Radio Galaxy Zoo Talk

New RGZ Publication - Giant WAT

  • 42jkb by 42jkb scientist, admin

    We have been working hard on a new paper on a RGZ finding. @Dolorous_Edd and @antikodon had found a giant wide-angle tail radio galaxy (https://radiotalk.galaxyzoo.org/#/boards/BRG0000006/discussions/DRG00001mr). As a result, they are co-authors on the discovery paper and have participated in our proposal for follow-up EVLA time. We have posted an image of the front page of the paper on twitter: https://twitter.com/radiogalaxyzoo/status/710966649545863168

    The paper was submitted to MNRAS at the beginning of March. We are waiting to hear back from the referee and the journal.

    Posted

  • JeanTate by JeanTate in response to 42jkb's comment.

    That is SUPER COOL! 😃

    Congratulations, Dolorous_Edd and antikodon!! 😄

    The first ordinary zooites as co-authors of an RGZ paper!!!

    This should be on Daily Zooniverse, and should go into ZPubs, when it's published. Any idea when that will be? And when all zooites can get a copy of the published paper, not behind a paywall?

    Also, I'm curious: why not put it up on arXiv, as a preprint?

    Posted

  • 42jkb by 42jkb scientist, admin in response to JeanTate's comment.

    We are waiting response from the journal/referee. I hesitate to place articles on arXiv prior to being accepted by the journal. I did that once when I was applying for a job and the accepted version was rather different from the version on arXiv. It just gets confusing if someone cites your work before being accepted.

    The manuscript will not be behind a paywall and will also be placed on arXiv. The article was submitted at the beginning of March and the referee has around 3 months to respond. Then exchange between the referee and the authors happens until we converge on an acceptable version for the journal - this can take months depending on the referee report. The referee can also say that the work is not publishable.

    Posted

  • sisifolibre by sisifolibre

    congratulations and good luck! I hope that the paper will be accepted as soon as possible

    Posted

  • ChrisMolloy by ChrisMolloy

    Yes. Congratulations Dolorous_Edd, antikodon and all involved. Looking forward to reading it.

    Posted

  • Tim_F by Tim_F scientist

    In the mean time, please read my exclusive interview with @Dolorous_Edd and @antikodon about their Zooniverse experiences on our Radio Galaxy Zoo blog through this link http://bit.ly/RGZBlog18Apr16

    Posted

  • sisifolibre by sisifolibre

    Thanks Tim! I identify with most that they say in the interview, they are an great example (and a help) of citicen sciencists.

    If the second paper published with data of RGZ have 2 citizen sciencist it's a great notice, IMHO the recognition to the work of the superzoonites is a archievement for they and for the scientifics involved too.

    Posted

  • Dolorous_Edd by Dolorous_Edd

    Thanks everyone!

    hopefully review won't take too long and the paper will be accepted

    Posted

  • Tim_F by Tim_F scientist

    Fantastic to hear that you share the views expressed in the interview sisifolibre! I hope that the views of the few participants, like yourself, that I have chatted with are echoed within the wider RGZ and Zooniverse community.

    I feel that recognising the work of the participants is a great way for the scientific community to thank our volunteers for all their hard work and involvement, and it's slowly happening more often in other citizen science projects.

    Sisifolibre, and other users, do you think there is something else that scientists could do to reward the efforts of the citizen scientists involved in achievements like this? Or is it simply being a part of something amazing like RGZ that makes it worth participating?

    Posted

  • sisifolibre by sisifolibre

    I try to answer your question here

    Posted

  • 42jkb by 42jkb scientist, admin

    UPDATE - received message from MNRAS apologizing for the delay. They are following up with the referee. As a referee you get 3 weeks to provide a review back to MNRAS and then MNRAS combines this with the response form the journal editor and technical advisor.

    Posted

  • 42jkb by 42jkb scientist, admin

    Dear Dr Banfield

    Your manuscript entitled "Radio Galaxy Zoo: discovery of a poor cluster through a giant wide-angle tail radio galaxy", ref. MN-16-0780-MJ, has now been accepted for publication in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Main Journal.

    The details are as follows:

    Accepted 2016 May 02. Received 2016 March 09

    Reviewer's comments:

    "This article is a wonderful example of how citizen science projects can lead to scientific discovery that would have otherwise been overlooked. Using WATs to identify clusters has long been proposed and I am happy to see that a positive identification has been made. My only concern is that higher resolution/exposure time follow-up of these sources would have been nice, but the argument for this being a WAT in a rich group/poor cluster is pretty solid. I would suggest high-resolution and long-exposure time follow-up in both radio and X-ray wavebands to confirm this finding, but this is more of a "would be nice" rather than anything else! I see no issues in this article and there is nothing that I would see changed; this is a rather neat interaction of citizen science and cluster discovery using radio sources!!"

    Posted

  • JeanTate by JeanTate in response to 42jkb's comment.

    That is soooo cool! 😄

    Can't wait to read the paper ...

    Posted

  • ivywong by ivywong scientist, admin

    Press Release link : http://caastro.org/news/2016-rgz

    with complementary media resources 😄

    Thanks everyone for the great work and thank you Julie for coordinating this immense effort!

    Posted

  • JeanTate by JeanTate in response to ivywong's comment.

    Very cool! 😃

    But the discovery of the Matorny-Terentev Cluster RGZ-CL J0823.2+0333, now bearing the names of the two citizen scientists, means even more than having added another piece to our cosmic puzzle.

    So, now Dolorous_Edd and antikodon have their names written on one of the largest structures in the nearby universe! 😮

    The PR includes a link to the MNRAS paper, which can be accessed for free (no paywall, yay!).

    Congrats to everyone!! 😄

    Posted

  • ivywong by ivywong scientist, admin

    Yep, no secret recipe. Patience, perseverance and hard work. 😉

    Posted

  • 42jkb by 42jkb scientist, admin

    Perth news interviewed Ivy, watch it here: https://twitter.com/cyndilavrencic/status/742701584614891520

    Posted

  • JeanTate by JeanTate in response to 42jkb's comment.

    Very cool! 😃

    Posted

  • ChrisMolloy by ChrisMolloy in response to 42jkb's comment.

    I agree. That is very cool. Congratulations!

    Posted

  • JeanTate by JeanTate in response to JeanTate's comment.

    I've now read the paper, as well as I could, and was struck by one thing (actually, I was struck by many things, but I'll pick just one, for now): the use of so many packages/software!

    • Figure 1 uses CUBEHELIX
    • the spectral analysis used IRAF
    • mean velocity and velocity dispersion determined using ROBUST
    • galactic absorption from COLDEN
    • (more?)

    The paper also illustrates how much astronomy depends on publicly available surveys. Obviously, for RGZ, there's WISE and FIRST; almost obviously there's also SDSS and NVSS. Also mentioned, directly or indirectly, are 2MASS, "Very Large Array (VLA) data at 8 GHz", redMaPPer, "an archival XMM–Newton data set", LoCuSS, and NED (though that's not, strictly speaking, a survey). And quite a few planned future surveys are mentioned, e.g. EMU, WODAN, MeerKAT, and MIGHTEE.

    Posted

  • 42jkb by 42jkb scientist, admin in response to JeanTate's comment.

    Indeed! And that is why it is such a team effort. I haven't used IRAF in over 10 years so there is no way I could have done the analysis in a reasonable amount of time. Heinz and his team worked on the cluster definition, Martin Hardcastle looked over the archival X-Ray data, Anna examined the re-starting nature of the WAT, and Garret and Sam were the optical observers on Palomar and did the spectral line and redshift analysis. And that is just a few of the authors. It was a very collaborative effort.

    This is the power of RGZ. We used legacy data from radio surveys that have been public for over 20 years and we are finding new things, and not just the WAT.

    Posted