I’m travelling back to Barcelona today, later than planned because I’ve had a heavy cold that I struggled to shake off and didn’t want to infect fellow passengers on the flight. While I’m in transit I thought I’d share some updates about the European Space Agency’s Euclid mission.
The first thing to share is a piece by Knud Jahnke with news about Euclid’s issue with ice in the optical system. The latest intervention has led to an improvement, but since it is a closed system ice will probably form again – though perhaps not in the same place – and further procedures will probably be necessary in future. In the meantime, though, the survey resumes.
Now for some short videos -three, to be precise – about the Early Release Observations mentioned here. I posted another one in this series here. I think the titles are self-explanatory:
And if that isn’t enough, for those of you who like simulations here is another video about the Euclid Flagship simulation described in this paper.
Five months ago I wrote a blog post mentioning that the Open Journal of Astrophysics (OJAp) had been accepted for listing in Scopus. A couple of months later, I posted an update explaining that the process of was taking much longer than the 4 to 6 weeks I was told it would. Well, I can now report that, a full five months after acceptance, we have finally made it onto the Scopus database.
Great! I hear you say. Well, no actually. Despite taking an excessive length of time to index the Open Journal of Astrophysics, the Scopus crew have messed up the bibliometric data relating to it in a most ridiculous fashion.
Here is the entry:
I draw your attention first to the column marked Documents 2020-23 under which you will see the number 67. In fact we published 99 articles between 2020 and 2023, not 67. This is easily established here. The number 67 relates to the period 2022-23 only. Accidentally or deliberately, Scopus has omitted a third of our papers from its database.
But the error doesn’t end there. Papers published in OJAp between 2020 and 2023 have actually been cited 959 times, not 137. If you restrict the count to papers published in 2022-23 there are 526 citations. It’s no wonder that OJAp has such a low CiteScore, and consequently appears so far down the rankings, when the citation information is so woefully inaccurate.
Incidentally, CiteScores are marketed by Scopus as “metrics you can verify and trust”. Oh no you can’t.
When I first saw this travesty I thought very hard about asking to have OJAp removed from Scopus altogether, but on reflection I decided to contact them with the actual numbers and a request that they issue a correction as soon as possible. Given that it took 5 months to get this far, however, I’m not optimistic for a speedy response.
While I’m waiting for that I suggest you consider whether these egregious errors are simply incompetent or whether they are deliberate acts of sabotage by a front organization for the commercial publishing industry? And another question: how much else in the Scopus database is as badly wrong as the OJAp entry?
Following Friday’s vote, counting in Ireland’s local elections began Saturday morning. As it happened, Maynooth was one of the first LEAs to start counting and, the electorate being fairly small, was completed last night.
In the system employed in these elections, votes are progressively reallocated in various rounds until one ends up with the top n candidates to fill the n available seats. The STV system involves a quota for automatic election which is N/(m+1) + 1 votes, where N is the number of valid ballots cast and m is the number of seats in the constituency. To see why this is the case consider a four-seat constituency, where the quota would be 20% of the votes cast plus one. No more than four candidates can reach this level so anyone managing to get that many vote is automatically elected. Surplus votes from candidates exceeding quota, as well as those of eliminated candidates, are reallocated to lower-preference candidates in this process.
I thought it might be interesting to show how it went. Here is the state of the poll after the initial count of first preference votes:
Incumbent Councillor Naoise Ó Cearúil (Fianna Fáil) led the first preference votes, exceeding the quota of 1566, and was therefore immediately elected. When his surplus votes were reallocated to second-preference candidates they did not result in anyone else exceeding quota, so Peter Hamilton (who finished last) was eliminated and his votes reallocated, etc. And so it came to pass that Tim Durkan (Fine Gael) was elected on the third count, Angela Feeney (Lab) and Peter Melrose (Social Democrats) on the 6th Count, and Paul Ward (FF) on the 7th Count. Durkan, by the way, is the son of sitting Fine Gael TD Bernard Durkan. For those outside Ireland I should mention that the Irish Social Democrats are quite progressive – in contrast to some parties with the same name in other countries – and they have a TD in the form of Caroline Murphy who has strong local support.
The turnout in Maynooth, by the way, was 45.3%. That’s quite high by the standards of local elections in the UK, but I always find it disappointing when people can’t be bothered to vote.
Anyway, of the five councillors elected (2 FF, 1 FG, 1 Lab & 1 SD) four are incumbent. The only change was sitting Green candidate Hamilton was replaced by newbie Peter Melrose for the Social Democrats. It was a disappointing result for Sinn Féin, similar to what happened five years ago in this LEA. The losing candidate then, however, Réada Cronin, went on to win a seat as TD for North Kildare in the General Election of 2020.
As I write, under a quarter of LEAs have completed their counts but it is fairly clear that it has been a disappointing election for Sinn Féin who, despite riding high in the opinion polls a few months ago, have not really recovered significantly from their poor showing in the 2019 Local Elections. Of course the question asked in opinion polls is about a General Election, which is quite a different kettle of fish compared to a Local election. Lots of pundits are trying to interpret these local results as a kind of opinion poll on the General Election which must happen before next year. They do this in the UK too. I don’t think that is wise. I think most people vote in the Local Elections on the local and rather mundane issues which are actually what the County Councils can actually deal with. Councils have very little power in Ireland and candidates who have grandiose plans far beyond the scope of what a councillor can actually achieve are not likely to do well. There is also a definite advantage on being an incumbent who has done a good job for the past five years. A problem for Sinn Féin is that it had to put up new faces in many LEAs to replace those lost five years ago, and few have been successful.
Anyway, it seems the status quo parties have done better than expected, and a variety of Independents have done well. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael – to me, indistinguishable conservative neoliberal parties – are currently governing Ireland in coalition with the Greens. It surprises me that there is so much support for establishment parties that have presided over a housing shortage, ever-increasing homelessness and steadily deteriorating public services, but there you go.
We’ll have to wait a considerable time for the European Election count to finish, as it hasn’t even started yet, but it seems likely that Sinn Fein will struggle and that Independent will do well.
Time for another roundup of business at the Open Journal of Astrophysics. This time I have three papers to announce, which brings the total we have published so far this year (Vol. 7) to 45 and the total published by OJAp to 160. We’re still on track to publish around 100 papers this year or more, compared to last year’s 50.
First one up, published on 3rd June 2024, is “Log-Normal Waiting Time Widths Characterize Dynamics” by Jonathan Katz of Washington University (St Louis, Missouri, USA). This paper presents a discussion of the connection between waiting time distributions and dynamics for aperiodic astrophysical systems, with emphasis on log-normal distributions. This paper is in the folder marked High-Energy Astrophysical Phenomena.
Here is a screen grab of the overlay, which includes the abstract:
The second paper to present is “An Empirical Model For Intrinsic Alignments: Insights From Cosmological Simulations” by Nicholas Van Alfen (Northeastern University, Boston, USA), Duncan Campbell (Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA), Jonathan Blazek (Northeastern University), C. Danielle Leonard (Newcastle University, UK), Francois Lanusse (Université Paris-Saclay, France), Andrew Hearin (Argonne National Laboratory, USA), Rachel Mandelbaum (Carnegie Mellon University) and The LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration. This paper presents an extension of the halo model (specifically the Halo Occupation Distribution, HOD) to include intrinsic alignment effects for the study of weak gravitational lensing. This paper is in the folder marked Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics. It was published on Tuesday June 4th 2024.
The overlay looks like this:
You can read this paper directly on the arXiv here.
Last, but by no means least, comes “Towards Cosmography of the Local Universe” which proposes the multipoles of the distance-redshift relation as new cosmological observables that have a direct physical interpretation in terms of kinematical quantities of the underlying matter flow. This was also published on 4th June. The authors are Julian Adamek (IfA Zurich, Switzerland), Chris Clarkson (Queen Mary, London, UK), Ruth Durrer (Geneva, Switzerland), Asta Heinesen (U. Lyon, France & NBI Copenhagen, Denmark), Martin Kunz (Geneva), and Hayley J. Macpherson (Chicago, USA).
I’m briefly back in Maynooth in order to cast my vote in the Local and European Parliament Elections being held today, which I did earlier this morning. Both elections are held under Proportional Representation (Single Transferable Vote) which seems to me a very sensible system. One ranks the candidates in order of preference; you can rank all the candidates or just some. In the system employed here in Ireland, votes are progressively reallocated in various rounds until one ends up with the top n candidates to fill the n available seats. The STV system involves a quota for automatic election which is N/(m+1) + 1 votes, where N is the number of valid ballots cast and m is the number of seats in the constituency. To see why this is the case consider a four-seat constituency, where the quota would be 20% of the votes cast plus one. No more than four candidates can reach this level so anyone managing to get that many vote is automatically elected. Surplus votes from candidates exceeding quota, as well as those of eliminated candidates, are reallocated to lower-preference candidates in this process.
The Local Elections involve filling 40 seats on Kildare County Council, with five councillors representing Maynooth. The nine candidates are listed here, in case you’re interested. Some of the councillors applying for re-election have been diligent in dealing with local issues over the last five years and have in my opinion earned a vote. Other have only appeared since the election notice was given.
For the European Parliament Elections things are a bit more complicated. For the purposes of the EU elections Ireland is divided into three constituencies: Dublin, Ireland South and Midlands North West. I am in the latter, which elects four MEPs. There were 17 candidates for 4 MEPs in this constituency in 2019 but there are 27 this time round, for 5 MEPs, listed here. A sizeable fraction of these are sundry far-right loons, anti-vaxers, and general dickheads, whom I hope will be eliminated. The long list of candidates, however, means that it will take some time to complete the counting for the European elections, which won’t even start until Sunday. The Local election count will start tomorrow morning, and is expected to be completed by Sunday.
With an hour or so to waste in Heathrow Airport I thought I’d just mention that yesterday I attended the 27th Hintze Lecture on the topic of Understanding supernova explosions with sophisticated computer simulations delivered by Prof. Adam Burrows (in the very same lecture theatre in which I gave my lecture the day before). I was also on the guest list for a subsequent dinner in Christ Church College, which was very nice. Thanks to Stephen Smartt for that!
Anyway, I’m now on my way to Dublin (and then Maynooth) so I can vote in tomorrow’s Local and European Parliament elections before returning to Barcelona early next week after a (hopefully) restful weekend…
I gave my talk yesterday as planned. I think it went quite well, although it did involve a few things I’ve never spoken about in public before, so it wasn’t exactly an easy talk to give. I guess about 60 or 70 people attended, mostly from Astrophysics. There was then a drinks reception and then I adjourned with organizer Jake Taylor and a couple of others to the King’s Arms for a few beers and a bite to eat.
I was a little bit worried ahead of the talk because I came down with some sort of bug over the weekend which gave me a sore throat and a bad cough. Fortunately, though, that passed quickly and I got through the lecture OK although I probably sounded a little hoarse.
Anyway, a big thank you to everyone in the Department who helped organize this event, and who looked after me so nicely before and after!
Radcliffe Camera and ProtestNot SureBodleian LibraryAll Souls
So here I am, among the dreaming spires of Oxford, although I’m not sure whether they are actually dreaming or just asleep. I had a short walk around before heading to the Physics Department this morning to put the finishing touches to my talk for this afternoon. It was nice to see the Pride Progress flags flying over Lincoln College on the way.
While en route to Oxford I thought I’d do a quick post about the purpose of my visit there, namely to give the inaugural Pride Lecture at the Department of Physics. I’m looking forward to it, and spending a couple of days as a guest of All Souls College. Here’s the promo for the lecture:
This is a public event. I’ve no idea how many people will be there, but I’ll find out tomorrow I suppose!
Let me take this opportunity to wish all of you a very happy Pride Month (which started on Saturday). With its origins as a commemoration of the Stonewall Riots of 1969, Pride remains both a celebration and protest. It’s more necessary than ever now, especially because of the sustained abuse being aimed at trans people from all quarters, from those in political power to those sad losers who have nothing better to do that spend all day tweeting their bigotry on social media.
Anyway, as well as a celebration and a protest, Pride is an opportunity for us all to show solidarity against those who seek to divide us.
Though many LGBTQIA+ people in many countries – even those that claim to be more liberal – still face discrimination, hostility and violence, Pride Month always reminds me of how far we’ve come in the past 50 years ago. As I get older, I find I have become more and more protective towards younger LGBTQIA+ people. I don’t want them to have to put up with the crap that I did when I was their age.
So here I am, not in Barcelona. On Thursday night I flew to the fine city of Newcastle upon Tyne to act as external examiner for a PhD candidate. Since I knew I would be arriving quite late I stayed in a hotel near Newcastle Airport. It was just as well I did so because, it being Ryanair, I arrived even later than expected. On Friday morning I took the Metro from the Airport to Haymarket and spent the morning in the School of Mathematics, Statistics and Physics at Newcastle University ahead of the viva voce examination.
The PhD candidate was Alex Gough (pictured right, after the examination, with supervisor Cora Uhlemann). Cora being German we were treated to the tradition of successful PhD candidates having to wear a elaborate hat, after the examination (fortunately not during it). Some champagne was consumed, followed by dinner at a nice Indian restaurant on Clayton Street.
For those of you not familiar with how the PhD system works in the UK, it involves doing research into a particular topic and then writing up what you’ve done in a thesis. The thesis is a substantial piece of work, often in the region of 100,000 words (200 pages or so), which is then assessed by two examiners (one internal to the university at which the research was done, and one external). They read copies of the thesis and then the candidate has to defend it in an oral examination, which was what happened on Friday, after which they make a recommendation to the university about whether the degree should be awarded.
There aren’t many rules for how a viva voce examination should be conducted or how long it should last, but the can be as short as, say, 2 hours and can be as long as 5 hours or more. The examiners usually ask a mixture of questions, some about the details of the work presented and some about the general background. The unpredictable content of a viva voce examination makes it very difficult to prepare for, and it can be difficult and stressful for the candidate (as well as just tiring, as it can drag on for a long time). However, call me old-fashioned but I think if you’re going to get to call youself Doctor of Philosophy you should expect to have to work for it. Some might disagree.
Obviously I can’t give details of what went on in the examination except that it was quite long primarily because the thesis was very interesting and gave us lots to discuss. At the end internal examiner Danielle Leonard and I agreed to recommend the award of a PhD. In Newcastle as in other UK universities, the examiners simply make a recommendation to a higher authority (e.g. Board of Graduate Studies) to formally award the degree, but they almost always endorse the recommendation. I’ve never been sure exactly when a successful candidate is allowed to call themselves “Doctor”, actually, but congratulations to Dr Gough!
Anyway, the celebratory dinner ended just after Women’s International football match between England and France (which France won) had finished at St James’ Park and the Metro was consequently crammed full, but I got back to the hotel at a reasonable hour. Thank you to everyone in the group, especially Cora and Ian Moss, for being so friendly and making me feel so welcome during this brief visit.
Tomorrow I shall be heading to the part of not-Barcelona known as Oxford, where I believe there is a University of some sort, to give a lecture about which I’ll post more tomorrow.
The views presented here are personal and not necessarily those of my employer (or anyone else for that matter).
Feel free to comment on any of the posts on this blog but comments may be moderated; anonymous comments and any considered by me to be vexatious and/or abusive and/or defamatory will not be accepted. I do not necessarily endorse, support, sanction, encourage, verify or agree with the opinions or statements of any information or other content in the comments on this site and do not in any way guarantee their accuracy or reliability.