Updates from Overleaf

answers.tex

@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ \subsection{Rolling}\label{sec:rolling}
 
 {\bf The SCOC recommends that the time domain community, particularly those interested in phenomena that have evolutionary time scales of hours-to-days, urgently quantifies the impact of the proposed uniform rolling compared to rolling in four cycles. For this purpose, while the baseline is implemented with 3-cycles uniform rolling, the Survey Strategy team has prepared v3.5 \opsim s  with different rolling implementations.}
 
-{\bf Further, the SCOC iterates the recommendation that Data Management scopes a plan for producing uniform data releases in DR5 and DR8 in addition to the standard data releases and that the cost of the development and storage of these additional data releases is scoped and shared with the scientific community.} Even if produced by the Rubin DM, uniform data releases will require the input (of the DESC and extragalactic science community at large) to develop the algorithm that will achieve sufficient uniformity. Understanding the cost of producing two additional {\it uniform} data releases is necessary to compare this cost to the scientific cost of three vs four cycles of rolling, to be measured by the community (see previous paragraph). In addition, if rolling cannot start early enough to interrupt rolling ahead of DR5 and DR8, this remains the only alternative solution currently identified to achieve sufficient uniformity. Sharing information on the cost of additional data releases will place the community in a position, if needed, to advocate and secure funding for this purpose.
+{\bf Further, the SCOC reiterates the recommendation that Data Management scopes a plan for producing uniform data releases in DR5 and DR8 in addition to the standard data releases and that the cost of the development and storage of these additional data releases is scoped and shared with the scientific community.} Even if produced by the Rubin DM, uniform data releases will require the input (of the DESC and extragalactic science community at large) to develop the algorithm that will achieve sufficient uniformity. Understanding the cost of producing two additional {\it uniform} data releases is necessary to compare this cost to the scientific cost of three vs four cycles of rolling, to be measured by the community (see previous paragraph). In addition, if rolling cannot start early enough to interrupt rolling ahead of DR5 and DR8, this remains the only alternative solution currently identified to achieve sufficient uniformity. Sharing information on the cost of additional data releases will place the community in a position, if needed, to advocate and secure funding for this purpose.
 
 The SCOC is thankful to the Uniformity Task Force, chaired by Rachel Mandelbaum, which provided invaluable contributions and analysis that led us to this recommendation.
 
@@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ \subsection{Targets of Opportunity (ToO)}\label{sec:ToO}
 
 For all ToOs, to enable ToO response from the Rubin system, a high level of automation is required. For each potential ToO, a response shall be pre-determined algorithmically, including which targets Rubin responds to and the sequence of observations, based on the transient’s characteristics. Informal systems can easily lead to mistakes. For this reason, {\bf the SCOC recommends that Rubin only consider potential ToOs that emanate from vetted discovery and distribution systems that produce and dispatch fully machine-readable alerts.\footnote{At the time of writing, the SCOC understands that full automation is not currently in place for all IceCube neutrino triggers.}} The SCOC considers the current list of vetted systems to be: LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA (gravitational waves); IceCube (neutrinos); SNEWS (neutrinos); JPL Scout or Sentry for potentially hazardous asteroids. The SCOC will evaluate future systems for inclusion in this list (\eg , a new neutrino observatory) on formal request.
 
-Human input may still be required to evaluate in real-time the value of a ToO trigger and the specific response. One (or more) Rubin members %(assigned on any given night from a group of Rubin Scientists) 
+Human input may still be required to evaluate in real-time the value of a ToO trigger and the specific response.  One (or more) Rubin members %(assigned on any given night from a group of Rubin Scientists) 
 should review triggers and be allowed to, if desired, overwrite the algorithmic decision to pursue/not pursue a ToO or interrupt the ToO observing sequence. Further, to ensure that appropriate expertise is available, an Advisory Committee of community members can interact and advise the observer in real-time, with communication initiated either by the committee or by the observer. 
 This Advisory Committee should be composed of community members and have a nomination-selection process (including self-nomination) to be outlined in detail before the start of survey operations, ensuring broad coverage of scientific competence and diversity along all relevant axes.
 The committee, observers, and Rubin leadership will review the ToO outcomes post-factum to advise on program changes.