adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Shape Modeling of Dimorphos for the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART)
Authors: R. Terik Daly, Carolyn M. Ernst, Olivier S. Barnouin, Robert W. Gaskell, Eric E. Palmer, Hari Nair, Ray C. Espiritu, Sarah Hasnain, Dany Waller, Angela M. Stickle, Michael C. Nolan, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Elisabetta Dotto, Alice Lucchetti, Maurizio Pajola, Simone Ieva, Patrick Michel
Figure caption: Volume error as function of shape model processing. The volume error decreases through the shape modeling process. Progress refers to the steps shown in Figure 2. From left to right, the dots correspond to the starting triaxial ellipsoid, the limb-based shape, the 60 cm maplet shape, the 25 cm maplet shape, the 10 cm maplet shape, the reflected and trimmed shape, and the final shape.
Paper: Shape Modeling of Dimorphos for the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART)
Authors: R. Terik Daly, Carolyn M. Ernst, Olivier S. Barnouin, Robert W. Gaskell, Eric E. Palmer, Hari Nair, Ray C. Espiritu, Sarah Hasnain, Dany Waller, Angela M. Stickle, Michael C. Nolan, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Elisabetta Dotto, Alice Lucchetti, Maurizio Pajola, Simone Ieva, Patrick Michel
Figure caption: Mean tilts across the impact site DTMs with respect to the spacecraft impact vector, with a tilt radius of 0.9 m. The left column (red) plots the distributions for the truth model. The blue column (right) plots the distributions for the reconstructed impact site DTMs. The difference in the mean and median tilts between the truth and reconstructed cases is between 2° and 7°, depending on the case.
Paper: Shape Modeling of Dimorphos for the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART)
Authors: R. Terik Daly, Carolyn M. Ernst, Olivier S. Barnouin, Robert W. Gaskell, Eric E. Palmer, Hari Nair, Ray C. Espiritu, Sarah Hasnain, Dany Waller, Angela M. Stickle, Michael C. Nolan, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Elisabetta Dotto, Alice Lucchetti, Maurizio Pajola, Simone Ieva, Patrick Michel
Figure caption: Mean tilts across the impact site DTMs with respect to the spacecraft impact vector, with a tilt radius of 9 m. The left column (red) plots the distributions for the truth model. The blue column (right) plots the distributions for the reconstructed impact site DTMs. The difference in the mean and median tilts between the truth and reconstructed cases is between 4° and 7°, depending on the case.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: (a) CO2 ice total band areas and 1σ uncertainties for Ariel’s low (30°S–30°N), mid (31°N–44°N), and high (45°N–51°N) sub-observer latitude zones (gold, green, and blue circles, respectively). Numerical values for these data points are shown in the “CO2 Total Area” column in Table 2. A sinusoidal fit to the low sub-observer latitude data points (gold dashed line) highlights the clear longitudinal trend in the distribution of CO2 ice on Ariel in this latitude zone. Similarly, the sinusoidal fit to the mid and high sub-observer latitude data points (black dashed line) highlights the reduction in CO2 ice band areas on Ariel’s trailing hemisphere at sub-observer latitudes ≥30° N. Repeat longitudes (gray-toned zones) are shown to highlight the periodicity in the distribution of CO2 on Ariel. (b) Mean CO2 ice total band areas and 1σ uncertainties (vertical error bars) for the low, mid, and high sub-observer latitude zones (gold, green, and blue symbols, respectively) over Ariel’s leading (diamonds) and trailing (circles) hemispheres. The horizontal error bars represent the range of latitudes we use to define each sub-observer latitude zone. Numerical values for these data points are shown in the “Mean CO2 Total Areas” column in Table 2. (c) Mean CO2 band 1, 2, and 3 areas and 1σ uncertainties for the low, mid, and high sub-observer latitude zones (gold, green, and blue circles, respectively) on Ariel’s trailing hemisphere.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: Left: diagram showing the mid-observation, sub-observer longitudes and latitudes of reflectance spectra collected in the low (30°S–30°N), mid (31°N–44°N), and high (45°N–51°N) sub-observer latitude zones over Ariel’s trailing hemisphere (gold, green, and blue dots, respectively). Ariel’s equator (0°) and the center of its trailing hemisphere (270° longitude) are indicated (black lines). All collected spectra are disk-integrated and average over an entire hemisphere. Right: “grand average” spectra and 1σ uncertainties for Ariel’s low, mid, and high sub-observer latitude zones (gold, green, and blue, error bars, respectively). The spectra were normalized to 1 using the mean reflectance between 1.74 and 1.77 μm and then offset vertically for clarity. The sub-observer latitude range for the individual spectra and the years they were collected in are listed above each of the grand average spectra (see Table 1 for observation details). The wavelength ranges of CO2 bands 1, 2, and 3 are indicated (black dashed lines). The spectra were lightly smoothed using a 2-to-4-pixel-wide boxcar function.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: Left: comparison between the grand average Ariel spectra for low, mid, and high sub-observer latitude zones (1σ uncertainties indicated by gold, green, and blue error bars, respectively) and synthetic spectra (numbered 1–7) that model the CO2 ice combination and overtone bands centered near 1.543, 1.578, and 1.609 μm (CO2 bands bracketed by black dashed lines). Right: comparison between the grand average Ariel spectra for low, mid, and high sub-observer latitude zones (orange, green, and blue error bars, respectively) and synthetic spectra (numbered 8–10) that model the CO2 ice combination and overtone bands centered near 1.966, 2.012, and 2.070 μm (CO2 bands bracketed by black dashed lines). The low sub-observer latitude synthetic spectrum (10) was originally reported in Cartwright et al. (2015). The included constituents for each synthetic spectrum are summarized in Tables 3 and 4. Spectra and models in both plots are scaled to Ariel’s geometric albedo (0.564) at ∼0.958 μm (Karkoschka 2001) and offset vertically for clarity. The grand average spectra were lightly smoothed using a 2-to-4-pixel-wide boxcar function.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: NIR spectra and 1σ uncertainties (blue error bars) displaying evidence for a subtle absorption band centered near 2.13 μm (black arrows), located on the long-wavelength shoulder of the 2.02 μm H2O ice band. These two spectra were collected at mid-observation longitudes and latitudes of (1) 231.8°N and 51.1°N (IRTF/SpeX) and (2) 235.9°N and 47.3°N (ARC 3.5 m/TripleSpec). The 2.13 μm band spans 2.123 to 2.137 μm in these two spectra with continuum-divided band depths of (1) 1.8% ± 0.5% and (2) 1.7% ± 0.6%. The bottom spectrum (3) is an average of these two spectra, highlighting the 2.13 μm band. The positions of CO2 bands 1, 2, and 3 are delineated as well (black dashed lines). All spectra are normalized to 1 using the mean reflectance between 1.74 and 1.77 μm and offset vertically for clarity. These data were lightly smoothed using a 7-pixel-wide boxcar function.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: Grand average low-latitude spectra and 1σ uncertainties (gold) of Ariel’s trailing (top) and leading (bottom) hemisphere, highlighting the position of a subtle 2.35 μm band (black dotted line) that is observed on Ariel’s trailing hemisphere but is absent from its leading hemisphere. Both spectra were normalized to 1 using the mean reflectance between 1.74 and 1.77 μm and offset vertically for clarity. These data were lightly smoothed using a 5-pixel-wide boxcar function.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: Four new IRTF/SpeX spectra (longitudes 153°, 205°, 232°, and 293°) and six new ARC 3.5 m/TripleSpec spectra (longitudes 07°, 27°, 100°, 236°, 260°, and 264°) of Ariel and their 1σ uncertainties, collected in 2019 and 2020. The mid-observation, sub-observer longitude for each spectrum is included in the lower left corner of each plot (see Table 1 for observation details). All spectra have been normalized to 1 between 2.24 and 2.25 μm. The sensitivities of SpeX (SXD mode) and TripleSpec are lower at wavelengths <1.4 μm and >2.3 μm, resulting in lower S/N compared to wavelengths between 1.4 and 2.3 μm. Scattered light from Uranus contributes additional structure to some of these spectra at wavelengths <1.3 μm.
Paper: A CO2 Cycle on Ariel? Radiolytic Production and Migration to Low-latitude Cold Traps
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Tom A. Nordheim, Riley A. DeColibus, William M. Grundy, Bryan J. Holler, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Michael M. Sori, Michael P. Lucas, Catherine M. Elder, Leonardo H. Regoli, Dale P. Cruikshank, Joshua P. Emery, Erin J. Leonard, Corey J. Cochrane
Figure caption: A graphical demonstration of the wavelength ranges of CO2 ice bands 1, 2, and 3, and their associated continua, using the grand average low-latitude spectrum of Ariel (1σ uncertainties shown as gold error bars). The data points used to calculate the areas of CO2 bands 1, 2, and 3 (spanning 1.962–1.969 μm, 2.008–2.015 μm, and 2.068–2.072 μm, respectively) are shown as red data points. The data points utilized for the continua of these three CO2 bands are shown as white data points that are connected by black lines.
Paper: Arecibo Planetary Radar Observations of Near-Earth Asteroids: 2017 December–2019 December
Authors: Anne K. Virkki, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Luisa F. Zambrano-Marín, Dylan C. Hickson, Anna McGilvray, Patrick A. Taylor, Edgard G. Rivera-Valentín, Maxime Devogèle, Eframir Franco Díaz, Sriram S. Bhiravarasu, Betzaida Aponte Hernández, Carolina Rodriguez Sánchez-Vahamonde, Michael C. Nolan, Phil Perillat, Israel Cabrera, Elliot González, Daniel Padilla, Victor Negrón, Juan Marrero, Johbany Lebrón, Adrian Bagué, Francisco Jiménez, Andy López-Oquendo, Daniel Repp, Riley A. McGlasson, Brynn Presler-Marshall, Ellen S. Howell, Jean-Luc Margot, Sanjana Prabhu Desai
Figure caption: On the top: the system temperature of the two polarization channels from 2017 December through 2019 December. The values less than 10 K were invalid measurements due to temporary failures. Data source: http://www.naic.edu/~phil/tsys/tsysmon/tsysmon.html. On the bottom: the antenna gain using the S-band narrow (2380 MHz) receiver as a function of zenith angle (“za”; in degrees) and azimuth angle (“az”; in degrees) before Hurricane Maria on 2017 September 20 (“PreMaria”; black solid lines) and after it (“PostMaria”; red solid lines). The latter applies to all observations presented in this paper, whereas the first one is included to represent the expected change in the S/N due to the antenna gain, when comparing observations conducted before and after 2017 September 20. Data source: http://www.naic.edu/~phil/calsbn/sbn.html.
Paper: Momentum Enhancement from a 3 cm Diameter Aluminum Sphere Striking a Small Boulder Assembly at 5.4 km s−1 
Authors: James D. Walker, Sidney Chocron, Donald J. Grosch, Simone Marchi, Amanda M. Alexander
Figure caption: A sequence of photographs of the impact from a high-speed camera (left to right, top to bottom). The first is two frames before the strike, where with higher sensitivity it is possible to make out the incoming sphere before the impact (the crescent from hypersonic flight through the residual gas in the near vacuum). The next frame shows the impact, where the saturated image is about 12 cm across. The next frame is from a numerical simulation of the impact, showing material speed; the black line demarcates the impactor and target) and the crater at 10 μs is around 6 cm across. The next three frames are sequential photographs following the strike. The frames are 12.65 µs apart; the exposure is 0.29 µs. Experimental images are self-illuminated.
Paper: Momentum Enhancement from a 3 cm Diameter Aluminum Sphere Striking a Small Boulder Assembly at 5.4 km s−1 
Authors: James D. Walker, Sidney Chocron, Donald J. Grosch, Simone Marchi, Amanda M. Alexander
Figure caption: Cog wheel arrangement for the measurement of pendulum swing (left). Data trace (blue) and fit curve (red) from the pendulum swing over five cycles (10 s; right).
Paper: Momentum Enhancement from a 3 cm Diameter Aluminum Sphere Striking a Small Boulder Assembly at 5.4 km s−1 
Authors: James D. Walker, Sidney Chocron, Donald J. Grosch, Simone Marchi, Amanda M. Alexander
Figure caption: Images of the target following the experiment: the front of pendulum (left), debris in front of the pendulum (center), and debris behind the pendulum (right). The target is completely disassembled by the impact. At the end of the experiment, all components are covered with fine soot.
Paper: Momentum Enhancement from a 3 cm Diameter Aluminum Sphere Striking a Small Boulder Assembly at 5.4 km s−1 
Authors: James D. Walker, Sidney Chocron, Donald J. Grosch, Simone Marchi, Amanda M. Alexander
Figure caption: Photograph of the stones in the wooden frame before (left) and after (right) the cement to hold them in place was poured. The right picture shows the target block as it is chained to the face of the pendulum. Behind the target is a 10.16 cm thick aluminum plate with dimensions 30.48 × 30.48 cm. The aluminum plate has been set on wooden blocks so that it overlays the open back of the wooden frame. The white dot with a red border at the center of the target face is the laser-aligned projected impact point.
Paper: Momentum Enhancement from a 3 cm Diameter Aluminum Sphere Striking a Small Boulder Assembly at 5.4 km s−1 
Authors: James D. Walker, Sidney Chocron, Donald J. Grosch, Simone Marchi, Amanda M. Alexander
Figure caption: Debris swept up following the impact, showing the range of size from stones similar in size to the originals to fine powder. Ruler is in inches.
Paper: Momentum Enhancement from a 3 cm Diameter Aluminum Sphere Striking a Small Boulder Assembly at 5.4 km s−1 
Authors: James D. Walker, Sidney Chocron, Donald J. Grosch, Simone Marchi, Amanda M. Alexander
Figure caption: Photograph of the back side of the pendulum in the target vacuum chamber before the impact experiment (left). Drawing of the pendulum assembly from the front (right).
Paper: After DART: Using the First Full-scale Test of a Kinetic Impactor to Inform a Future Planetary Defense Mission
Authors: Thomas S. Statler, Sabina D. Raducan, Olivier S. Barnouin, Mallory E. DeCoster, Steven R. Chesley, Brent Barbee, Harrison F. Agrusa, Saverio Cambioni, Andrew F. Cheng, Elisabetta Dotto, Siegfried Eggl, Eugene G. Fahnestock, Fabio Ferrari, Dawn Graninger, Alain Herique, Isabel Herreros, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Stavro Ivanovski, Martin Jutzi, Özgür Karatekin, Alice Lucchetti, Robert Luther, Rahil Makadia, Francesco Marzari, Patrick Michel, Naomi Murdoch, Ryota Nakano, Jens Ormö, Maurizio Pajola, Andrew S. Rivkin, Alessandro Rossi, Paul Sánchez, Stephen R. Schwartz, Stefania Soldini, Damya Souami, Angela Stickle, Paolo Tortora, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Flaviane Venditti, Jean-Baptiste Vincent, Kai Wünnemann
Figure caption: Spacecraft’s view of an idealized spherical asteroid showing a map of β  u  across the surface. Values are indicated by the color scale at the far left. The desired deflection direction ﹩\widehat{{\boldsymbol{u}}}﹩ is into the page and 40° to the right. (a): ejecta response Model 1, Equation (23); (b): ejecta response Model 2, Equation (24).
Paper: After DART: Using the First Full-scale Test of a Kinetic Impactor to Inform a Future Planetary Defense Mission
Authors: Thomas S. Statler, Sabina D. Raducan, Olivier S. Barnouin, Mallory E. DeCoster, Steven R. Chesley, Brent Barbee, Harrison F. Agrusa, Saverio Cambioni, Andrew F. Cheng, Elisabetta Dotto, Siegfried Eggl, Eugene G. Fahnestock, Fabio Ferrari, Dawn Graninger, Alain Herique, Isabel Herreros, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Stavro Ivanovski, Martin Jutzi, Özgür Karatekin, Alice Lucchetti, Robert Luther, Rahil Makadia, Francesco Marzari, Patrick Michel, Naomi Murdoch, Ryota Nakano, Jens Ormö, Maurizio Pajola, Andrew S. Rivkin, Alessandro Rossi, Paul Sánchez, Stephen R. Schwartz, Stefania Soldini, Damya Souami, Angela Stickle, Paolo Tortora, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Flaviane Venditti, Jean-Baptiste Vincent, Kai Wünnemann
Figure caption: Results from Bern SPH oblique impact simulations (circles with error bars) and from iSALE-3D (Raducan et al. 2022a; crosses) on half-space targets. (a) Ratio of ejecta momentum to impactor momentum η as a function of impact angle i, for target cohesions Y 0 = 0.1, 1, and 10 kPa. (b) Ejection angle α as a function of impact angle i. (c) Momentum ratio η as a function of ejection angle α.
Paper: After DART: Using the First Full-scale Test of a Kinetic Impactor to Inform a Future Planetary Defense Mission
Authors: Thomas S. Statler, Sabina D. Raducan, Olivier S. Barnouin, Mallory E. DeCoster, Steven R. Chesley, Brent Barbee, Harrison F. Agrusa, Saverio Cambioni, Andrew F. Cheng, Elisabetta Dotto, Siegfried Eggl, Eugene G. Fahnestock, Fabio Ferrari, Dawn Graninger, Alain Herique, Isabel Herreros, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Stavro Ivanovski, Martin Jutzi, Özgür Karatekin, Alice Lucchetti, Robert Luther, Rahil Makadia, Francesco Marzari, Patrick Michel, Naomi Murdoch, Ryota Nakano, Jens Ormö, Maurizio Pajola, Andrew S. Rivkin, Alessandro Rossi, Paul Sánchez, Stephen R. Schwartz, Stefania Soldini, Damya Souami, Angela Stickle, Paolo Tortora, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Flaviane Venditti, Jean-Baptiste Vincent, Kai Wünnemann
Figure caption: Δv required to deflect a large set of simulated Earth-impacting asteroids at the 95th percentile level as a function of time of deflection prior to Earth encounter. The horizontal lines show the Δv, at the 25th and 75th percentile levels, that would unbind currently known binary asteroid systems or pose a risk of fragmenting the primary or secondary body in the binary asteroid system.
Paper: After DART: Using the First Full-scale Test of a Kinetic Impactor to Inform a Future Planetary Defense Mission
Authors: Thomas S. Statler, Sabina D. Raducan, Olivier S. Barnouin, Mallory E. DeCoster, Steven R. Chesley, Brent Barbee, Harrison F. Agrusa, Saverio Cambioni, Andrew F. Cheng, Elisabetta Dotto, Siegfried Eggl, Eugene G. Fahnestock, Fabio Ferrari, Dawn Graninger, Alain Herique, Isabel Herreros, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Stavro Ivanovski, Martin Jutzi, Özgür Karatekin, Alice Lucchetti, Robert Luther, Rahil Makadia, Francesco Marzari, Patrick Michel, Naomi Murdoch, Ryota Nakano, Jens Ormö, Maurizio Pajola, Andrew S. Rivkin, Alessandro Rossi, Paul Sánchez, Stephen R. Schwartz, Stefania Soldini, Damya Souami, Angela Stickle, Paolo Tortora, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Flaviane Venditti, Jean-Baptiste Vincent, Kai Wünnemann
Figure caption: Results from numerical simulations of impacts, at i = 45°, from Bern SPH, iSALE-3D and CTH. (a) Ratio of the ejecta momentum to the impactor momentum (η) as a function of target cohesive strength. (b) Ejecta momentum direction from the normal, α, as a function of cohesion. (c) Momentum ratio η as a function of ejection angle α.
Paper: After DART: Using the First Full-scale Test of a Kinetic Impactor to Inform a Future Planetary Defense Mission
Authors: Thomas S. Statler, Sabina D. Raducan, Olivier S. Barnouin, Mallory E. DeCoster, Steven R. Chesley, Brent Barbee, Harrison F. Agrusa, Saverio Cambioni, Andrew F. Cheng, Elisabetta Dotto, Siegfried Eggl, Eugene G. Fahnestock, Fabio Ferrari, Dawn Graninger, Alain Herique, Isabel Herreros, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Stavro Ivanovski, Martin Jutzi, Özgür Karatekin, Alice Lucchetti, Robert Luther, Rahil Makadia, Francesco Marzari, Patrick Michel, Naomi Murdoch, Ryota Nakano, Jens Ormö, Maurizio Pajola, Andrew S. Rivkin, Alessandro Rossi, Paul Sánchez, Stephen R. Schwartz, Stefania Soldini, Damya Souami, Angela Stickle, Paolo Tortora, Josep M. Trigo-Rodríguez, Flaviane Venditti, Jean-Baptiste Vincent, Kai Wünnemann
Figure caption: Maps of β  u , as in Figure 5, for one possible orientation of a Bennu-shaped asteroid. Geometry, ejecta response models, and color scale are the same as in Figure 5.
Paper: Anticipating the DART Impact: Orbit Estimation of Dimorphos Using a Simplified Model
Authors: Shantanu P. Naidu, Steven R. Chesley, Davide Farnocchia, Nick Moskovitz, Petr Pravec, Petr Scheirich, Cristina Thomas, Andrew S. Rivkin
Figure caption: Projections of the best-fit parameters and their 3σ uncertainties for various orbital solutions of Dimorphos. The solution using a data-arc of 2003–2019 is shown in red, and the solution using a data-arc of 2003–2020 is shown in green. Solution 104, the current best-fit solution, is shown in blue. Solutions are mapped to epoch 2022 September 26 23:15 UTC, the DART impact time. The orbital phase is the angle in the orbital plane measured from the 0° longitude in the IAU76 ecliptic frame, as opposed to the mean anomaly, which is measured from the ascending node. Both angles are measured in the direction of the orbital motion of the satellite.
Paper: Anticipating the DART Impact: Orbit Estimation of Dimorphos Using a Simplified Model
Authors: Shantanu P. Naidu, Steven R. Chesley, Davide Farnocchia, Nick Moskovitz, Petr Pravec, Petr Scheirich, Cristina Thomas, Andrew S. Rivkin
Figure caption: Dashed blue lines show the path of the secondary relative to the primary on 2022 October 16 UTC in range-Doppler space in radar images. Earth is at the bottom and orbital motion is clockwise. The orange point shows the predicted location of Dimorphos at 10:00 UTC based on the pre-impact orbit (solution 104). The green and red points show predicted locations of Dimorphos assuming a one- and a seven-minute period change. The error bar on the orange point is its formal 3σ uncertainty. The error bars on the green and red points are expected measurement uncertainties from Goldstone–Green Bank Telescope range-Doppler images (150 m in range and 1 Hz in Doppler).