Listed below are the liens/RIDs that were found at the PDS/PSA February 2016 review of the Prelanding thru Escort 1 phases of the Rosetta mission. Even though this particular data set may have not participated in the review, it uses the same pipeline and so the liens likely apply here as well. Please take note that some issues may be resolved, while others are not. If any other issues are discovered please let the PDS-SBN know. It is expected that a fully lien resolved version will be produced during post mission ops and archived with an incremented data set version number. 1)Reference ID (RID): RO-AR-RID-MIRO-101-BJB Dataset: All Location: aareadme.txt files do not always give the proper organization of the data/ directory. Title: Directory structure Description: "The aareadme.txt files don't show all of the directories in the data/ directory. For instance, in ro-c-miro-3-esc1-67p-v1.0 there is a geometry/ directory under data/ but no mention of that in aareadme.txt. " Proposed solution by reviewer: Make aareadme.txt properly reflect the directories that are present. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Minor - not discussed 2)Reference ID (RID): RO-AR-RID-MIRO-102-BJB Dataset:All Location: Level 3 data files Title: Calibration documentation Description: "The calibration is not sufficiently described to be able to reproduce Level 3 data from Level 2. As an example, given the documentation in the user manual, I think that given a number of source counts D, the antenna temperature of the source is: / 1 D - Dc / 1 1 \\ TAs = | --------------- + ------- | --------------- - --------------- || \exp(hv/kTc) - 1 Dw - Dc \exp(hv/kTw) - 1 exp(hv/kTc) - 1// (or the equivalent with Dw as the primary measurement), given warm and cold load counts Dw and Dc, and warm and cold load temperatures Tw and Tc. But there are some caveats given about when to use which load, when the sky is used as a load, and there are two temperatures for each load in the housekeeping data and it’s not specified which is used. And, are the values for Dw and Dc interpolated? Nearest neighbor? " Proposed solution by reviewer: Document the calibration properly. Chapter 9 of the User Manual is a great start, it just seems like the effort to complete that documentation just sort of withered on the vine (it is stated that it is meant to "grow rapidly in later versions" yet it hasn't changed in three years). Fleshing that out to include substantive discussions of each of the bulleted items at the beginning of the chapter would be a good start. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 3)Reference ID (RID): RO-AR-RID-MIRO-103-BJB Dataset:Continuum Location: data files Title: Artifacts Description: There are a lot of artifacts still remaining in the Level 3 data. Their statement is that the calibration should be good to 10%, but some of the jumps in the continuum data, and the baseline offsets/ripples in the spectroscopic data, are larger than that. Proposed solution by reviewer: Unclear, though a file in the documents/ or catalog/ directory giving a short synopsis of each of the datasets would really help with this. Much of it is due to simply not knowing what is going on during the time of each of the datasets. Note that this would be different than the catalog/...log... files, which contain some detail, but not a good overall view for each dataset. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Team knows the issues and the new calibration routine corrects them.Agree 4)Reference ID (RID): RO-AR-RID-MIRO-104-BJB Dataset: Continuum, PRL, Level 2 & 3 Location: data files Title: Data missing Description: The continuum data published in Chroukon et al. 2015 seems to be missing in both the Level 2 and Level 3 PRL datasets. There should be a miro_3_mm_20142930000.dat file in the ro-c-miro-3-prl-67p-v1.0/data/continuum directory (and similar for _submm_ and for Level 2 for both) files covering the timerange 2014-10-23 as published, but they are simply not there. There is a corresponding spectroscopic data file, just no continuum files. Proposed solution by reviewer: These data should be included. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Team is investigating why a week of data was not collected into the delivery Agree 5)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_101_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Discrepancy between documentation and data set content Description: Contrary to what is written p. 15 of RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF, the document MIRO_CTS_FREQUENCY_CALIBRATION_V0 (or MIRO_CTS_FREQUENCY_CALIBRATION as written p. 28) is not included in the DOCUMENT directories. Proposed solution by reviewer: Add the missing file on the frequency calibration Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Not discussed 6)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_102_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DATA AND DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF Title: Discrepancy between documentation and data set content Description: Contrary to what is written p. 19 of RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF, the datetime in the data naming is not in the form yyyydddhhmmss. Example: MIRO_2_MM_20143510000.DAT Proposed solution by reviewer: Change the data naming or the description of it in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 7)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_103_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Missing GEOMETRY description in the EAICD Description: The GEOMETRY directory is not described in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF. Proposed solution by reviewer: Describe the GEOMETRY directory in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: To be added in the documentation. Why in the PRL: first added in the science data that were in the ESC1. Data is embedded in the PRL data. 8)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_104_AL Dataset: RO-C-MIRO-3-PRL-67P-V1.0 Location: DATA Title: No GEOMETRY in PRL Description: It is not clear why there is no GEOMETRY directory (and data) in RO-C-MIRO-3-PRL-67P-V1.0/DATA. Proposed solution by reviewer: Explain in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF or add it in RO-C-MIRO-3-PRL-67P-V1.0/DATA if omitted. If omitted, also add the label description in RO-C-MIRO-3-PRL-67P-V1.0/LABEL. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 9)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_105_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Incorrect description of data Description: "Contrary to what is written p. 28: - For Level-3-CTS, the header contains 20 items, not 19. - For Level-3-CONT, the header contains 14 items, not 13. - For Level-2-CTS, the header contains 11 items, not 10 - For Level-2-CONT, the header contains 13 items, not 12." Proposed solution by reviewer: Correct in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 10)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_106_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Discrepancy between documentation and data set content Description: Contrary to what is written p. 27 of RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF, there is no sample record printout generated by the program MIRO_READ_DATA in the DOCUMENT directories. Proposed solution by reviewer: Add or correct in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 11)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_107_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Discrepancy between documentation and data set content Description: Contrary to what is written p. 28, there is no FILE_RECORDS keyword in the label. Proposed solution by reviewer: Correct in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 12)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_108_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Discrepancy between documentation and data set content Description: "Contrary to what is written p. 28, the cal/No cal flag (CAL or CALMODE keywords) is not column 6 in CTS-level 3 (it is column 7) or CONT-Level 3 (it is column 12). Likewise, the mirror position flag (MIRPOS keyword) is not column 2 in CTS-level 3 (it is column 3) or CONT-Level 3 (it is column 6)." Proposed solution by reviewer: Correct in RO_MIR_IF_0001.PDF Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 13)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_109_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Documentation clarification Description: These sentences (p. 28) are not clear at all: “However, when the Cal/No-cal flag is 1, then the data are difference spectra between the two LO states, so will be close to zero on average. Only the Cal=1 data (and the Sky data for Cal=0) are the observational data for the target body. » Proposed solution by reviewer: Please, clarify Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 14)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_110_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Typos Description: There is a number of typos (e.g., p. 22: ‘directoriy’, ‘descirption’; p. 26 ‘ia’ instead of ‘is’). Proposed solution by reviewer: Correct typos Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 15)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_111_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Invalid link Description: The link given p. 63 is not valid (http://pdssbn.astro.umd.edu/nodehtml/software.shtml) Proposed solution by reviewer: Replace by this link: http://pds-smallbodies.astro.umd.edu/tools/tools_readPDS.shtml Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 16)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_112_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Clarification Description: Page 11 and Table 2.2: it is not clear if the center-band in the MM is 188 GHz (p. 11) or 190 MHz (Table 2.2). Proposed solution by reviewer: I understand that the receiver us a double side band (188.75 GHz and 191.25 GH). For sake of clarity and simplicity, 188 GHz p. 11 should be replaced by 190 MHz. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 17)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_113_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DOCUMENT/RO_MIR_IF_001.PDF Title: Clarification Description: Page 11 and Table 2.2: it is not clear if the bandwidths in the MM is 1 GHz (p. 11) or 11 GHz (Table 2.2). Proposed solution by reviewer: Clarify Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 18)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_114_AL Dataset: ALL Location: - Title: - Description: "The data are provided within science telemetry packet of 5-7 days. It is not clear why there is time gap between these packets Example: 'MIRO_3_SUBMM_20143440000.LBL : START:2014-12-10T05:52:23 END:2014-12-15T10:30:19 is followed by 'MIRO_3_SUBMM_20143510000.LBL' : START:2014-12-17T05:52:15 END:2014-12-23T23:59:55" Proposed solution by reviewer: Clarify and/or add the missing data, if any Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Gaps: 1) not in the dds 2) under investigation, a mistery 19)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_115_AL Dataset: RO-C-MIRO-3-PRL-67P-V1.0 Location: DATA/CONTINUUM Title: Missing data Description: At least one science telemetry packet is missing. The continuum data of October 23-24, 2014, shown in Fig. 2 of Choukroun et al. (A&A, 2015) are not provided in RO-C-MIRO-3-PRL-67P-V1.0/DATA/CONTINUUM/ Proposed solution by reviewer: Add missing data Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 20)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_116_AL Dataset: L3 data Location: in L3 DATA directories (CONTINUUM and CTS) Title: - Description: "The provided antenna temperatures (column 14 of the data file) - when no calibration is in progress - are sometimes negative, sometimes very high (>1000 K !). This is not physical. Example: Ex: MIRO_3_MM_20143230000.LBL Min Ta: -12.4 K, Max Ta: 12760.7 K see Pictures" Proposed solution by reviewer: Clarify why unphysical antenna temperatures are given. The invalid data (there are clearly spikes within the dataset, see figure above) should be set to a fixed value (e.g., 9999). Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Calibration is crude. Cal target every 30m gives many interpretations. Noise in the calibration process. Instability in the instr that affects the calibration. Improved calibration that average noise. Data to be delivered with new calibration. Agree to include some documentation. 21)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_117_AL Dataset: L3 data Location: in L3 DATA directories (CONTINUUM and CTS) Title: - Description: The antenna temperatures could be better absolutely calibrated. The zero level, in particular, could be removed using the data acquired on the empty sky (i.e., the CMB that is known to be at 1.5*10-3 K in the SUBMM or 0.3 K in the MM). Proposed solution by reviewer: Remove the zero baseline to the provided antenna temperatures and/or add a new object to the data that flags if MIRO is looking at the empty sky or not; this will help PSA/PDS users to absolutely calibrate the data on their own. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: Depend on observing mode, not done on all product. 22)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_118_AL Dataset: - Location: - Title: - Description: The data are calibrated observing two blackbody loads, a warm one and a cold one, of known temperature. I could not find the expected values of the load temperatures in the provided documents and it seems that they vary between the MM and SUBMM bands by about 5 K. Proposed solution by reviewer: Please, clarify. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: calibrations are not temperture controlled. MM and SUBMM shows different temperature: submm needs to be corrected. SKY varies so much: empty sky and nucleus. Will be exlpained better in documentation 23)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_119_AL Dataset: ALL Location: DATA Title: antenna temperature variation Description: " It is not clear to me why the antenna temperatures provided when the mirror position is « sky » vary so much Example : MIRO_3_MM_20143230000.DAT In “sky” position: Ta min: 79 K, Ta max: 2753 K " Proposed solution by reviewer: Please clarify what is meant by “sky” and why its temperature varies so much. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 24)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_120_AL Dataset: L3 data Location: All CTS L3 DATA Title: - Description: The spectral data (column 20) are provided as a function of the channel number. In its section 9.4.3, the User Manual gives an equation to convert the channel number into input CTS intermediate frequency (called “IF frequency” which is somewhat redundant btw). I tested this equation with a few dataset but it gives IF values in the range 1340-1440 MHz instead of the expected range of 1260-1440 MHz (see example below). If true, we are missing the band lines of H2O, H2O(17), Me1103 and H2O(18). Am I missing something? see picture Proposed solution by reviewer: Please clarify and/or correct the equation of section 9.4.3 if needed. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: may have missed one thing: frequency smoothing during the referenced observations. The US reviewer checked and found good frequency range. The team agree to check. 25)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_121_AL Dataset: L3 data Location: All CTS L3 DATA Title: - Description: It is not clear to me and not explained in the User Manual how the antenna temperatures provided as spectral data (column 20) can be converted into abundances or column densities (especially with negative values, cf. RO-AR-RID-MIRO-116-ALG). Proposed solution by reviewer: Please clarify. Will that be delivered in the next MIRO archive dataset? Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: As the team develop high level products they wil provide this information. 26)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_122_AL Dataset: ALL Location: GEOMETRY Title: Missing more direct geometry information Description: The information provided in the GEOMETRY data cannot be used to easily determine whether or not the MIRO footprint is on the target 67P and, if the case, at which location on the target (effective latitudes and longitudes of the intercept ellipse). Of course, this can be inferred from the measurement time using SPICE and the shape model of 67P but it will be useful to have more directly this information. Proposed solution by reviewer: Will this information be provided in the next MIRO archive delivery? Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: The team plan to improve the geometry files. 27)Reference ID (RID): RO_AR-RID_MIRO_123_AL Dataset: L3 data Location: All CTS L3 DATA Title: Zero values of geometry keywords Description: The objects with the keyword RA, DEC and VEL in the CTS L3 dataset seem to be always equal to zero. Proposed solution by reviewer: Explain and/or correct. Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 28)Reference ID (RID): RO-AR-RID-MIRO-101-MB Dataset: ALL Location: ALL Title: Technical PSA RIDs Description: Please correct all PSA RIDs. Word Document provided to the team Proposed solution by reviewer: - Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 29)Reference ID (RID): RO-AR-RID-MIRO-101-SBN Dataset: ALL Location: ALL Title: Techincal PDS RIDS Description: Please correct all PDS RIDs. Proposed solution by reviewer: - Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 30)Reference ID (RID): ro-c-miro-101-RE Dataset: .ro-c-miro-3-prl-67p-v1.0 Location: document/ro_mir_if_0001.pdf Title: MIRO PDF Description: " - p.23, section 3.4.3.5: checksum.* isn't listed, which is ok, but index/ has only index.*, but do not have the rest such as specindx.* and contindx.*, etc — probably don’t matter - want to make sure the actual directory is not missing anything important - p.25 INSTRUMENT_HOST_NAME = ""ROSETTA ORBITER"" should be ""ROSETTA-ORBITER"" - p.30+, Appendix 2: the values to FORMAT, especially for floats, need """"" Proposed solution by reviewer: see description Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: - 31)Reference ID (RID): ro-c-miro-102-RE Dataset: .ro-c-miro-3-prl-67p-v1.0 Location: - Title: index/indxinfo.txt Description: lines end in CRCRLF instead of CRLF Proposed solution by reviewer: remove extra CR Review board discussion outcome and Instrument team response: -