This document defines the membership and publication policy of the Hector Galaxy survey collaboration.
This membership policy covers projects, analyses, presentations, proposals, publications and the use of
all non-public data associated with the Hector survey. This includes all non-public raw Hector spectral
data, any non-public processed Hector data and any unpublished interpretations derived from that data.
Likewise, this policy covers all the non-public target selection discussions and algorithms, any non-public
targeting data and unpublished interpretations derived from that data. This policy covers all publications,
including journals, conference proceedings, technical reports and popular articles, as well as all
presentations and proposals on the Hector survey (in whole or in part).
We would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land on which the AAT stands, the Gamilaraay
people, and pay our respects to elders past and present.
- Acknowledging use of Hector data
- Team membership
- Requesting team membership
- Key roles and structures
- Hector survey projects and papers
Full PDF version of the document:
Acknowledging use of Hector data
Hector papers should contain the following acknowledgement:
The Hector Galaxy Survey is based on observations made at the Anglo-Australian Telescope. The
Hector multi-object integral field spectrograph instrument was developed jointly by the University of
Sydney and Macquarie University, with additional financial contributions from the Australian
National University and University of Western Australia. The Hector input catalogue is based on
data taken from the WAVES Survey, Sloan Digital Sky Survey and the GAMA Survey. The Hector
Galaxy Survey research is supported by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for
All Sky Astrophysics in 3 Dimensions (ASTRO3D), through project number CE170100013, and
other participating institutions. The Hector Galaxy Survey website is https://hector.survey.org.au/.
The initial membership of the Hector collaboration was set in 2018A from responses to a call to the
Australian astronomical community and engagement in Hector activities. The list of team members is
described on the Hector survey team wiki. This list will be finalised at the date of the first observing
proposal. Active team members at that date will be listed on the proposal and considered Full team
members. Researchers who have expressed an interest in being on the Hector team but have not
contributed to Hector through engagement in the instrument, science or survey preparation, will then be
considered associate team members.
New members can join the team either as full or associate members. In either case new members need
to be proposed by a current full team member and need to propose a specific science project that they
intend to focus on. In the case of a full team member the proposal should also outline the expected
contribution to the overall survey. Requests for membership should be forwarded to the team leader.
Approval of new team members is by the Hector Executive Committee (Hector Exec).
Full team members
Full team members have unlimited access to the Hector data and related products and may propose any
science project using the data, taking into account previously proposed projects. By being members they
are agreeing to abide by the policies described in this document. They have rights to be involved in any
science project to which they can make a significant contribution. Full team members may request
authorship on Hector papers on the basis of either their direct contribution to that work, or their overall
contribution to the project. There is an expectation that full team members contribute meaningfully to the
ongoing effort of the project. This ongoing effort may be via involvement in target selection, observing,
software development, data reduction, generation of simulations or any other effort that aids the survey.
Full team members who have not contributed to the Survey effort or used survey data for 2 years will be
contacted by the Exec. to discuss a defined project that would allow them to be moved to the Associate
membership class. If no project can be found that fits within an Associate membership then their Hector
team membership will lapse.
Associate team members
Individuals may be associate team members for either of two specific reasons:
(A) to carry out a specific project/analysis generally leading to a paper, which is not currently being
undertaken by the team. These Associate members will have access to Hector data and related products
for their specific proposed project and will be authors (often first author) on the papers arising from their
project. They do not have access to the data for other projects and do not have rights to be authors on
papers unrelated to their proposed project.
(B) they provide a specific product or effort to the survey team, but are not directly involved with the main
survey science. In this case in return for the effort/product in question these associate members are
eligible to be authors on ‘core’ survey papers as defined below, or papers in which their products/efforts
are directly used. If the product is essential to the Survey (not just a beneficial addition) then Full
membership would be more appropriate.
Associate team members who have not contributed to the Survey effort or used Survey data for 2 years
will be removed from Associate membership (after consultation between the member and the Exec).
Instrument team builders
These are individuals who were essential to the building of the original instrument and for whom it formed
at least 50% of their time for 1 year or more, or for whom their contribution can be justified as essential to
establishing funding. They will have authorship rights according to the policy below. Some Instrument
team builders will also be Full or Associate team members if they go on to engage with the survey
science. Instrument Builders will have rights to be on the “core” papers as well as the first 10 non-core
publications using Hector data. At the start of the Survey all Instrument team builders who expect to
engage with the Science Survey will be considered Founders (see below).
A team member who has contributed a substantial enabling effort towards the survey (as assessed by the
Hector Exec, but nominally based on minimum of 6 months equivalent full-time effort, subject to
opportunity) and aims to engage with the Science Survey going forward, will qualify for Founder status.
Such effort includes work on instrumentation, software, simulations, observing and any other development
that can be considered to have contributed to enabling the Survey for the whole team. A list of current
team members with Founder status will be maintained on the Hector wiki. A team member who wishes to
have Founder status should contact the survey Principal Investigator with a brief justification of their case.
Decisions on Founder status will then be made by the Hector Executive Committee.
Founder status will be recognised on the Hector public website with descriptions of contributions.
Founders applying for jobs/grants can then point to that web site as proof of their pinnacle role in papers
they have co-authorship rights on.
In order to maintain Founder status a genuine continued contribution to the Survey effort is required. Such
a contribution does not include using data only for their own science, but does include, for example,
significant observing load, updates to data reduction pipelines, producing data products for the whole
team and maintaining them, management or coordination roles or other contributions that assist the
science of the Hector team. An indicative contribution would be a minimum of 4 weeks (20 days) FTE
equivalent per year (subject to opportunity) but this is not a strict time limit. Observing nights are counted
towards this total as individual days, not based on work hours. A minimum number of 3 observing nights
in a row is required for observing to be included in the founder status tally, and then it counts as the
number of observing nights plus 2. For example, a 5 night observing run is the equivalent of 7 days of
contribution. If the Exec has concerns that a Founder is no longer engaged at this level then the Exec will
first discuss the ongoing engagement with the Founder member. The Exec will then make a decision on
continuing Founder status. In cases where the Founder has moved on and has no part in the Hector
Survey, they will be removed from Founder status.
A team member with Founder status is able to be a co-author on any Hector survey paper or related
publication. They must however have read the paper and provided comments on the paper to the author
or given reasonable justification for not providing comments to the author (e.g. on leave at the paper
Requesting team membership
Requests for full team membership should be made if there will be continued significant involvement in
the project. There is an expectation that new full team members will either be (i) students/ECRs
supervised/mentored by a current full team member, or (ii) a researcher bringing a substantial new data
product, tool or methodology which would otherwise be unavailable to the team.
Full team member requests should address the following points:
• An outline of their key science interests with respect to the Hector Galaxy Survey, ideally defined
as one or more specific papers. There should be enough information for the Exec to be able to
confirm that there are no conflicts with other Hector science projects already approved.
• The expected contribution to ongoing survey effort. This can cover any area that contributes to the
project as a whole, including software development (e.g. data reduction and analysis), target
selection, observing, database, simulations, theory. Any unique data product or tool/methodology
that is being brought into the collaboration should also be discussed here.
• The amount of effort expected to be committed to the project over the lifetime of the survey. Also
please list other commitments (e.g. part-time position, teaching, observatory duties, other nonresearch
Associate membership requests need only address either point 1 or 2 above, depending on the specific
type of associate membership requested (type A or B above).
Membership proposals should clearly state which class of membership is being requested and also the
name of the current team member acting as sponsor/mentor, if applicable. Membership requests should
be limited to a single page and sent to the Principal Investigator who will then present the requests to the
Membership for students
It is expected that students involved in Hector research projects will also be official team members (either
full or associate), just as any other researchers are. However, this is not required for short term (in particular undergraduate) research projects, where there is no immediate expectation of publication. In
this situation, the student’s supervisor is responsible for arranging data access and making sure that the
student abides by the policies of the team.
Key roles and structures
Project Leader (Principal Investigator)
Overall leadership of the project; Chair of Executive Committee: Julia Bryant
To offer overall strategic direction: Joss Bland-Hawthorn
Management and coordination of papers; primary contact for new science proposals: Scott Croom
Proactively manage the access of simulations relevant to the Hector ream and actively source simulations
requested by Hector science team members: Claudia Lagos, Charlotte Welker
Target selection coordinator
Manage the construction and maintenance of the input catalogue, tiling of targets and progress of fields
observed: Sam Vaughan
Data Reduction coordinator: Sree Oh, Madusha Gunawardhana
Database coordinator and quality control: TBD
Manage the timetabling of observers for observing runs, and ensuring all observers have the required
training: Sree Oh for coordination and Julia Bryant for training.
Manage the information on the Hector website including interaction with Data Central on automated data
delivery, manage mailing lists and membership : Stefania Barsanti, Marie Partridge
Hector Science team leaders
Coordinate Hector science efforts on each theme, actively identifying conflicts between member projects
and presenting those conflicts to the Exec, and actively identifying key science that should be a priority for
completion by the Hector team, organising regular meetings with these science theme members.
- Stellar populations & kinematics: Jesse van de Sande & Nic Scott
- Gas kinematics: Julia Bryant
- Emission line processes: Brent Groves
- Radio/HI connections: Luca Cortese & Barbara Catinella
- Environments/halos: Matt Owers
- Dark matter: Celine Boehm
Hector Executive Committee
Hector Exec consists of the Project Leader, Science Coordinator, key strategic advisors and selected
team members for whom Hector will be their major science project. If required, the Hector Exec will
resolve any conflicts that cannot be resolved by the full team. If the Hector Exec cannot resolve the
dispute, then the Project Leader may make the final decision.
The role of the Hector Exec is to provide high level scientific guidance for the survey; monitor progress by
the various working groups and resolve any conflicts within the team.
Project Review Committee
This committee is a small sub-set of the Executive committee. The Project Review committee reviews
proposed papers/projects as described below.
Hector survey projects and papers
The Hector projects and paper policies are outlined below. Any disputes will be managed by the Hector
Exec (see above).
New potential science projects must be submitted via the Hector wiki. The included project description will
be made public to the full team via email and the website. The proposed project will be reviewed by the
science coordinator and a small group of other Hector team members (the Project Review Committee) to
review any potential conflicts with other projects. Other team members who perceive a conflict may also
raise the issue with the science coordinator and the researcher proposing the new project. The Project
Review Committee may require changes to the description and scope of the project before approving it.
Only approved projects may continue towards publication.
Project summaries must contain a detailed description of the project and a description of the publication(s)
that will result from the project, with lead authors for each paper identified. Where possible, members
should post individual project summaries for each anticipated publication. To avoid conflicts, the summary
should be focused on specific research with well-defined goals. Large projects with more than one
expected paper (such as thesis projects) should contain detailed descriptions of each paper anticipated
from the project with the lead authors identified.
Thesis project summaries must contain a detailed description of the project, the publications that will
result from the thesis, and a thesis timeline for the project. The student should be identified in the project
summary and should be a member of the Hector team.
The full team is encouraged to read all new project descriptions and bring up any conflicts with existing
projects for discussion with project proposers and the Science Coordinator.
Project priority periods define the amount of time from initiation of the project to first draft of the paper.
Regular team members have a priority period of 1 year. PhD students may request an extended priority
period of up to 2 years. The science coordinator is responsible for identifying projects that are not
progressing. The priority periods ensure that key Hector science papers will be completed by Hector team
members prior to public data release. If an approved paper on the wiki does not progress after 1 year or
have a draft paper by 2 years then the project will remain an approved project but other researchers can
then apply to the Exec to do that research paper instead. An exception is given for students in which a set
of papers have been defined at the start of the PhD, in which case there must be progress on the science
that drives that set of papers, even if there is not progress on the last papers in that set within these time
Progress reports will be requested by the Science Coordinator for inclusion in the Hector newsletter to be
circulated to the Hector team. Project leaders and PhD students are encouraged to provide progress
reports for the newsletter to keep the team informed of project discoveries and timescale for publication.
Participation and Authorship
Any full member of the team may request participation on any project. Involvement is at the discretion of
the lead author on the given project, but any reasonable offer to collaborate should be accepted.
Authorship: There are no requirements to include anyone as a co-author by default, beyond the standard
scientific practice of including those that have actively worked on the paper and those that have provided
a data product that has been used in the paper. However, in addition the following people have a right to
• Any full team member who has significantly contributed to the production of the particular data
used in the paper. This includes team members who have produced particular team data products
(including value-added data products) that are used in the paper.
• Any team member with Founder status.
• Any full team member that has provided substantial feedback on the paper (i.e. more than just
pointing out typos).
The lead author has the right to decide on the ordering of the author list, based on the usual two-tier list of
those who make direct contributions to the paper (in order of contribution), followed by those how have
contributed to the broader survey and have requested authorship (in alphabetical order).
All team members requesting authorship (including Founders) are expected to read the paper, approve of
its content and have provided feedback comments. Team members who do not do this may be removed
from the author list.
Core papers: In addition to the above, there will be a small number of “core” survey papers, which will
describe key aspects of the survey (e.g. data reduction paper, sample definition paper). In addition to the
authorship policy given above, a request for co-authorship on a core paper may be made in the case of:
• Any full team member who has made a meaningful contribution to the effort of the survey, even if
below the threshold for Founder status.
The primary aim of the core papers policy is to recognize and reward effort at a range of levels in the
Titles: Hector Galaxy Survey paper titles should take the form “The Hector Galaxy Survey: ……” e.g. “The
Hector Galaxy Survey: Target Selection”, in order to ensure maximum publicity and brand recognition for
Draft paper posting: draft papers should be posted to the team wiki as early as possible to inform the
collaboration of the progress of the project. When the paper is nominally complete it should be posted to
the wiki and an email sent to the team to allow feedback/comment from the rest of the team.
Feedback period: The authors must allow a minimum of 3 weeks for feedback from the rest of the team
ArXiv posting: Hector survey default policy is that papers must be accepted before being submitted to
arXiv. This policy may be over-ruled in exceptional circumstances with the agreement of the team.
Assumed cosmology: To aid comparison between results Hector papers should, where possible, use the
same assumed cosmology. Ωm=0.3, Ωλ=0.7 and H0=70km/s/Mpc. These should be clearly stated at the
end of the introduction of the paper. In addition, if you show the H0 dependence explicitly with factors of h
(e.g. Mpc/h), making the definition of h clear (e.g. H0 = 100 h km/s/Mpc).
Citing instrument and survey definition papers: Each Hector paper should cite the appropriate
instrument and survey definition papers. These will be listed on the Hector wiki and updated as the papers
Papers that use derived higher-level data products should also cite the relevant papers describing these.
Example text for the instrument description that can be modified for use in papers:
The Hector Integral field spectrograph instrument (Bryant et al. [ref TBD]) is mounted at the 2-degree
diameter field of view focus on the Anglo-Australian. Hector uses 21 fused fibre bundles (Hexabundles;
Brown et al. [ref TBD], Wang et al. [ref TBD], Bland-Hawthorn et al. 2011; Bryant et al. 2014) with a high
(75%) fill factor. Two 37-core hexabundles are allocated to secondary standard stars. Each galaxy bundle
contains between 61-169 fibres of 1.6 arcsec diameter resulting in each IFU having a diameter of 15-27
arcsec. The IFUs are attached to robotically configured magnets across the field plate. While one plate
observes, the second field plate is being configured by the robot. Hector fibres are fed to both the Hector
spectrograph (841] fibres) and the double-beam AAOmega spectrograph (819 fibres; Sharp et al. 2006).
The Hector spectrograph has a fixed format with an instrumental spectral resolution of at 0.13 nm from
372.7-776.1 nm with 2+/-0.2 pixel FWHM spectral sampling. AAOmega allows a range of different
resolutions and wavelength ranges. For the Hector Galaxy survey we use the 570V grating at 3700-5700A
giving a resolution of R=1805 (FWHMblue = 2.66 Å, sigma~70 km s-1), and the R1000 grating from 6250-
7350A giving a resolution of R=4308 (FWHMred = 1.59 Å, sigma~30 km s-1, Scott et al. 2018, van de
Sande et al. 2017).
Hector follow-up projects and proposals
Any team member may submit follow-up telescope proposals based on discoveries from the Hector
Galaxy Survey data. These do not need to be approved by the Hector Exec, but they should be advertised
to the Hector team via the full team email exploder prior to submission of the proposal, so that others can
collaborate on the project if interested. A brief description of the proposal and a final copy of the full
proposal should be placed on the Hector wiki page for follow-up proposals.
If the project was initiated based on proprietary Hector Galaxy Survey data then publications based on the
data should also follow the publication rules described in this policy document, as well as any other rules
appropriate to new data.