Publication of VSX changes by the AAVSO

Affiliation
American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO)
Thu, 11/27/2014 - 04:29

Hi Group!

Many years ago, there was some discussion about the AAVSO VSX database and whether new discoveries and revisions entered directly (and only) into the VSX database would somehow be officially "published, either in the IBVS as "star lists" or via the GCVS updating their database.  (It is a somewhat moot point since the VSX is the most extensive and accurate variable star list anyway.) But what I have seen several times in professional research papers is a "new variable" discovery, with no mention at all that the star was discovered years ago, and has quitely resided in the VSX.  Is this a "problem" of the VSX not officially being published, or that observers still rely only on the GCVS (or SIMBAD) for their search information?

:-)

Rick Huziak (HUZ)

Affiliation
American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO)
"New" old variables

Hi Rick,

    Good points, I've mulled over them too.  I use VSX only as a starting point for a complete literature search.  There are not enough resources to do complete literature searchs to keep the VSX totally up to date, or even complete, and so some references, especially older ones, may be missing entirely.  That does not excuse an author from failing to do "due diligence" via a literature search though.   ADS is the only really complete resource of information from the literature.  The search can turn up information for submittal to VSX for inclusion in VSX.

 

    I recently came across the question of who discovered and made the first observations of a variable I am working on.  I found that Hipparcos lists the star as a "new variable", and the 74th Name List repeats that incorrect information. In fact, BQ Lyn was first announced in 1991 to be variable, in an A&ASs paper by Oja; his claim is based on photometry he obtained pre-Hipparcos.  VSX does not list Oja's paper as a reference; only the Hipparcos catalog is listed as a reference in VSX.  I now always do a thorough search of primary reference material before I put my unquestioned trust in secondary material such as Hipparcos or VSX, for example.

 

Cheers,

Thom

Affiliation
Svensk Amator Astronomisk Forening, variabelsektionen (Sweden) (SAAF)
One of the great features of

One of the great features of VSX is how easy it is to suggest changes and revisions, which helps keeping the catalogue updated. In this case, it wouldn't take long to enter a suggestion for revision of the VSX entry on BQ Lyn, adding the reference to Oja's paper (in fact, I just did). Try doing that with GCVS ...

/Gustav, HGUA

Affiliation
American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO)
No universal database

The issue here goes far beyond just publishing VSX updates, its a fundamental problem of a lack of a commonly agreed upon central database of all variable stars and their observations. Clearly AAVSO's VSX and WebObs are the leaders in the field, but there are several others - GCVS, vsnet, etc. - which have been around a long while and have their faithful followers.

As long as multiple independent datasets of variable star catalogues and observations exist in the world, the problems mentioned will continue to come up. And this is not a problem unique to variable stars either. A similar situation exists in the world of comet observations, with ICQ, COBS, and other sites acting as repositories.

None of the independent sites really "talk" to each other, make much of an attempt to consolidate and generalize observational data. Until this situation is resolved, these problems are fundamental and will continue to come up. I mentioned this issue a decade ago, and it seems like little to no progress has been made to improve the status quo.

Mike LMK

 

Affiliation
American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO)
VSX

I'll try to reply to some of the isues raised from the inside.

We always said that submitting a variable star to VSX doesn't strictly mean publication. If people want that they should do some more work and prepare a journal publication.
However, single run of the mill variables are likely to be rejected nowadays by most editors.
So VSX becomes a good venue for those discoveries.

Since the time of those discussions about publishing the VSX results in a journal or not were raised, one important step has been taken: VSX is one of the catalogues available through VizieR and it gets updated every Monday.
This means everyone checking information on some star will be able to find information on variability for the object being studied, unless they don't use VizieR.
If you don't use VSX and you also don't use VizieR, then something is wrong with your approach or you are not really involved in variable star research.

Of course being in SIMBAD adds more exposure and it is also true that there are still people only relying on the GCVS when it comes to variable stars. The only solution I see for this is giving VSX more publicity. We are constantly getting more attention with time, but that also includes a paper and IAU recognition. Those things are probably good plans for the future.
At the pace new variables are being submitted (think about ~2,000 new stars per year by individual submitters) I don't know if we could cope up with publications at this pace or if it actually makes any sense in the current context, but it is a matter of discussion, priorities and manpower.
Devoting time to improve the data in VSX, deleting duplicates, being up-to-date, is more important.

About VSX completeness regarding literature: VSX never meant to be a bibliographic source.
Asking VSX for that is the same as asking SIMBAD or the ADS to give all the variability information available on each variable star they include. Each database is focused on some aspect, they are complementary.

About BQ Lyn, VSX was populated with the published catalogues and the information contained in them. We decided to be all inclusive instead of checking stars one by one.
Our approach is: if it is wrong, then help us fix it. Gustav was right about that: everyone can add information or submit corrections for any star as long as supporting evidence is given.
However, in this specific case, the fact that VSX lists HIPPARCOS as the reference doesn't mean HIPPARCOS is the discoverer. Remember that we are not a bibliographic source. The range, period and other information come from HIPPARCOS data and that's why it is listed as a source. The discovery paper does not have that information.
Gustav has already submitted Oja's reference so it will surely be included along with the discoverer's name.

Finally about the subject of collaboration between groups, I can say that over the last years there has been more interaction, for instance, between the GCVS team and the VSX team and nowadays each team mutually informs the other when a substantial change is made on stars that we have in common (e.g. the GCVS and NSV stars). A lot of wrong identifications are being corrected in both databases (most of them made by us and informed to the GCVS team).

So, the overall situation is improving although maybe at a slow pace.

Cheers,
Sebastian

-----------------------
Sebastian Otero
VSX Team
American Association of Variable Star Observers

Where you can "publish"

The issue with an 'official' list of variable stars is an old issue that includes as much politics as science.  The IAU recognizes the GCVS as official. But that recognition is old and politically radioactive to touch.  Getting VSX recognized in this respect is very complicated.

As a practical matter I would encourage AAVSO members to publish their discoveries either in a peer reviewed journal like the JAAVSO or in a source that gets indexed by ADS like ATel.  JAAVSO should get most of the love.  It is very affordable for AAVSO members to publish there. You need to be credentialed to publish an ATel (and really it is not that hard to earn credentials) but I and others have said we are willing to use our credentials to post discoveries by AAVSO members to help establish credit and precedence with time sensitive discoveries and identifications.

So my advice is don't sumbit it to VSX and think that is that.  Be sure to publish it elsewhere as well.