1. Preliminaries: VK and RD are graduating and their contributions to this paper overlap their needs to write a project report or thesis and present slides at a defense. So we will discuss this first before getting to the paper.
- RD is defending Friday noon on April 27; needs to fill out Dana's mandatory questions; he has done that so I need to forward the info to Dana soon.
- VK is defending Friday noon on April 20 in EIT 281; group needs to test the video conferencing software on 3/30/18 meeting or shortly thereafter.
2. RS has submitted the abstract, has joined the AAS in order to be able to submit. Discuss reimbursement for RS, $60 for abstract and $30 for AAS membership: HA suggests we add up everything until the end, then divide by 3.
3. Discuss the presentation-in-progress: RS thinks it is a 15-minute slot which includes questions. He will rehearse the presentation to us before the conference.
4. Discuss the paper-in-progress:
- Papers are all different lengths, but initial impression is that 5 pages or more is fine and mainstream. Few if any papers are 2 pages. So we'll aim for 5 as a broad target.
- The LPU philosophy is alive and well here, especially inasmuch as AAS is not exactly an A pub.
- HA is reformatting the references.
- The paper is due on W April 4. RS is the corresponding author, DB is the technical contact, author list is: VK, RD, RS, HA, DB.
- DB will finalize the paper.
- Formatting guidelines appear here.
OUTLINE
Abstract
1. motivation
2. background (literature review)
HA is writing it
Everyone reads/critiques the draft and we continue from there
3. Data Analysis
Intro statement
3.1 Visits to extraterrestrial bodies (based on RD's work)
3.1.1 Graph of % contribution from each country over time.
Analysis: Statistical variance over time, showing steady decrease(?)
Discussion: notice # of countries increasing over time; graph of it
3.1.2 Graph of total points for all countries, each year
Analysis: find the right different weights for different destinations
A more or less monotonically increasing curve is a good result
3.2 Satellite trends (based on VK's work)
3.2.1 Graph and discussion of satellite *purpose*
3.2.2 Graph and discussion of *launch site*
3.2.3 Graph and discussion of *orbital distance*
3.2.4 Graph and discussion of successful vs. failed launches over time
3.2.5 Graph and discussion of comparisons of different countries
3.2.6 Discussion of patterns and spikes in the data
4. Discussion
Finding weights for different destinations: it is how to generate a testable hypothesis
Thus, it is not "overfitting" or "forcing the data to fit the hypothesis"
A monotonic curve can be extrapolated to make predictions, thus is testable
5. Conclusions and Future Work
1. motivation
2. background (literature review)
HA is writing it
Everyone reads/critiques the draft and we continue from there
3. Data Analysis
Intro statement
3.1 Visits to extraterrestrial bodies (based on RD's work)
3.1.1 Graph of % contribution from each country over time.
Analysis: Statistical variance over time, showing steady decrease(?)
Discussion: notice # of countries increasing over time; graph of it
3.1.2 Graph of total points for all countries, each year
Analysis: find the right different weights for different destinations
A more or less monotonically increasing curve is a good result
3.2 Satellite trends (based on VK's work)
3.2.1 Graph and discussion of satellite *purpose*
3.2.2 Graph and discussion of *launch site*
3.2.3 Graph and discussion of *orbital distance*
3.2.4 Graph and discussion of successful vs. failed launches over time
3.2.5 Graph and discussion of comparisons of different countries
3.2.6 Discussion of patterns and spikes in the data
4. Discussion
Finding weights for different destinations: it is how to generate a testable hypothesis
Thus, it is not "overfitting" or "forcing the data to fit the hypothesis"
A monotonic curve can be extrapolated to make predictions, thus is testable
5. Conclusions and Future Work
6. References
