Spectra DM for theoretical spectra?

[Miguel Cerviño]

Hi :)
>
>

> Moreover, the simulation code itself is explicitly described in the  
> model
> itself.


I mostly agree with Gerard, althought, again, the problem is what  
SimDB is used for:
If it used as a Data Model (and just for a Data model)
It would be possible collapse all the parameter space in a "flat  
structure",
although I think that is by far much more powerful to allow recursive  
(embebed)
DM (phisical models are made by combine small different building blocks)


> I don't think this is very difficult?

May be not dificult, but tedious. The other question, it is operative?
(example, the parameter list presented in Trieste for PRD simulations  
was very very large because
several structures should be collapsed in flat description. Again, if  
the
datamodel itself allow to include (and resolve) references to  
different datamodels
lots of things simplified in the description.


> It may be possible for a selected sub discipline to define an  
> explicit set
> of parameters for which "nothing
> can be done without them". Possbily stellar atmospheres, evolution.  
> These
> were actually singled out in last year's EuroVO DCA theory workshop  
> and it
> was suggested that they get together and try to define this kind of  
> explicit
> models.
> There was interest amongst participating scientists to contribute to  
> such an
> effort. I can give names and email addresses if this is of interest.
>
> But note that this group is not defined because they produce synthetic
> spectra.
> But because they use similar types of models (or SimDB:Protocols in
> SimDB-speak).


:) not exactlly. I remember people tin this group talkign about  
Atmosphere models, astrosismology, Single stellar populations models,  
galaxy models, or the color obtained in Milenum simulations, all have  
spectra as output in comun,  and most of them kuruczc models at the  
very basic input. But programs, algorimths, descriptions etc (i.e.
SimDB:Protocols) are quite diferent.

By the way, althought a different issue, I had contacted with some of  
people working on it. It is very confuse
to them to include their models in the VO: I am not able to say how  
describe their models (i.e. the DM)
and even worst, nobody will access their models, since there is almost  
no application that even make use of TSAP (that is an standard!). But  
this is another issue....


> For example people producing galaxy spectra will have a different  
> opinion
> about what input parametesr they can not do without.

(I sended an email before about)

cheers :)

m
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Nunca se debe intentar contentar a
quienes nunca se van a dar por contentos"

                        Javier Marias

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/theory/attachments/20090603/0c8b9a84/attachment-0003.html>