Criteria for Checking Archive Quality

1. The data are relatively static over a timescale of several years.

   Note, however, that some special data sets, like the asteroid identification list, have new information added to them on a regular basis. The existing data at any given point, however, are static (i.e., asteroids do not, generally speaking, change names, although new designations may be added).

    

2. The data are not readily derived from some other source.

   A data set of orbital elements for asteroids might be archival, for example, but ephemeris tables would not, since they are easily created when the need arises.

    

3. The data are scientifically significant.

   Shortcomings in documentation or hardware problems discovered after the observations were recorded, for example, may render some data sets (or parts of data sets) meaningless. Or, a later data set may supersede the one being reviewed, in which case an attempt is usually made to acquire the superseding data set.

Questions regarding archival quality are best raised and discussed during the peer review meeting.

Back to What We Need from Reviewers

Back to Help for Data Reviewers