JuanCastillo29/space-mission-intelligence-data huggingface dataset:
0.022
No1 relevance =29.87% No2 relevance =24.52% No3 relevance =23.23% No4 relevance =12.67% No5 relevance =9.72%
0.02
0.018
0.016
0.014
Intensity
0.012
0.01
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
2675 2680 2685 2690 2695 Wavenumber (cm-1)
for

[Figure: Figure 8: Results of the psNMF algorithm for the diffraction order 119 for NS = 5. The sources 1, 3 and 5 are identified to CO2 (shift of 0.01 for clarity). The source 2 is identified to the background level (continuum misestimation). The source 4 is identified to H2O. No source seems to be related to CH4.]

[Figure: Figure 8: Results of the psNMF algorithm for the diffraction order 119 for NS = 5. The sources 1, 3 and 5 are identified to CO2 (shift of 0.01 for clarity). The source 2 is identified to the background level (continuum misestimation). The source 4 is identified to H2O. No source seems to be related to CH4.]
for

[Figure: Figure 9: Results of the psNMF algorithm for the diffraction order 134 for NS = 5. The source 1 is identified to the background level (continuum misestimation), the sources 3, 4 and 5 are identified to H2O. The sources 2 present unmodeled lines that are not present in the spectroscopic database. These lines has been first detected in the ACS instrument data and attributed to CO2 magnetic dipole transition (Trokhimovskiy et al., 2020). No source seems to be related to CH4.]

[Figure: Figure 9: Results of the psNMF algorithm for the diffraction order 134 for NS = 5. The source 1 is identified to the background level (continuum misestimation), the sources 3, 4 and 5 are identified to H2O. The sources 2 present unmodeled lines that are not present in the spectroscopic database. These lines has been first detected in the ACS instrument data and attributed to CO2 magnetic dipole transition (Trokhimovskiy et al., 2020). No source seems to be related to CH4.]
INPOP08, the AU is fitted and the mass of the Sun fixed to the DE405 one. In the case of INPOP08b, the AU is fixed to be equal to AUIERS03, and a new estimation of the mass of the Sun is deduced as described in section 5.2.
AU
GM⊙
km
km3.s−2
Fitted DE405 INPOP08 149597870.69922 132712440039.87900
IERS03 Deduced INPOP08b 149597870.69100 132712440039.878750]

[Figure: Fig. 5. Estimations of Ceres, Pallas and Vesta masses found in the literature. The GMs (in unit of 10−10 solar mass y-axis) are plotted by years of publications (xaxis). The dark red circles represent the GMs estimated in using close-encounters as described by Baer and Chesley (2008). The crosses represent GMs fitted with the planetary ephemerides. The upper triangles represent masses deduced from radar observations as described by Michalak (2000). The last crosses corresponding to 2009 give values obtained by INPOP08.]
A. Fienga1,2, J. Laskar1, T. Morley3, H. Manche1, P. Kuchynka1, C. Le Poncin-Lafitte4, F. Budnik3, M. Gastineau1, and L. Somenzi1,2
1 Astronomie et Syst`emes Dynamiques, IMCCE-CNRS UMR8028, 77 Av. Denfert-Rochereau, 75014 Paris, France 2 Observatoire de Besan¸con, CNRS UMR6213, 41bis Av. de l’Observatoire, 25000 Besan¸con, France 3 ESOC, Robert-Bosch-Str. 5, Darmstadt, D-64293 Germany 4 SYRTE, CNRS UMR8630, Observatoire de Paris, 77 Av. Denfert-Rochereau, 75014 Paris, France November 6, 2018 Abstract. The latest version of the planetary ephemerides developed at the Paris Observatory and at the Besan¸con Observatory is presented here. INPOP08 is a 4-dimension ephemeris since it provides to users positions and velocities of planets and the relation between TT and TDB. Investigations leading to improve the modeling of asteroids are described as well as the new sets of observations used for the fit of INPOP08. New observations provided by the European Space Agency (ESA) deduced from the tracking of the Mars Express (MEX) and Venus Express (VEX) missions are presented as well as the normal point deduced from the Cassini mission. We show the huge impact brought by these observations in the fit of INPOP08, especially in terms of Venus, Saturn and Earth-Moon barycenter orbits.
Key words. celestial mechanics - ephemerides
right member of (10) does not depend on ∆T DB, the equation (10) is not strictly an ordinary differential equation.

In the computation of α, A enumerates all massive bodies of the Solar System, that is, the Sun, the planets, Pluto, the Moon and all the 303 asteroids.

In β (which is divided by c4, and so is less important than α), A and B enumerate all bodies except the 298 “small” asteroids.

For the acceleration term aA, all the interactions are taken into account, including newtonian interactions, relativistic corrections, figure and tide effects.

It was already needed for the equation of motion of the corresponding body, and no additional work is therefore necessary to compute it.

Because the (T T −T DB) value is unknown at J2000 (it depends on the ephemeris), the initial condition is set to zero.

The quantity integrated in the state vector (including positions and velocities vectors of bodies) is then ∆T DB + k where k is an offset determined later, just before building the Chebychev polynomials, by using the following condition: for the event 1977 January 1st 00h 00m 00s TAI at the geocenter, TDB julian day is T0 + T DB0 and ∆T DB = −T DB0.

At this point, the difference T T −T DB can be computed from any value of T DB.

But in the reduction process of observations and because they are dated in UTC time scale, the transformation T T −T DB as a function of T T (noted ∆T T ) is needed.

A similar differential equation as eq. (10) can be found for d(∆T T )/dT T (Klioner, 2007), but it is not necessary to integrate it.

From the relation (T T −T DB) = f(T DB) computed with INPOP, one can notice that (T T −T DB) = f(T T −(T T −T DB)). ∆T T is then solution of an implicit equation, which can be solved by iterations.

In fact, only one is necessary, discrepancies between T T and T DB being smaller than 2 milliseconds.

The formal differences between the present procedure and TE405 (Irwin & Fukushima, 1999) are small as illustrated in Fig. 1.

The linear drift is measured to 6.74 nanosecond per century (ns/cy).

This value is consistent with the IAU2006 resolution B3 (less than 1 nanosecond in INPOP061.

Three asteroids have predicted perturbation amplitudes well over 30m and are absent from the INPOP06 selection: 60 Echo (amplitude reaches 170m), 585 Bilkis and 516 Amherstia. We added these to the 300 already integrated in INPOP06 and thus there are in total 303 asteroids integrated individually in INPOP08. More details on the methodology used for obtaining the most probable list of the top 300 perturbing asteroids can be found in (Kuchynka et al. 2009).

[Figure: Fig. 1. Differences (in nanosecond) between TE405 (corrected from the 6.55 × 10−5 second offset) and the (TTTDB) integrated in INPOP08. X axis is Terrestrial Time, expressed in years from J2000.]
, i varying from 1 to 24635. The differences between the two integrations give the impact induced by the asteroid i. To built our list of asteroids, we have studied the impact not only on the Earth-Mars distances, but also the Earth-Venus and Earth-Mercury distances. We are thus able to compile the most probable list of the 300 most perturbing asteroids and compare it to the INPOP06 selection used
(Kuchynka et al. 2009).
1 the list of asteroids integrated individually in INPOP06 or DE405 is given in (Standish and Williams 2001)

The quantity of DSN range data and hence range residuals is far higher than the quantity of ESA range residuals due to the extraction of one ESA raw data point every 20 minutes whereas DSN range measurements of MEX are made at intervals of 3 minutes 27 seconds. The standard deviation of range residuals for individual passes gives a good indication of the random noise on the measurements. For ESA data, the average standard deviation of the (twoway) residuals is less than 1 m. For NASA/DSN data it is below 0.5 m. In terms of orbit geometry, the operational orbit is near polar and elliptic with an apoapsis altitude of a little over 10000 km and a periapsis altitude that has varied between 250 km and 340 km. The orbital period averaged 6.72 hours until late in 2007 when a series of five manoeuvres at periapsis increased the period to 6.84 hours. MEX is equipped with a fixed high-gain antenna (HGA) that must be pointed towards the Earth during tracking passes and tracking is done in X-band up- and downlink. The primary science data collection is around periapsis passage when the spacecraft HGA is not Earth-pointing. For orbit determination purposes, the information content within the Doppler data is highest around periapsis, so the orbit solution accuracy is adversely affected by the lack of such data. The orbit determination accuracy is also limited by other factors; most notably the imperfect calibration of perturbing velocity increments caused by thrusting, to off-load the accumulated angular momentum of the reaction wheels, and also the problems in accurately modeling small forces due to solar radiation pressure and the tiny but highly variable atmospheric drag at each periapsis passage. For much of the MEX operational mission, routine orbit determinations were made twice per week based on tracking data arcs of 5-7 days duration, corresponding to approximately 18-25 orbital revolutions, with a typical overlap of 2 days between successive arcs. Nowadays, orbit determination is made weekly using an arc of about 10 days duration and therefore with similar overlaps. The differences between the values of common range residuals computed from successive orbit determinations provide an indication of the effect of orbit determination errors on the accuracy of the residuals. Outside of periods of superior solar conjunction, these differences are almost always below 3 m. The range residuals that are retained are taken from the earlier of each overlapping solution.

[Figure: Fig. 2. Impact of the asteroid ring on the position of the SSB over 100-years integration.]
before and after the solar conjunction in range residuals.

To illustrate the impact of solar conjunction, peak in residuals is plotted in the case of VEX data on figure 3.

On figure 4, the gap in MEX data around October 2006 is induced by the solar conjunction.

Such solar conjunctions also occured during the MGS and MO missions and caused observation gaps such as about January 2000 and mid-2002.
5.

INPOP08 Fit For the fit of INPOP08, MEX and VEX observations provided by ESA and described previously were added to the INPOP06 data sets used for its adjustment.

See (Fienga et al. 2008) for a more detailed description of this data of 4 meters (1-sigma formal dispersion)

[Table: Table 1. Residuals obtained from INPOP06 and INPOP08
Planet Data Nbr INPOP06 INPOP08 [unit] 1σ 1σ Mercury
Direct radar
range [m] 462 894 842 Venus
Magellan
VLBI [mas] 18 2 2
Direct radar
range [m] 488 1386 1376
VEX
range [m] 15131 185.829 4.6 Mars
MGS/MO
range [m] 10410 5.954 1.57
MEX
range [m] 6006 13.56 2.07
Path
range [m] 90 7.63 12.46
Vkg
range [m] 1245 17.396 18.53
Mixed
VLBI [mas] 96 0.4 0.4 Jupiter
Galileo
VLBI [mas] 24 12 11
Optical
ra [arcsec] 5616 0.343 0.343
Optical
de [arcsec] 5534 0.332 0.338 Saturn
Optical
ra [arcsec] 5598 0.347 0.346
Optical
de [arcsec] 5573 0.312 0.311
Cassini
ra [mas] 31 5 4
Cassini
de [mas] 31 7 7
Cassini
range [m] 31 27324 22 Uranus
Optical
ra [arcsec] 3849 0.358 0.351
Optical
de [arcsec] 3835 0.366 0.361 Neptune
Optical
ra [arcsec] 3898 0.368 0.361
Optical
de [arcsec] 3879 0.360 0.358 Pluto
Optical
ra [arcsec] 1023 0.170 0.170
Optical
de [arcsec] 1023 0.171 0.171]

with a bias of 1.5 meters is obtained after the fit, which corresponds to the level of accuracy of the VEX observations. This is an improvement in the estimation of the Earth-Venus distance of about a factor 42 compared to the previous ephemeris, INPOP06, which was not fitted to VEX data. The large effect that one can see on figure 3 is actually induced by the propagation of the previous planetary ephemerides uncertainties on Earth and Venus orbits. Such ephemerides as INPOP06, but also DE405, were only fitted to direct radar observations on the Venus surface (see Standish 1998b; Fienga et al. 2008) and to the VLBI data deduced from the tracking of the Venus mission Magellan in 1994. The Venus data sets were suffering from a big lack of observations since 1994 and from low accuracy of the direct radar observations. The combination of both explains the spectacular improvement observed on Figure 3. One can also notice in table 1 that even if the new Venus INPOP08 orbit induces significant changes in the values of VEX residuals compared to INPOP06 ones, the residuals obtained by comparison between this new orbit and the observations used previously for the INPOP06 fit are quite similar to those obtained with INPOP06. This means that the VEX data are consistent with the old ones and their addition in the fit does not degrade the ephemerides on a large time interval.
Using MEX tracking data and the INPOP06 Mars data
set, we fitted the new asteroid ring modeling as well as the
selection of asteroids described in section 3. Compared to
INPOP06, the ring model was modified to a non-static
ring, 3 more asteroids were included in the list of main
perturbers and more asteroids have their masses fitted in-
dividually in using a priori sigmas (Moyer 1971) of about
30% constraints to their initial values. The choice of the
fitted asteroid masses was done in a way to have only pos-
itive masses even without the constraints. In INPOP08,
34 asteroids have their masses fitted individually against
5 in INPOP06.
As one can see in table 1 and figure 4, this new ap-
proach and the input of information brought by the MEX
data improve the ephemerides by reducing significantly
the residuals. This improvement can be noticed with the
new MEX data set which was not included in the pre-
vious solution, but also with the MGS/MO data set in-
cluded both in INPOP08 and INPOP06 adjustments. For
the MGS/MO residuals we have an improvement of the
results of a factor 4.
Furthermore, as one can see on Figure 4 during the
overlap period of the mission (from 2005.5 to 2006), the
connection between MGS/MO and MEX data is done
properly by INPOP08 with a bias of about 3.5 meters
between MGS/MO and MEX. This bias is in the error es-
timations presented in section 4 and the calibration done

set. Observations deduced from the tracking of the Cassini spacecraft processed and provided by JPL (Folkner et al. 2008) were also added to the set of observations. Global adjustments of planet initial conditions, Earth-Moon mass ratios, Astronomical Unit, Sun oblateness J2 as well as 34 asteroid masses were fitted to obtain INPOP08. Obtained values are presented in table 2 and table 3 as well as comparable values found in the literature. The fit procedures are discussed in the following sections.
alternative version of INPOP08 was built. This version is based of the INPOP08 ephemeris presented in the previous section. However, instead of providing a value of AU fitted to observations, the AU is fixed to the (IERS 2003) value and the change is absorbed by the multiplication of all the initial conditions of planets and asteroids as well as all the masses including the GM of the sun by a factor equivalent to AUfitted over AUIERS03. A new value for the GM of the Sun is then deduced and preOften, users are asking for the accuracy of planet ephemerides.

[Table: Table 2. Physical parameters fitted in INPOP08. Other values deduced from planetary ephemerides are presented for comparison. EPM08 stands for (Pitjeva 2008). The uncertainties are given at 5-sigma for the GMs and 1 formal sigma for others. n/a stands for non-avalaible and NE as non-estimated. For AU, the presented values are the differences in meters between the fitted values and the AU value of the IERS conventions 2003, AUIERS03 = 149597870.691 km.
Unit DE414 DE421 EPM 2008 INPOP06 INPOP08
Mass of Ceres 10−10M� 4.699 ± 0.028 4.685 4.712 ± 0.006 4.756 ± 0.020 4.658 ± 0.045
Mass of Vesta 10−10M� 1.358 ± 0.016 1.328 1.344 ± 0.003 1.348 ± 0.015 1.392 ± 0.015
Mass of Pallas 10−10M� 1.026 ± 0.028 1.010 1.027 ± 0.007 1.025 ± 0.005 1.076 ± 0.010
Mass of Juno 10−10M� 0.149 ± 0.015 0.116 n/a NE 0.075 ± 0.015
Mass of Iris 10−10M� 0.060 ± 0.010 0.060 n/a 0.058 ± 0.005 0.050 ± 0.010
Mass of Bamberga 10−10M� 0.047 ± 0.007 0.048 n/a 0.046 ± 0.003 0.056 ± 0.004
Mass of Ring 10−10M� 0.30 NE n/a 0.34 ± 0.1 1.0 ± 0.3
Distance of Ring UA 2.8 NE n/a 2.8 3.14 Density of the C class 1.62 ± 0.07 1.09 n/a 1.56 ± 0.02 1.54 ± 0.07 Density of the S class 2.08 ± 0.19 3.45 n/a 2.18 ± 0.04 1.94 ± 0.14 Density of the M class 4.32 ± 0.37 4.22 n/a 4.26 ± 0.12 4.98 ± 0.50 Sun J2
10−7
2.34 ± 0.49 2.0 n/a 2.46 ± 0.40 1.82 ± 0.47 EMRAT 81.300568 81.300569 81.3005690 ± 0.0000001 NE 81.300540 ± 0.00005
AU-AUIERS03
m 9.8 ± 0.15 8.6 ± 0.15 4.4 ± 0.10 NE 8.22 ± 0.11]

[Table: Table 4. AU and GM of the sun values used for the construction of INPOP08 and INPOP08b. In the case of INPOP08, the AU is fitted and the mass of the Sun fixed to the DE405 one. In the case of INPOP08b, the AU is fixed to be equal to AUIERS03, and a new estimation of the mass of the Sun is deduced as described in section 5.2.
AU
GM⊙
km
km3.s−2
Fitted DE405 INPOP08 149597870.69922 132712440039.87900
IERS03 Deduced INPOP08b 149597870.69100 132712440039.878750]
There are two methods to answer. The first
one is to compare the ephemerides to observed positions
not used in the fit, and preferably to observations situated
out of the time interval of observations used for the adjust-
ment. Such results give information to the users who di-
rectly deal with observations of planets or satellites: what
accuracy in millarcseconds can we predict the position of
such a planet in right ascension and declination, what ac-
curacy in meters obtained for the estimation of Earth-
Mars distances etc... . In section 6.1, we present such an
extrapolation of INPOP08 compared to observations not
used in the fit and usually outside the fit interval.

sented on Table 4. This version of INPOP08 is equivalent to the previous one but allows the next versions of planetary ephemerides to fit directly the GM of the sun instead of the AU.

[Table: Table 3.

Asteroid GMs fitted in INPOP08.

Other values deduced from planetary ephemerides are presented for comparison.

Reference [1] stands for (Baer and Chelsey, 2008). [2] are values estimated in DE414 but not published with errorbars.

They are directly extracted from the DE414 header. [3] stands for (Baer et al. 2008) and [4] for DE421 values as published by (Folkner et al. 2008).

The given uncertainties are formal accuracy given at 1-sigma.

Column 4 and 5 are dedicated to physical characteristics of the objects: in column 4 are given radius in kilometers, and spectral type in column 5.

In column 6, are given the densities obtained in using the given radius and the estimated masses given in column 2.

Density errorbars are estimated with the given mass 1-sigma uncertainties and accuracies on radius when provided by the PDS website.

The last column gives the maximum impact of each asteroid on the Earth-Mars distances over the 1998 to 2008 intervalle of time.
The given uncertainties are formal accuracy given at 1-sigma.

Column 4 and 5 are dedicated to physical characteristics of the objects: in column 4 are given radius in kilometers, and spectral type in column 5.

In column 6, are given the densities obtained in using the given radius and the estimated masses given in column 2.

Density errorbars are estimated with the given mass 1-sigma uncertainties and accuracies on radius when provided by the PDS website.

The last column gives the maximum impact of each asteroid on the Earth-Mars distances over the 1998 to 2008 intervalle of time.

Asteroid INPOP08 Others r type ρ 10−11M� 10−11M� km
g.cm−3
[m]
16 Psyche 1.596 ± 0.032 1.29 ± 0.17 [1] 126.6 ± 2.0 M 3.7 ± 0.1 138 1.688 [4] 29 Amphitrite 0.491 ± 0.09 1.00 ± 0.35 [1] 106.1 ± 3.4 S 1.9 ± 0.4 118 0.684 [4] 14 Irene 0.071 ± 0.01 0.2623 [2] 76.0 ± 8.0 S 0.8 ± 0.3 69 0.413 ± 0.073 [3] 0.263 [4] 704 Interamnia 1.623 ± 0.01 3.58 ± 0.42 [1] 158.3 ± 2.0 C 1.9 ± 0.1 65 1.862 [4] 532 Herculina 0.546 ± 0.01 0.667 [2] 111.2 ± 2.0 S 1.9 ± 0.1 63 0.669[4] 6 Hebe 0.016 ± 0.011 0.759 ± 0.142 [1] 92.5 ± 1.5 S 0.1 ± 0.1 63 0.255 [2] 0.457 [4] 52 Europa 1.724 ± 0.100 0.976 ± 0.22 [1] 151.25 ± 2.7 C 2.4 ± 0.2 52 1.023 [4] 9 Metis 0.115 ± 0.100 1.03 ± 0.24 [1] 95.0 ± 9.5 S 0.6 ± 0.5 49 0.600 [2] 0.428 [4] 19 Fortuna 0.202 ± 0.02 0.541 ± 0.008 [1] 101.7 C 0.9 ± 0.1 48 0.350 [4] 128 Nemesis 0.169 ± 0.033 94.1 ± 2.0 C 1.0 ± 0.2 42 18 Melpomene 0.091 ± 0.02 0.151 ± 0.051 [3] 70.3 ± 1.5 S 1.2 ± 0.3 40 0.201 [4] 15 Eunomia 2.230 ± 0.018 1.68 ± 0.08 [1] 127.7 ± 7.0 S 5.0 ± 0.7 37 1.239 [4] 88 Thisbe 0.863 ± 0.026 0.57 ± 0.18 [1] 116.0 ± C 2.6 ± 0.1 36 409 Aspasia 0.105 ± 0.003 0.163 [4] 80.8 ± 4.0 C 0.9 ± 0.1 29 216 Kleopatra 0.353 ± 0.012 0.255 [2] 67.5 ± M 5.3 ± 0.2 27 0.226 [4] 21 Lutetia 0.1034 ± 0.03 0.129 ± 0.012 [3] 47.9 ± 4.1 M 4.4 ± 1.3 24 0.105 [4] 31 Euphrosyne 2.99 ± 0.68 1.54 [2] 127.95 ± 5.5 C 6.7 ± 1.6 23 0.313 ± 0.059 [3] 0.860 [4] 23 Thalia 0.003 ± 0.001 53.8 ± 2.2 S 1.06 ± 0.08 23 0.097 [4] 354 Eleonora 0.488 ± 0.035 0.246 [2] 77.6 ± 4.2 S 4.9 ± 0.4 22 0.247 [4] 192 Nausikaa 0.137 ± 0.041 0.081 [4
.313 ± 0.059 [3] 0.860 [4] 23 Thalia 0.003 ± 0.001 53.8 ± 2.2 S 1.06 ± 0.08 23 0.097 [4] 354 Eleonora 0.488 ± 0.035 0.246 [2] 77.6 ± 4.2 S 4.9 ± 0.4 22 0.247 [4] 192 Nausikaa 0.137 ± 0.041 0.081 [4

] 51.6 ± 1.0 S 4.6 ± 1.4 22 747 Winchester 0.0004 ± 0.0002 0.148[4] 85.9 ± 1.5 C 3e-3 ± 1e-3 22 129 Antigone 0.717 ± 0.014 104.58 ± M 3.0 ± 0.1 21 41 Daphne 0.527 ± 0.05 0.467 [2] 87.00 ± 6.0 C 3.8 ± 0.7 20 0.398[4] 173 Ino 0.366 ± 0.030 77.0 ± 1.6 C 3.8 ± 0.3 20 89 Julia 0.359 ± 0.014 75.8 ± 1.5 C 4.0 ± 0.4 15 8 Flora 0.535 ± 0.005 0.178 [2] 67.9 ± 1.0 S 8.1 ± 0.5 14 0.426 ± 0.045 [3] 0.178 [4] 12 Victoria 0.117 ± 0.003 56.4 ± 1.5 S 3.1 ± 0.2 13 139 Juewa 0.359 ± 0.010 0.142[4] 78.3 ± 1.5 C 3.6 ± 0.10 10]

[Figure: Fig. 6. Residuals obtained by comparisons between INPOP08 and MEX tracking data (left hand side) and VEX (right hand side) observations. The small dark points represent residuals of observations which were used in the fit of INPOP08 and the big dark points represent residuals of observations not used in the fit. The large slope of MEX residuals may possibily be improved in the future with better determination of asteroid masses.]