Open Problems in Modern Astrophysics

Course manual 2019/2020

Course content

A different cutting-edge astrophysical topic will be discussed each week, presented by a lecturer who is an expert in that research field. At the start of each week the lecturer will introduce a topic, giving sufficient background to enable students to read a recent breakthrough research paper in the field. Students will be asked to read the paper, in preparation for an in-depth class discussion in the second session of the week. Each week a small group of nominated students will be asked to give a presentation on the key points of the paper.  The rest of the class will participate in asking questions and further discussion. After the presentation and in-class discussion, the presenting students will write a short report on the main points of the paper.  Students should expect to present a paper twice during the course.

In between the Monday and Friday, the presenter groups need to prepare for the discussion meeting. The following schedule should be used:
1. By Thursday of the previous week: the lecturer/TA communicates details of the paper to be discussed and possible background materials.
2. Before the Monday: all students in the class read the paper and the presenter group prepare to meet with the lecturer.
3. Monday lecture: the lecturer presents and discusses the background for the paper with all students.
4. No later than Thursday 17h: the presenter groups meet and flesh out a plan for the content of the Friday presentations. They should also meet with the lecturer to discuss this, in time to still change the plans in response to lecturer input.
5. Friday: the presenter groups give a 15 minute presentation on the paper in their respective discussion sessions. Following this, the group discussion may continue in an ad hoc way. Throughout the whole discussion, active participation is encouraged and expected from the whole class, and all class members are to raise questions. The lecturer and TA will sit in and help guide the discussion if necessary.
6. Between the Friday of the presentation and the Friday of the following week (at 17h): the presenter groups prepare and submit to the lecturer and TA via email a brief referee report for the paper (3 pages).

Deadlines for preparation and submission should be taken very seriously. They can be exceeded only in emergencies and, even then, only with prior notification of the lecturer and agreement on a new deadline.

Study materials

Other

• Research papers.

Objectives

• Introduce and review open problems at the forefront of modern astrophysics, spanning the full range of research interests at API;
• Search and review the astrophysical literature
• Present, discuss and review research papers.

Teaching methods

• Lecture
• Seminar

Learning activities

Attendance

Requirements concerning attendance (OER-B).

Additional requirements for this course:

All students must participate in all classes – part of the grade will be based on attendance; absences must be reported to the TA in advance and are allowed only for emergency matters. The course grade will be determined by the grades for the presentations and reports a student contributes to (2/3 of the weight) and by the quality of their general participation in the discussion, i.e. not as part of the presenter groups (1/3 of the weight).

Assessment

Assignments

The referee report
This is in the style of a letter to the editor. The referee report written by the presenting groups should typically be 3 pages long, and not more than 1500 words in total (figures aren't necessary but may be included if the students find them useful to convey something important). The report gives a brief overview of the paper but mainly summarizes the answers to the questions asked during the presentation. The presenter groups should write these reports independently! When writing the report, the students could consider the following simple layout (this is not set in stone though: students should feel free to use a different format if they feel it works better):

Introduction: (<0.5 page): give a brief overview of the topic paper and put it into context, i.e. why are the results presented in the paper important/interesting?
Discussion: This is in a paper referee report style. Content could include (but not exclusive to):
• Key open questions from the paper with suggestions how these could be pursued
• Are the explanations easy to understand and is the paper well written?
• Are the results/interpretation/model plausible? Why / why not?
• Is there anything additional that you would like to see in the paper?
• Are results important or novel? Do they have a wider significance?
Conclusion: The presenter groups should finish the report with a paragraph giving their own view about the paper. Being critical is fine (this is part of the process of developing their own scientific opinion) and it's also fine to express uncertainty (or be wrong!), the main thing here is to give the reasoning behind their opinion. Should the paper be accepted for publication?

Fraud and plagiarism

The 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' applies to this course. This will be monitored carefully. Upon suspicion of fraud or plagiarism the Examinations Board of the programme will be informed. For the 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' see: www.student.uva.nl

Course structure

Timetable

The schedule for this course is published on DataNose.

Contact information

Coordinator

• dr. J.L. Birkby