adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: The pkdgrav simulations showing Didymos’s reshaping modes depending on the interparticle cohesive strength, c, and the bulk density, ρ  B . The particle size distribution ranges between ∼4 and ∼16 m. The color shows the particle speed. (a) Original shape configuration. (b) c = 320 Pa and ρ  B  = 2170 kg m−3. (c) c = 700 Pa and ρ  B  = 1820 kg m−3. (d) c = 150 Pa and ρ  B  = 2520 kg m−3.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Dimorphos’s reshaping mode and orbital perturbation. (a) Defined coordinate frame. (b) Example of reshaping. (c) Time evolution of relative angular position with a length change of 16 m. (d) Orbital period change with respect to length change.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Fractions of collision events. (a) Collision event fraction as a function of deviation angle from the original surface normal. (b) Collision event fraction as a function of the impact angle. The solid lines denote the collision events only, while the dashed lines show the total test runs. The fractions defined here are the ratios of the number of considered events to the number of test runs.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Didymos’s reshaping mode and orbital perturbation. (a) Defined coordinate frame. (b) Example of reshaping. (c) Time evolution of relative angular position with a length change of ∼8 m. (d) Orbital period change with respect to length change.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Velocity profile of the particles in the simulation box 12 s after the last projectile was shot. Each line corresponds to a different latitude. Here V  x  is the velocity component along the horizontal direction. The bulk cohesive strength is fixed at 25 Pa. The surface layer is located about 0.8 m from the bottom, and the region above it is free space. (a) V ejc = 1 m s−1. (b) V ejc = 5 m s−1.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Critical cohesive strength C crit with respect to the bulk density ρ  B  for four homogeneous rubble-pile structures. This figure is an updated version of Figure 12 of Zhang et al. (2021), including the results from the FEM model by Naidu et al. (2020) and excluding all but the C crit values.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Didymos’s reshaping-driven spin period change. The x-axis gives the reshaping-driven length change along the short axis, dD = D 0 − D, up to 10 m. The black dotted–dashed line is the planned optical measurement accuracy obtained by the end of 2023 April.
Paper: Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART): Structural and Dynamic Interactions between Asteroidal Elements of Binary Asteroid (65803) Didymos
Authors: Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Fabio Ferrari, Martin Jutzi, Ryota Nakano, Sabina D. Raducan, Paul Sánchez, Stefania Soldini, Yun Zhang, Olivier S. Barnouin, Derek C. Richardson, Patrick Michel, Elisabetta Dotto, Alessandro Rossi, Andrew R. Rivkin
Figure caption: Simulation setup. The image shows a perpendicular impact at 1 m s−1 on a cohesive bed. The color green is linked to particles affected by the contact process.
Paper: Spectral Rotational Characterization of the Didymos System prior to the DART Impact 
Authors: Simone Ieva, E. Mazzotta Epifani, D. Perna, M. Dall'Ora, V. Petropoulou, J. D. P. Deshapriya, P. H. Hasselmann, A. Rossi, G. Poggiali, J. R. Brucato, M. Pajola, A. Lucchetti, S. L. Ivanovski, P. Palumbo, V. Della Corte, A. Zinzi, A. S. Rivkin, C. A. Thomas, J. de León, E. Dotto, M. Amoroso, I. Bertini, A. Capannolo, B. Cotugno, G. Cremonese, V. Di Tana, I. Gai, G. Impresario, M. Lavagna, A. Meneghin, F. Miglioretti, D. Modenini, S. Pirrotta, E. Simioni, S. Simonetti, P. Tortora, M. Zannoni, G. Zanotti
Figure caption: All the spectra observed in the 2021 apparition from TNG. Spectra 1–7 were observed on the night of February 15, while spectrum 8 was observed on February 23. All spectra are normalized at 0.55 μm.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption:  β versus ejecta mass for the various impactor scenarios: weak material results are shown in the top two panels, and strong in the bottom. Note that the range of ejecta mass and β used for the axes of these plots varies between panels.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: Histories for ﹩\beta /{\beta }_{\mathrm{Sphere}}﹩ in the Spheral models. The panels are arranged as in Figure 3.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: Renderings of the transient crater surfaces for the six Spheral models using the DART CAD impactor geometry (ejecta removed for clarity). The top row shows results for the weak Dimorphos material model, while the lower row is the strong Dimorphos case. The frame size is fixed for each panel, showing a roughly 30 m × 30 m section of the surface. The small-scale crenelations (in ring patterns outside the crater) are artifacts from the polyhedral volume reconstruction around the Spheral ASPH points.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: Complementary cumulative ejecta momentum distribution functions (of velocity), normalized by DART impactor momentum and velocity for the Spheral models. Note that the maximum y value on these plots is equivalent to β − 1.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: Complementary cumulative ejecta momentum distribution functions (same as Figure 10), normalized by DART impactor momentum and velocity for the CTH and iSALE models.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: CTH β histories for strong asteroid material strength. The left panel shows the raw β histories for the sphere, DART (0° orientation), and three cylinder configurations, while the right panel shows the ratios with ﹩{\beta }_{\mathrm{Sphere}}﹩.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: Complementary cumulative ejecta mass functions (same as Figure 8), normalized by DART impactor mass and velocity for the CTH and iSALE models.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: Complementary cumulative ejecta mass functions (of velocity), normalized by DART impactor mass and velocity for the Spheral models.
Paper: Spacecraft Geometry Effects on Kinetic Impactor Missions
Authors: J. Michael Owen, Mallory E. DeCoster, Dawn M. Graninger, Sabina D. Raducan
Figure caption: iSALE β histories for strong and weak asteroid material strength regimes. The left panels show the raw β histories for the sphere and three cylinder configurations, while the right panels show the ratios with ﹩{\beta }_{\mathrm{Sphere}}﹩. The top row shows the results for the weak asteroid target, while the bottom row shows the strong Dimorphos case.
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: Parallel coordinate plots of input parameters with equivalent parameters in the truth simulations, as well as final ΔV and β. Simulation lines are colored by the difference between the simulation ΔV and the target ΔV, with blue being slower than the truth simulation and red being faster than the truth simulation. White stars indicate the values of the truth simulation. For ϕ, the open star indicates the original truth simulation value of 0.24 while the solid white star indicates the porosity required for an equivalently massive asteroid in our simulations. Plots are shown for (a) all simulations, (b) simulations with initial asteroid mass within 10% of the truth simulation, and (c) simulations with Y s0 within 1 order of magnitude of the truth simulation. Ticks and axis limits in (b) and (c) are the same as in (a).
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: (a) Crater size vs. Y s0 for successful simulations. Solid symbols represent the crater estimated from the final simulated time. Empty symbols represent the crater estimated at 0.1 s. The truth simulation is shown in black. (b) The ratio of crater width to crater depth vs. ϕ. Solid and empty symbols have the same interpretation as in (a). The truth simulation is shown in black, with an empty symbol for the 24% porosity set for the basalt EOS of the truth simulation and a solid symbol for the 18% porosity required for an SiO2 EOS to have the same bulk density.
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: Extrapolations for ΔV for all simulations, with time in seconds on the X-axis and the magnitude of ΔV in centimeters per second on the Y-axis. Solid lines show the data from each simulation, and dotted lines in the same color show the fit of the extrapolation function to those data. The blue bar at the center of each plot shows the target ΔV of 1.972 ± 0.07 cm s−1
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: (a) Example simulation exhibiting the difference in ejecta definition. Material in gray is considered part of the asteroid, and material in light red is considered ejecta in both definitions. The material in dark red is considered ejecta only by our definition using the asteroid surface. (b) ΔV convergence with the old z-plane definition (black) and the new surface definition (red).
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: Results of simulations examining the effect of EOS/material choice showing (a) β vs. time, and (b)–(e) ΔV vs. time. Lines are colored to group simulations with the same material input parameters, and line type indicates the EOS and material choice. The dashed black lines in plots (b)–(e) indicate the ΔV of the truth simulation, with the dark gray line covering ±0.07 cm s−1. Numbers in the legend (e.g., 22.05) are simulation IDs (see Table F1).
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: Example of crater fit for simulation 11.09. (a) Original surface of critical density. (b) Plane/hyperboloid fit to the surface.
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: Initial reference frame for this study, showing the shrunken Itokawa shape model and indicating the impact velocity vector (in red), the impact location (in blue), the vector toward the Didymos primary asteroid, and the vector of the asteroid’s orbital velocity.
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: Final ΔV vs. β for all simulations. Each simulation is colored by initial porosity, ϕ. The target ΔV of −1.972 cm s−1 is indicated with a dashed line.
Paper: Predicting Asteroid Material Properties from a DART-like Kinetic Impact
Authors: Kathryn M. Kumamoto, J. Michael Owen, Megan Bruck Syal, Jason Pearl, Cody Raskin, Wendy K. Caldwell, Emma Rainey, Angela M. Stickle, R. Terik Daly, Olivier Barnouin
Figure caption: ΔV at t = 0.1 s (purple) or t = 0.2 s (orange) vs. ΔV at t ∼ ∞ . The blue line is 1:1.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Delay-Doppler images of Midas from Arecibo in 2018. All of these images show single scans. Upper left: midreceive time March 21, 22:37:37 UTC; frequency resolution 0.954 Hz, delay resolution 0.50 μs. Lower left: March 22, 22:01:08 UTC; 0.298 Hz × 0.05 μs (from 0.20 μs baud with four samples per baud). Upper middle: March 23, 21:59:14 UTC; 0.477 Hz × 0.50 μs. Lower middle: March 23, 22:37:38 UTC; 0.477 Hz × 0.50 μs. Upper right: March 23, 23:06:08 UTC; 0.477 Hz × 0.50 μs. Lower right: March 24, 22:08:58 UTC; 0.954 Hz × 0.50 μs. In these delay-Doppler images, and for all other delay-Doppler images shown in this work, Doppler frequency is plotted on the horizontal axis, increasing from left to right. Delay (range) is plotted on the vertical axis, increasing from top to bottom. The original data had different delay resolutions, but all images have been stretched (along both axes) and cropped so that they are displayed as square frames with a side length corresponding to 6.0 km. This means that the original delay-Doppler pixels can appear rectangular here.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Two different model types: 1996 HW1 and Midas. Row A shows the comparison of a delay-Doppler frame of Midas (A1), modeled delay-Doppler image (A2) using the 1996 HW1 model from Magri et al. (2011), and a simulated plane-of-sky image (A3) of the same view as the delay-Doppler frames. Row B shows the same comparison, with a later stage model of Midas. In the plane-of-sky views, the magenta arrow shows the rotation axis, and the red and green shafts show the long and intermediate principal axes, respectively (the short axis is aligned with the rotation axis). The 1996 HW1 model is clearly a bad fit for the data, but it has two lobes (A2) that appear to be of similar proportions to the two lobes visible in the data (A1). This is a much easier starting point for SHAPE to fit to the data than an ovoid model (not shown).
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Example views of the model with a northern pole direction that best fit the lightcurve data. From left to right, the delay-Doppler frames (c), (d) are as follows: delay-Doppler data, model, plane-of-sky view of the model. The colored arrows are as in Figure 2. The model is a good fit for the lightcurve data (a), (b) but is a poor fit for the delay-Doppler images (c), (d). This is compelling evidence to confirm the preference of a southern pole direction (retrograde rotation) over this northern pole direction (prograde rotation).
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Comparison of data to model (left to right in both frames) before and after shifting the vertices of the neck in Blender. Before shifting in Blender (frame (a)), the model neck is considerably deeper than it appears in the data. After shifting (frame (b)), it appears to be a much closer fit to the data. Although the model in frame (b) still does not appear to fit the data perfectly, it is close enough where SHAPE can find a better fit without getting stuck in a different chi-square minimum.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Sky positions (R.A. and decl.) of Midas during observations. Yellow-green triangles indicate Arecibo radar observations, cyan triangles indicate Goldstone radar observations, and purple circles indicate lightcurve observations.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Plots showing the process of applying linear shifts to the model using a spreadsheet. Because the 1996 HW1 model was consistently a bad fit for the radar images in the neck area, we used a spreadsheet to apply linear shifts to the vertices. The input and output plots of that shift are shown in panels (a) and (b), respectively. In panel (a), orange arrows indicate the location of the neck of the input model, and in panel (b) the neck of the model after applying the shift is indicated with blue arrows.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: (a) Acceleration map of Midas showing the magnitude of the total acceleration on the surface of the asteroid. (b) Surface slope map of Midas showing each facet’s gravitational slope. Both plots assume a density of 2000 kg m−3.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: Example views of the model with a northern pole direction that best fit the radar data. The delay-Doppler frames are organized as in Figure 5. The model is a poor fit for the lightcurve data (a), (b), but is a better fit for the delay-Doppler images (c), (d). This is further evidence to confirm the preference for retrograde rotation rather than prograde rotation.
Paper: Radar and Lightcurve Observations and a Physical Model of Potentially Hazardous Asteroid 1981 Midas
Authors: Riley A. McGlasson, Sean E. Marshall, Flaviane C. F. Venditti, Shantanu P. Naidu, Lance A. M. Benner, Marina Brozović, Jon D. Giorgini, Patrick A. Taylor, Betzaida Aponte, Anne K. Virkki, Alan W. Harris, James W. Young, Marek Husárik, Guy Wells, Daniel Bamberger, Jeff Tobak
Figure caption: The principal-axis views of the best model of Midas. Facets with yellow shading were seen at incidence angles greater than 60° (or not seen at all) in all delay-Doppler images and therefore are not well constrained.