Re: Andy/Peter/Greg -- Important/Urgent

From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Thu May 01 2003 - 18:28:52 PDT

  • Next message: Greg Aldering: "page 5-14 edits"

    Here's what we're going to do:

    I will rewrite the text to reflect the 9878 and 98104 lightcurves as
    relatively less well confirmed. (This is just a small rewrite.)

    I will subtract them from Subset 3 and redo just that one fit (well, two
    fits, since there's also the w fit) for that section ("type
    contamination") of the systematic error section.

    I will not change anything about any of the primary subsets; this
    includes not re-evaluating which of the 42SNe ought or ought not to go
    in the primary subset. Any change to the primary subset means a LOT of
    fits to redo, which will probalby make it impossible to get this paper
    submitted next week.

    This is a minimum pain way to go, and from the back-n-forth it even
    sounds like it's at least a justifiable way to go; it sounds like
    there's enough disagreement about the "best" way to go that I'm just
    going to assert that this is it.

    We can continue to discuss the best subsets to use for future papers,
    but not for this paper.... There's no problem with switching subsets in
    later papers; after all, I changed selection criteria for this paper in
    comparison to P99.

    -Rob



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 01 2003 - 18:28:54 PDT