Untitled - Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de l'Observatoire de Grenoble

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• National astronomy programs. 4 Figure 1.7: Budget resources structure The main programs of interest for LAOG are PNPS (Programme National de Physique Stellaire), PNP (Programme National de Planétologie), and PCMI (Programme National de Physique et Chimie du Milieu Interstellaire), along with the GDR (research cluster) PCHE (Physique des sources Cosmiques à Haute Energie) and the ASHRA (Action Spécifique pour la Haute Résolution Angulaire). The corresponding funds are used essentially for collaborative purposes (in some cases also for equipment), mainly, though not exclusively, within the French community. A yearly AO is issued, followed by a selection of proposals by a scientific committee. The funds made available through National Programs bring about 20 to 30 kE, (with fluctuations since the funding of the National Programs is itself variable). They can provide very useful “pocket money” to the teams for collaborations (∼ 10-15% of the total LAOG operating budget). For their parts, LAOG teams are regularly successful, and use these funds as much as possible to have an independent budget which they manage by themselves, mainly for scientific collaborations, including short-term visitors, and thematic workshops. This year (2005) a new national research funding structure has emerged, the “Agence Nationale de la Recherche” (ANR). Basically, this structure (endowed with about 700 ME in total), more or less inspired by the NSF, is meant to provide funds and human resources (which is a major difference with national programs) on a competitive basis. While most of the funding is targeted towards major national priorities (e.g., nanotechnology projects), a fraction (about 20 %) is “open”. ANR issued its first AO last spring, and LAOG has submitted several proposals in the open category, mostly for post-docs (a critical deficiency of the French research system). Thus the funding LAOG competes for with ANR is roughly an order of magnitude larger than for programs –which is logical since salaries are now counted. We are expecting the results of this new experience, which could have a strong impact on our future funding. 4 Another note for our foreign colleagues. French research in astronomy is structured into “national programs” or smaller-sized “research clusters” and “specific actions”, funded mainly by CNRS, with contributions from other state agencies like CNES (French space agency) and CEA (Atomic energy commission). 32
• Contract-related funding. These funds are obtained as a result of successful proposals after an AO has been issued: these can be contracts with an international institute (like ESO), or with industry (e.g., Alcatel Space). In some cases, after the contract is awarded, an additional contribution (typically from CNRS/INSU) can be obtained, for instance if there was a share of the costs between the international institute and the country of the successful proposer (e.g., VLT instrumentation). These contributions are known respectively as “Contracts” and “Operations” . However, care must be taken in entering these funds into the laboratory budget. Indeed, a contract, by construction, is a box in which funding comes for a specific purpose: it is spent for that purpose only (for instance to buy equipment or instruments), and only overheads can be used to contribute to the operating budget of the laboratory as a whole (furniture, missions, etc.). For such contracts, LAOG typically retains 10% of their amount for this purpose. It is this “tax” that must be added to the previous funds, not the amount of the contract itself. (One should add for completeness that some contracts do include salaries, but this is currently more the excpetion than the rule, and in view of the present budget exercise the salaries have not been taken into account for the sake of clarity.) Therefore, in figure 1.7 we have included only these 10% (referred to as “contributions” in the figure), and not the full amount of the “Contracts” and “Operations” (which is thus simply 10 times larger). As a result, and contrary to what might naively think, even though the contracts themselves may look large, (like 350 kE for WIRCAM at CFHT), the total amont effectively usable for LAOG common expenses is not so large (30-70 kE/yr, i.e., less than “specific” funds, or ∼ 15-20% of the budget). In this way one arrives at a realistic operating budget, comprised between 400 and 500 kE/yr. (If contracts are used fully instead, one obtains an enormous year-to-year vartiation: 1200 kE in 2004 vs. 650 kE in 2005, which obviously does not reflect at all the way the laboratory operates on a day-to-day basis.) This is perhaps the good news. The bad news is that when one divides this amount by the LAOG population, one gets a very significant decrease of funding as a function of time. This is illustrated in figure 1.8, which displays two parallel histograms. The histogram with the largest boxes shows the operating budget per capita if one counts only the permanent staff (36 in 2001, 43 in 2005), the smaller boxes if one counts the whole population effectively present (i.e., including PhD students, post-docs, etc.: 76 in 2001, 98 in 2005). The figure also displays a regression line for the two histograms: the decline is obvious, on the order of 20% over five years (more like 30% if one takes inflation into account), with admittedly fluctuations on the order of 10% due to start and end of contracts. Figure 1.8: Time evolution of the operating budget per person (in kE). Large box histogram: counting permanent staff only. Small box histogram: counting all LAOG members (including PhD students, post-docs, etc.). Pending a new way of operating with the ANR in the future, the most obvious solution would be to look for more contracts. But this is misleading: (i) doubling the amount of contracts would bring not more than another 10 %, and only to 15-20 % of the operating budget ; (ii) more importantly, LAOG basically has one or two large contracts per “quedriennal”, corresponding to the instrument plans of agencies like ESO, and this is the best it can hope for given its mission to do fundamental research, and not look for large-scale applications. The other solution is to reinforce significantly the “recurrent” funding, since, as noted before, it amounts to about half of the LAOG operating budget. 33
Page 3: LABORATOIRE D’ASTROPHYSIQUE DE GR
Page 6 and 7: III Team ASTROMOL 41 2 Presentation
Page 8 and 9: 8.1.3 Graduate Students . . . . . .
Page 10 and 11: VI Team SHERPA 145 15 Results 147 1
Page 13: Part I Foreword: Presentation of th
Page 17: Part II Executive Summary A 18th ce
Page 20 and 21: of CNRS for technicians and enginee
Page 22 and 23: Figure 1.3: New LAOG organigram (20
Page 24 and 25: heart attack. Manuel went back to t
Page 26 and 27: Figure 1.6: PhD student repartition
Page 28 and 29: • LAOG researchers (and publishin
Page 30 and 31: and published 95 papers in four yea
Page 34 and 35: 1.5 From dreams to reality: Human r
Page 36 and 37: and accretion disks with heavy nume
Page 38 and 39: emphasis on the chemistry of planet
Page 41: Part III TEAM ASTROMOL Sub-arcsecon
Page 44 and 45: • we develop quantum and classica
Page 46 and 47: Table shows not only the volume of
Page 48 and 49: • Herschel-HIFI: Astromol is invo
Page 50 and 51: particular, we calculated a 9D H2O-
Page 52 and 53: • The hot corinos. More spectacul
Page 54 and 55: the massive deeply embedded protost
Page 56 and 57: tens of visual magnitudes, hence pr
Page 58 and 59: quantum VCC-IOS approximation may f
Page 60 and 61: Rate constant (cm 3 s -1 ) 1e-09 1e
Page 62 and 63: • One of us (PV) is strongly invo
Page 64 and 65: sublimation of water ice trapped ei
Page 66 and 67: If the chemistry in the first phase
Page 68 and 69: 4.2.2 Molecular Physics The theoret
Page 70 and 71: Source Herschel Time Astromol Class
Page 72 and 73: several important studies that anti
Page 74 and 75: Chapter 5 Selected Publications •
Page 77: Part IV TEAM FOST The first image o
Page 80 and 81: 393254 (5MJup at 55 AU) & AB Pic (1
Page 82 and 83:
2.2 µ m 0.5" 11.7 µ m Figure 6.1:
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 6.3: Contribution of heating
Page 86 and 87:
such mid-term (several weeks) magne
Page 88 and 89:
systems: HD 141569, HD 32297, HD 18
Page 90 and 91:
C2D Spitzer/IRAC and MIPS data of s
Page 92 and 93:
et al. 2002; 2003). We have found t
Page 94 and 95:
Figure 6.8: Distribution of separat
Page 96 and 97:
with only three known to date. Most
Page 98 and 99:
300 objects, a size sufficient for
Page 100 and 101:
therefore no surprise that vast eff
Page 102 and 103:
data to verify the predictions we a
Page 104 and 105:
Chapter 8 Appendices 8.1 Members of
Page 106 and 107:
106
Page 108 and 109:
108
Page 110 and 111:
equipments for these tasks, from de
Page 112 and 113:
10.1.3 Current trend of large equip
Page 114 and 115:
• Improving High Angular Resoluti
Page 116 and 117:
Chapter 11 Results 11.1 Towards hig
Page 118 and 119:
Figure 11.2: NAOS-CONICA image of t
Page 120 and 121:
on PUEO at CFHT. The IFS experts (A
Page 122 and 123:
Figure 11.5: Image of the binary st
Page 124 and 125:
Figure 11.7: PICNIC low noise infra
Page 126 and 127:
have taken responsibilities: A. Che
Page 128 and 129:
Figure 11.10: thermal modeling of W
Page 130 and 131:
Figure 12.1: All the GRIL projects
Page 132 and 133:
12.2 Optical interferometry As for
Page 134 and 135:
the VLTI. CHARA is equipped with an
Page 136 and 137:
• ANR Alterdetect, with IMEP : si
Page 138 and 139:
Mixed GRIL-other team profiles 1. A
Page 140 and 141:
Name Grade Comm. Project Berger Jea
Page 142 and 143:
• First fringes in the H band wit
Page 144 and 145:
144
Page 146 and 147:
146
Page 148 and 149:
Table 15.1: List of the permanent S
Page 150 and 151:
15.4 Transport phenomena in accreti
Page 152 and 153:
Figure 15.2: Spectral energy distri
Page 154 and 155:
states, combining a still powerful
Page 156 and 157:
Excitation of turbulence by Cosmic
Page 158 and 159:
Table 15.2: Former PhD students of
Page 160 and 161:
Chapter 16 Perspectives The distinc
Page 162 and 163:
Ray background. The second project
Page 164 and 165:
164
Page 166 and 167:
- Ceccarelli Cecilia (AT) - Delfoss
Page 168 and 169:
Among the various areas of expertis
Page 170 and 171:
-responsable du groupe ”logiciel
Page 172 and 173:
Chef de l’ Equipe ASTROMOL du LAO
Page 174 and 175:
jury de concours: 1 concours IR CNR
Page 176 and 177:
Chapter 20 Appendix 4: The Jean Mar
Page 178 and 179:
20.7 Production informatique ¡¢£
Page 180 and 181:
20.10 Formation des utilisateurs La
Page 182 and 183:
20.13 Darwin ¡¢£¤¥¦§¨©�
show all

Untitled - Laboratoire d'Astrophysique de l'Observatoire de Grenoble

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?