data, which is why the stats on em_min doesn’t change. As a matter of fact, from the Obscore data you can’t even guess whether a plate is “more red” or “rather blue”, as Obscore doesn’t have an (agreed-upon) field for “qualititive bandpass indicator”.
For some other data collections, we did map known emulsion/filter combinations to rough bandpasses (e.g., the Palomar-Leiden Trojan Survey, which only had a few of them). For APPLAUSE, there are 435 combinations of filter and emulsion (that’s a VOTable link that you can paste into TOPCAT’s load button in order to have a look at the table). Granted, quite a few of these pairs are (more or less) spurious because of inconsistent spelling. But we still gave up on researching the bandpasses even before we started.
If you’re a photographic plate buff: You could help us and posteriority a lot if you could go through this list and at least for some combinations tell us what, roughly, the lower and upper limits of the corresponding bandpasses might have been (what DaCHS already knows, plate-relevant data near the bottom of the file). As usual, send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org if you have anything to contribute.
Finally, here’s the brief explanation of the image for this article: Well, I wanted to find some Bamberg Sky Patrol images for a single field to play with. I knew they were primarily located in the South, and were made using Tessar cameras. So, I ran
SELECT t_min, access_url, s_region
WHERE instrument_name like '%Tessar%'
AND 1=CONTAINS(POINT(345, -38), s_region)
on GAVO’s TAP service. Since Aladin 10, you can do that from within the program (although some versions will reject this query because they mistakenly believe the ADQL is bad. Query through TOPCAT and send the result over to Aladin if that bites you). Incidentally, when there are s_region values in Obscore tables, it’s a good idea to use them as I do here, as it’s quite a bit more likely that this query will use indices than some condition on s_ra and s_dec. But then not all services fill s_region properly, so for all-VO queries you will probably want to make do with s_ra and s_dec.
From that result I first made the inset bar graph in the article image to show the temporal distribution of the Patrol plates. And then I grabbed two (rather randomly selected) plates and had Aladin produce a red-blue composite of them. Whatever is really red or really blue in that image may correspond to a transient event. Or, as certainly the case with that little hair (or whatever) that shines out in blue, it may not.
Using and re-using is of course what the Virtual Observatory is about, and we’ve been keeping fairly large plate collections in our data center for quite a while (among them the Archives of Landessternwarte Königstuhl or the Palomar-Leiden Trojan surveys, and there is the WFPDB TAP-accessibly). Therefore, people from GAVO Heidelberg have been to all past astroplate conferences.
For this one, I brought a brand-new tutorial on plate scans in the VO, which, I hope, also works as a general introduction to image discovery in the VO using SIAP, Datalink, and Obscore. If you’re doing image stuff now and then, please have a quick look at the thing – I am particularly grateful for hints on what to improve or perhaps particularly obvious use cases for the material discussed.
Such VO proselytising aside, the conference is discussing the wide variety of creative, low-cost data collectors out there as well as computer-aided re-analysis extracting new knowledge from decades-old data. If I had to choose a single come-to-think-of-it moment, it would be Norbert Zacharias’ observation that if you have a well-behaved object and you’d like to know where it was in 1900, it’s now more accurate to extrapolate Gaia astrometry to the epoch of observation than to measure it on the plate itself. Which is saying a lot about the amazing feat of engineering that Gaia is.
This is not, however, an argument for dumping the old data. Usually, it is exactly what is not so well-behaved (like those) that’s interesting – both in terms of astrometry and in terms of photometry (for which there’s a lot more unruly behaviour in the first place). To figure out how objects don’t behave well, and, for objects disguising as well-behaved only on time scales of the (say) Gaia mission, which these are, the key is “old” data. The freshness of which we’re discussing this week.
When I started working on the VO in 2007, my collagues in Garching already had a software that implemented major parts of the simple spectral access protocol (SSAP) that was being developed back then. It would publish spectra in the FITS format by just blindly dumping all header cards into a database table and then defining a view over that “raw” metadata table to make the whole thing match SSAP’s expectations for how the output table should look like. Sometimes you could just map through a header to an SSA column, sometimes you would just convert a unit, sometimes you would have to write a fairly complex SQL expressions combining multiple fields.
Back then, I didn’t like it – why have two things (a table and a view) that can break when one (just a table in SSA’s format) would do, too? Also, SSAP has about 50 metadata fields, but lets you put constant values into VOTable PARAMs, which seemed a very reasonable way to attain more compact responses. So, when DaCHS grew SSAP support, I defined a mixin (essentially, a configurable interface definition) that let operators define SSA tables and their constant parameters in a fairly simple fashion and directly produced a table you could base your SSAP service on.
That made assumptions about which pieces of metadata are constant and which are not; for instance, the original mixin (“hcd” for “homogeneous collection”) assumed all spectra in a data collection came from the same instrument and had the same resolution and (what was I thinking?) SNR. Unsurprisingly, that broke fairly soon. So, I added a second mixin (“mixc”) for when different instruments or codes produced the data.
But even that was headache, at the latest when I started making time series services using SSAP. And I had to fix a few bugs in the mixins themselves in the meantime, which mostly required re-imports of the data in that design. Such re-imports are non-trivial when you have millions of spectra, and they need to happen at software upgrade time or the services would break with the upgrade. Ouch.
It was about mid-2018 when it dawned on me that sometimes it’s better to have two things that can break even if one would do, after all. Specifically, if fixing the one thing is expensive, it’s an excellent idea to put a facade on top of it that’s cheap to change and can already be used to repair most deficiencies. Why re-build the house if a paint job does the trick?
So, I’ve now come up with a view-based solution in DaCHS, too: the //ssap#view mixin. This is a bit less radical than the Garching software of 2007, as it doesn’t dump raw headers but instead lets you do the primary transformations in the RD. But it no longer constrains what pieces of metadata should be constant and which may vary between spectra, and it uses the same names for the same pieces of metadata throughout (which also is a step forward over the old SSAP mixins).
With this, DaCHS operators should no longer use the hcd and mixc mixins for new services. The new technique is already reflected the respective tutorial chapter, and the SSAP template (you’re using dachs start, aren’t you?) now uses it, too.
If you have a spectra publishing project in your pipeline, this would be the perfect time to upgrade to the DaCHS 1.2.4 beta, which has the new mixin. It would be great if we could iron out remaining wrinkles before the next release makes changes a load on my conscience.
As to migrating existing SSAP services: Well, it would be great if I could drop the old mixins in a couple of years, as they cause quite a bit of uglyness in DaCHS’s built-in //ssap RD. But the migration regrettably isn’t straightforward, so you may want to wait a bit before embarking on that journey (I’ll be happy to help, though).