adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: OSIRIS-APEX: An OSIRIS-REx Extended Mission to Asteroid Apophis
Authors: Daniella N. DellaGiustina, Michael C. Nolan, Anjani T. Polit, Michael C. Moreau, Dathon R. Golish, Amy A. Simon, Coralie D. Adam, Peter G. Antreasian, Ronald-Louis Ballouz, Olivier S. Barnouin, Kris J. Becker, Carina A. Bennett, Richard P. Binzel, Brent J. Bos, Richard Burns, Nayessda Castro, Steven R. Chesley, Philip R. Christensen, M. Katherine Crombie, Michael G. Daly, R. Terik Daly, Heather L. Enos, Davide Farnocchia, Sandra Freund Kasper, Rose Garcia, Kenneth M. Getzandanner, Scott D. Guzewich, Christopher W. Haberle, Timothy Haltigin, Victoria E. Hamilton, Karl Harshman, Noble Hatten, Kyle M. Hughes, Erica R. Jawin, Hannah H. Kaplan, Dante S. Lauretta, Jason M. Leonard, Andrew H. Levine, Andrew J. Liounis, Christian W. May, Laura C. Mayorga, Lillian Nguyen, Lynnae C. Quick, Dennis C. Reuter, Edgard Rivera-Valentín, Bashar Rizk, Heather L. Roper, Andrew J. Ryan, Brian Sutter, Mathilde M. Westermann, Daniel R. Wibben, Bobby G. Williams, Kenneth Williams, C. W. V. Wolner
Figure caption: Spacecraft in fig-leaf attitude, viewed from Sun direction.
Paper: OSIRIS-APEX: An OSIRIS-REx Extended Mission to Asteroid Apophis
Authors: Daniella N. DellaGiustina, Michael C. Nolan, Anjani T. Polit, Michael C. Moreau, Dathon R. Golish, Amy A. Simon, Coralie D. Adam, Peter G. Antreasian, Ronald-Louis Ballouz, Olivier S. Barnouin, Kris J. Becker, Carina A. Bennett, Richard P. Binzel, Brent J. Bos, Richard Burns, Nayessda Castro, Steven R. Chesley, Philip R. Christensen, M. Katherine Crombie, Michael G. Daly, R. Terik Daly, Heather L. Enos, Davide Farnocchia, Sandra Freund Kasper, Rose Garcia, Kenneth M. Getzandanner, Scott D. Guzewich, Christopher W. Haberle, Timothy Haltigin, Victoria E. Hamilton, Karl Harshman, Noble Hatten, Kyle M. Hughes, Erica R. Jawin, Hannah H. Kaplan, Dante S. Lauretta, Jason M. Leonard, Andrew H. Levine, Andrew J. Liounis, Christian W. May, Laura C. Mayorga, Lillian Nguyen, Lynnae C. Quick, Dennis C. Reuter, Edgard Rivera-Valentín, Bashar Rizk, Heather L. Roper, Andrew J. Ryan, Brian Sutter, Mathilde M. Westermann, Daniel R. Wibben, Bobby G. Williams, Kenneth Williams, C. W. V. Wolner
Figure caption: The Triangle Survey trajectory (black). TM# indicates the maneuver number.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: Top row: distribution of absolute visible magnitudes (H) for the RSBPM model (dashed lines) for inner, middle, and outer MBAs compared to known objects in the MPC’s holdings (solid lines). The median H magnitude for the MPC catalog for each population is shown as a dotted vertical line. Known objects brighter than H < 17.75, 17.25, and 16.75 mag, respectively, were used as the basis for randomly drawing orbital elements for the synthetic objects in the inner, middle, and outer main belt. Second row from top: normalized visible geometric albedo distribution p  V  of the model inner, middle, and outer MBAs compared to the measurements of ∼130,000 known objects detected based on their 12 or 5 μm fluxes by NEOWISE. Third row from top: normalized distribution of beaming parameters (η) for the RSBPM model compared to the NEOWISE-detected inner, middle, and outer MBAs for which η could be measured. Bottom row: normalized fraction of p IR/p  V  for the RSBPM model compared to the NEOWISE-detected inner, middle, and outer MBAs for which p IR could be measured.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: (a) Fraction of p IR/p  V  for the RSBPM model compared to the ∼90 NEOWISE-detected NEOs for which p IR could be measured in Mainzer et al. (2011b). (b) Distribution of beaming parameters (η) for the RSBPM model compared to the ∼317 NEOWISE-detected NEOs for which η could be measured. (c) Distribution of absolute visible magnitudes for the RSBPM model containing only NEAs ≥140 m compared to that of the known NEOs to date; the distributions match well until the point at which the population becomes significantly less observationally complete.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: Top: survey completeness as a function of time for PHAs larger than 140 m in diameter (solid blue line). These simulations show that by the time the mission completes its baseline 5 yr survey, NEO Surveyor will have exceeded the mission’s Level 1 requirement of 2/3 survey completeness for PHAs ≥140 m in diameter (dashed gray line). The PHA catalog will reach 90% completeness within 10 yr of the launch of NEO Surveyor, fulfilling the Congressional mandate to NASA. The plot does not include possible contributions from Rubin. Survey completeness for Atiras, Atens, Apollos, and Amors larger than 140 m are shown as dashed lines. Bottom: survey completeness as a function of MOID.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: PDFs (solid gray areas) for the visible geometric albedo distributions p  V  of the model NEAs compared to the measurements for Atens, Apollos, and Amors detected by the NEOWISE based on their thermal fluxes.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: Detectable range for NEO Surveyor at S/N = 5 or greater of typical NEOs at sizes ranging from 25 m to 1 km with p  V  = 0.15 computed using the NEATM model (solid contour lines) and the FRM model (dashed contour lines). Since NEAs below ∼200 m are more likely to be rapid rotators (Pravec et al. 2008), the FRM model is probably the more appropriate choice for objects in this size range and lower.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: The distribution of H magnitudes for NEOs is shown for various diameter bins, illustrating that the canonical assumption that NEAs with H < 22 mag are all larger than 140 m in diameter is incorrect; many NEOs larger than 140 m have H > 22 mag.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: The orbital properties of the model NEOs were derived from the orbital elements of all known objects with H < 20 mag.
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: Albedo distribution as a function of orbital elements of (left) the reference model population and (right) NEOWISE-detected objects from Masiero et al. (2013).
Paper: The Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: A. K. Mainzer, J. R. Masiero, Paul A. Abell, J. M. Bauer, William Bottke, Bonnie J. Buratti, Sean J. Carey, D. Cotto-Figueroa, R. M. Cutri, D. Dahlen, Peter R. M. Eisenhardt, Y. R. Fernandez, Roberto Furfaro, Tommy Grav, T. L. Hoffman, Michael S. Kelley, Yoonyoung Kim, J. Davy Kirkpatrick, Christopher R. Lawler, Eva Lilly, X. Liu, Federico Marocco, K. A. Marsh, Frank J. Masci, Craig W. McMurtry, Milad Pourrahmani, Lennon Reinhart, Michael E. Ressler, Akash Satpathy, C. A. Schambeau, S. Sonnett, Timothy B. Spahr, Jason A. Surace, Mar Vaquero, E. L. Wright, Gregory R. Zengilowski
Figure caption: Orbital properties of the model background objects compared with those of known objects.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: True positives (left), false positives (middle), and false negatives (right) for features detected on L’LORRI images with circle-fit diameters (top) or ellipse-fit minor axes (bottom), with color brightness indicating whether those features were identified on native L’LORRI or processed L’LORRI images. The data are binned such that bin b  i  contains data from diameters (D  i-1, D  i ], and the bars straddle the bin value b i. In this analysis, if a feature was matched to the Robbins (2019) database, then the diameter used for the horizontal axis value is the crater diameter from the Robbins (2019) database and not the size found using L’LORRI images.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Ratio of crater size as a function of crater diameter in the ground-truth database for (A) diameters based on circle fits, and (B) minor axes of ellipse fits. A horizontal line of 1.0 would mean that the crater sizes from L’LORRI are identical to those from the ground-truth database for all diameters. Sharp cutoffs (diagonal in panel (A) and no data >2) are due to cutoffs in matching craters. Power-laws were fit to each data distribution using an orthogonal distance regression method, and parameters are given in the figure legends.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Similar to Figure 8, including the method of data binning. In this version, the TP, FN, and FP have been interleaved, but they still remain separated by native L’LORRI (first and third columns) or processed L’LORRI (second and fourth columns), and they are separated by circle-fit diameters (first two columns) and ellipse-fit minor axes (last two columns). In this version, rows indicate solar incidence range, where the top row covers lighting during the Lucy encounter of i ≈ 55°–65°, up to i ≈ 85°–89° in the bottom row. The purpose of this figure is to determine if and how the TP, FN, and FP rates vary based on Sun angle.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4, but uses the more classic binned method of the Arvidson et al. (1978) for the relative form (bottom) and unbinned for the cumulative form (top). In the relative version, lines connecting the points have been drawn.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Figures 4 and 10 stacked, with connecting lines in the RSFD removed. This figure demonstrates that the graphing method neither alters the results nor the interpretation.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Model illustrating our proposed explanation for the Lucy-based SFDs, specifically explaining the artifact in circle-fit crater diameters from “processed” L’LORRI images near ≈ 6–10 pix. Top shows cumulative, bottom shows relative plots; in all panels, the red line is an idealized dN /dD ∝D −3 function. In the left panel, an incomplete SFD is shown in the cyan curve, and the completeness based on the observed rollover is marked; it is at a false, smaller diameter on the CSFD because the CSFD masks diameter-specific behavior due to its cumulative nature. In the middle column, the small-crater SFD is measured to be broadened based on a combination of various factors, but in our scenario the broadening is dominated by the PSF. Depending on the severity of the broadening, the yellow curve may or may not be above the red; here, it is shown to be above the red because we think that is what is happening at ∼6–10 pix for circle-fit craters. In the right panels, the effects are convolved in the purple curve, resulting in the hump observed at small craters and then fall off to observed incompleteness. In reality, completeness is at a larger diameter, but the broadening of small craters artificially inflates the SFD, making it appear as though completeness is at a false, smaller diameter.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Crater match tolerance between L’LORRI and ground-truth craters. The horizontal axis is the maximum of the two cluster parameters used to match craters between the catalogs, since these parameters were varied (see main text). In automatic matching of craters between the different catalogs, clustering parameters were very small to begin with and then increased in order to match the best-matching features first. (A) Results from circle-based fits, and (B) results for ellipse-based fits to crater rims. These show that more features were found with the processed images than native (that curve is higher in both graphs), that more features are matched with tighter tolerances in all cases, and that more features were matched with tighter tolerances when using ellipse-fit minor axes than circle-fit diameters (i.e., there is better agreement between ellipse minor axes and ground-truth diameters).
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: A wide section of the Moon, with the LROC-WAC morphologic mosaic as the basemap. Overlaid are the four different L’LORRI images that were used in this test. Images are not photometrically corrected, so the lunar phase function and topographic shading are readily visible; images were stretched with 0.5% level clips of both the darkest and lightest pixels for this display. The first image in the sequence (upper left) is saturated over the western region, and the second image is saturated over Copernicus crater, since L’LORRI was not designed to image objects as bright as the Moon at 1 au. The lunar terminator was at approximately +10°E during imaging, so only approximately 20% of the final image of the sequence could be used.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: SFDEDF analysis for craters mapped on L’LORRI images compared with the ground-truth database. The SFDEDFs were constructed using Gaussian kernels with 0.1 · D widths, and the bootstrap with replacement method was run 10,000 times for each data set to produce the confidence envelopes. Rug plots on the bottom show original crater diameters that were used to construct each SFDEDF. Shaded confidence bands are 95% and dotted are 1σ (68%). Panel (A) shows diameters from circle fits, while panel (B) shows minor axes from ellipse fits.
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Sample region of the Moon showing different imaging and crater identifications from that imaging. (A) L’LORRI native image. (B) L’LORRI processed image. (C) LROC-WAC mosaic. The lighting geometry was approximately the same in the LROC-WAC as in the Lucy L’LORRI for this region. The panels on the right use the same color-coding as the rest of this work, where yellow are ground-truth craters, cyan are native L’LORRI, and pink are processed L’LORRI. (D) Crater identifications in each of the three data sets. (E) and (F) are close-ups of regions from (D) showing idealized circles from the ground-based database and actual rim outlines traced from the two L’LORRI data sets (while it appears as though there is large vertex spacing, the spacing is ≈1.5 km, which is ≈1 native L’LORRI pixel).
Paper: Imaging Lunar Craters with the Lucy Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (L’LORRI): A Resolution Test for NASA's Lucy Mission
Authors: Stuart J. Robbins, E. Beau Bierhaus, Olivier Barnouin, Tod R. Lauer, John Spencer, Simone Marchi, Harold A. Weaver, Stefano Mottola, Hal Levison, Neil Dello Russo
Figure caption: Shortly after the main lunar observations were taken, the L’LORRI boresight was offset from the Moon to capture images of a nearby star field, from which we constructed a well-sampled PSF that could be used to deconvolve the L’LORRI lunar images. This PSF is displayed here, in the top row, in three different formats: with native pixels, with double-sampled pixels as was used in the deconvolution (“2×”), and with quadruple-sampled pixels (“4×”). Each image is centered on the pixel with maximum intensity, is displayed on a linear scale from 0 to the maximum value, and covers the same physical area on the CCD (adapted from Weaver et al. 2023). The bottom row shows one image from one of the drift pointings and the processed L’LORRI image made from a combination of it and other images taken in the same cluster.
Paper: The Effects of Early Collisional Evolution on Amorphous Water Ice Bodies
Authors: Jordan K. Steckloff, Gal Sarid, Brandon C. Johnson
Figure caption: Sensitivity of AWI crystallization to object size. We simulate two 50 K objects colliding at 3 km s−1, with initial diameters of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 400 km. Top: the histograms of AWI crystallization plot the volume fraction of the initial AWI (vertical axis) that is crystallized to each degree, using 50 bins with uniform widths of 2%. Note that the vertical axis is logarithmic. Each histogram shows that minimal material is partially crystallized and that the vast majority of the initial AWI is either minimally (leftmost bin) or nearly fully crystallized (rightmost bin). The extreme similarities of these histograms reveal that there is little difference in AWI crystallization between these different impactor sizes. We can also plot the volume fraction of initial AWI that remains less than 0.1% crystallized (bottom left) or crystallized to at least 99.9% (bottom right) as a function of impactor diameter (this is equivalent to using 1000 histogram bins and looking at only the leftmost and rightmost bins). Both of these plots are nearly horizontal lines, showing that the amount of AWI that survives uncrystallized (to less than 0.1%) or fully crystallizes (to at least 99.9%) is essentially independent of impactor size.