adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Timing and Abundance of Clathrate Formation Control Ocean Evolution in Outer Solar System Bodies: Challenges of Maintaining a Thick Ocean within Pluto
Authors: Samuel W. Courville, Julie C. Castillo-Rogez, Mohit Melwani Daswani, Elodie Gloesener, Mathieu Choukroun, Joseph G. O'Rourke
Figure caption: We model the processes that may lead to clathrate formation in three steps: (1) differentiation and water–rock reactions, (2) freezing and clathrate formation, and (3) thermal metamorphism and volatile release. Clathrates may form at the top of the ocean or the base of the ocean depending on which gas species inhabit the clathrate cages. Further production of clathrates may occur after the release of volatiles into the ocean through metamorphism.
Paper: Timing and Abundance of Clathrate Formation Control Ocean Evolution in Outer Solar System Bodies: Challenges of Maintaining a Thick Ocean within Pluto
Authors: Samuel W. Courville, Julie C. Castillo-Rogez, Mohit Melwani Daswani, Elodie Gloesener, Mathieu Choukroun, Joseph G. O'Rourke
Figure caption: The molal concentration of CO2 (left) and the fugacity of CH4 (right) in the ocean (283 K and 50 MPa) as a function of their accreted wt% relative to water ice. The molality of CO2 increases with increasing accreted abundance up to its saturation limit in the ocean. The effective water–rock ratio (W:R) during ocean formation changes the concentration of dissolved CO2 because the W:R controls the pH of the ocean and therefore whether dissolved CO2 or carbonate ions exist in the ocean.
Paper: Optical Monitoring of the Didymos–Dimorphos Asteroid System with the Danish Telescope around the DART Mission Impact
Authors: Agata Rożek, Colin Snodgrass, Uffe G. Jørgensen, Petr Pravec, Mariangela Bonavita, Markus Rabus, Elahe Khalouei, Penélope Longa-Peña, Martin J. Burgdorf, Abbie Donaldson, Daniel Gardener, Dennis Crake, Sedighe Sajadian, Valerio Bozza, Jesper Skottfelt, Martin Dominik, J. Fynbo, Tobias C. Hinse, Markus Hundertmark, Sohrab Rahvar, John Southworth, Jeremy Tregloan-Reed, Mike Kretlow, Paolo Rota, Nuno Peixinho, Michael Andersen, Flavia Amadio, Daniela Barrios-López, Nora Soledad Castillo Baeza
Figure caption: Preimpact light curves collected at the DK telescope, calibrated to the ATLAS-RefCat2 r band. The horizontal axis scale is in days since 00:00 UT of a given observing night. Each night is divided into “segments” corresponding to different background fields used for relative light-curve extraction. Each segment is marked with a different color and symbol. Due to low seeing and corresponding high noise in small apertures on September 19, plots of the light curves in the 1.″5 and 2″ apertures are omitted on that date.
Paper: Optical Monitoring of the Didymos–Dimorphos Asteroid System with the Danish Telescope around the DART Mission Impact
Authors: Agata Rożek, Colin Snodgrass, Uffe G. Jørgensen, Petr Pravec, Mariangela Bonavita, Markus Rabus, Elahe Khalouei, Penélope Longa-Peña, Martin J. Burgdorf, Abbie Donaldson, Daniel Gardener, Dennis Crake, Sedighe Sajadian, Valerio Bozza, Jesper Skottfelt, Martin Dominik, J. Fynbo, Tobias C. Hinse, Markus Hundertmark, Sohrab Rahvar, John Southworth, Jeremy Tregloan-Reed, Mike Kretlow, Paolo Rota, Nuno Peixinho, Michael Andersen, Flavia Amadio, Daniela Barrios-López, Nora Soledad Castillo Baeza
Figure caption: Postimpact multiaperture light curves collected at the DK telescope, calibrated to the ATLAS-RefCat2 r band. The horizontal axis scale is in days since 00:00 UT of a given observing night. Each night is divided into “segments” corresponding to different background fields used for the relative light-curve extraction. Each segment and aperture size is marked with a different color and symbol.
Paper: Constraining the Structure under Lunar Impact Basins with Gravity
Authors: David E Smith, Sander Goossens, Gregory A Neumann, Maria T Zuber
Figure caption: Bouguer gravity individual spectra of 19 basins and the average spectrum (“Zero”) of over 15,000 locations where the Bouguer gravity was between ±1 mGal. All individual figures are on the same horizontal scale ±100 mGal except Zero, which is  ±  10 mGal. The left axis of the spectra is spherical harmonic degree L, right axis pm-km. The spectra show limited anomalous signal between spherical harmonic degree L ∼ 100 and ∼700, representing a depth of 2.5–17 pm-km, the upper crust. The region L > 800 is a combination of data noise and possibly gravity signal from the top 2–3 km of the crust. All spectra are evaluated at the central location of the feature, at the reference radius of 1738 km. Note that the vertical axis (degree, L) is logarithmic.
Paper: Constraining the Structure under Lunar Impact Basins with Gravity
Authors: David E Smith, Sander Goossens, Gregory A Neumann, Maria T Zuber
Figure caption: (a) Free-air gravity field (Equation (5)) of the Moon from GRAIL from the GRGM1200B model (Goossens et al. 2020) for degrees 2–600. (b) Bouguer gravity field based on GRAIL corrected for gravity from topography obtained by the laser altimeter (LOLA) instrument on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) spacecraft using a density of 2500 kg m−3 for the crust for degrees 6–600.
Paper: Constraining the Structure under Lunar Impact Basins with Gravity
Authors: David E Smith, Sander Goossens, Gregory A Neumann, Maria T Zuber
Figure caption: Left: the geographical distribution of Bouguer gravity signal for L = 700–1200 and 1000–1200 degrees for crustal densities of 2500 kg m−3. Right: two cumulative spectra of Serenitatis for different densities, and two cumulative-reverse spectra for Imbrium at different radii. The two cumulative profiles on the left compare densities of 2300 and 3100 kg m−3; the third cumulative-reverse profile compares the effect of evaluating the Bouguer field at 1738 and 1748 km approximately equivalent to the elevation on the lunar nearside and farside. The third profile has a double X-axis where the lower X-axis is 1738 km (red data) and the upper X-axis is 1748 km (blue data).
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Comparison of the difference in surface detail between the global LROC/WAC and SPC DTMs. Although other data sets exist at this location, these are the only sets in the literature that have been examined for topographic correlations. (A) Portion of the 100 m GSD LROC/WAC DTM covering the subregion within the Reiner Gamma study region (i.e., blue box in Figure 1). (B) Portion of the low-resolution (2.6 m GSD) SPC DTM for the study region covering only the subregion. See Figure 1 for context. (C) High-resolution (80 cm GSD) SPC DTM covering only the subregion. North is to the top. The subtle statistical correlations of the lowest elevations within on-swirl regions (see Statistical Analysis section), both in this study and those prior have only been detected using high-resolution SPC DTMs.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Data sets generated for the Reiner Gamma study region at 2.6 m pixel−1 resolution. The location of the subregion is outlined by the dark blue box. North is to the top. Scale bar is shown in panel A. (A) Slope-removed SPC DTM using a color stretch based on a 2.5 standard deviation about the mean; see Figure A1 for unmasked topography with no slope correction. (B) Surface reflectance at 18° incidence angle with on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red) training areas used by Chuang et al. (2022) for the supervised MLC algorithm. Reflectance data are undersampled to align with the 2.6 m GSD topography. (C) Unsupervised K-means clustering algorithm map with three defined units based on the elbow method optimization: on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red). (D) Supervised MLC algorithm map from Chuang et al. (2022) of on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red) units.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Top: lunar swirls in Reiner Gamma on the near-side of the Moon. The full study region (red box) is located just south of the central “eye.” The image is from a portion of the 100 m pixel−1 global LROC WAC mosaic. North is to the top. Bottom: 42° incidence angle surface reflectance image with bright on-swirl areas separated by dark lanes. A separate narrow subregion within the study region is indicated by the blue box.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Top: cumulative distributions of heights for the 7 × 7 km low-resolution study region for each of the on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (tan), and off-swirl (pink) units as identified by each of the two ML techniques: MLC (left) and K-means (right). The lighter-shaded areas surrounding each cumulative frequency distribution line represent the 3.9 m FormU error bars on each measurement; slight color variations indicate where error bars overlap. These plots show that the distribution of heights in the diffuse-swirl unit is shifted to higher elevations with respect to on- and off-swirl. The off-swirl unit is similar to on-swirl, although it has more data points at higher elevations. The results from the two ML techniques are similar, with K-means showing slightly larger differences between the units. Bottom: histograms of heights for the 7 × 7 km region for each of the swirl units as identified by each of the two ML techniques: MLC (left) and K-means (right). Gaussian fits to each unit, G(x, a, μ, σ), are shown as dotted lines. Variations in color shading indicate where populations overlap. As shown in the top plots, although less clearly, the distributions of heights are shifted to higher elevations for the diffuse-swirl unit relative to on- and off-swirl. The on- and off-swirl histograms are similar, with the fitted mean for on-swirl being slightly lower than off-swirl in MLC and slightly higher in K-means. The different sample sizes of the units in each ML technique are apparent in these plots.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Reiner Gamma high-resolution subregion-only data and unit maps at 80 cm pixel−1 with craters masked, with two swirl units. Due to the higher resolution, additional craters were masked along with those identified in the lower-resolution data. (A) Slope-corrected SPC DTM using a color stretch based on a 2.5 standard deviation about the mean. (B) Surface reflectance at 18° incidence angle with on-swirl (blue) and off-swirl (red) circular training areas used for the supervised MLC algorithm. Reflectance data undersampled to align with 80 cm GSD topography. (C) Unsupervised K-means clustering algorithm map with two defined units based on the elbow method optimization: on-swirl (blue) and off-swirl (red). (D) Supervised MLC algorithm map of on-swirl (blue) and off-swirl (red) units.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Results from regional slope removal across the study region. The blue rectangle indicates the subregion within this study. A slope of less than 0.5° from high to low occurs from the top left to lower right. (A) Original SPC DTM at 2.6 m GSD. (B) Slope-removed topography with impact craters and large features masked. (C) Slope-removed topography with step-wise seams smoothed out.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Reiner Gamma study region data and unit maps extracted from Figure 3 at 2.6 m pixel−1 of the subregion with craters masked. (A) Slope-corrected SPC DTM with the same color stretch as in Figure 3. (B) Surface reflectance at 18° incidence angle. Reflectance data undersampled to align with 2.6 m GSD topography. (C) Unsupervised K-means clustering algorithm map with on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red) units. (D) Supervised MLC algorithm map of on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red) units.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Cumulative distributions of heights for the high-resolution data of the subregion with two (top) and three (bottom) swirl classification units for the MLC (left) and K-means (right) methods. The unit classifications were performed using the subregion-only data. The lighter-shaded areas surrounding each cumulative frequency distribution line represent the error on an individual measurement; slight color variations indicate where error bars overlap. On-swirl is lower than off-swirl in all cases, with diffuse at an intermediate height between the two when it is considered as a separate unit. Two units are optimal when classifying based on the subregion-only data; however, classifications based on the larger study region reveal that a third unit is present and needs to be considered.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Cumulative distributions of heights for the subregion in low (top) and high (bottom) resolution for the MLC (left) and K-means (right) methods. The swirl unit classifications were performed using the 7 × 7 km study region. The lighter-shaded areas surrounding each cumulative frequency distribution line represent the error on an individual measurement; slight color variations indicate where error bars overlap. The high-resolution data show more of a spread in heights between the swirl units than the low-resolution data, with on-swirl data being at the lowest heights.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Reiner Gamma high-resolution subregion-only data and unit maps at 80 cm pixel−1 with craters masked, with three swirl units. (A) Slope-corrected SPC DTM using a color stretch based on a 2.5 standard deviation about the mean. Same as Figure 5(A). (B) Surface reflectance at 18° incidence angle with on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red) circular training areas used for the supervised MLC algorithm. Reflectance data are the same as Figure 5(B). (C) Unsupervised K-means clustering algorithm map with three units defined: on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red). (D) Supervised MLC algorithm map of on-swirl (blue), diffuse-swirl (yellow), and off-swirl (red) units. Note how similar, though not identical, the MLC map is to the K-means map both in this high-resolution subregion-only data and the low-resolution study region data in Figure 4.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Histograms of heights for the subregion in low resolution (top) and high resolution (bottom) for each of the swirl units as identified by MLC (left) and K-means (right). The swirl unit classifications were performed using the 7 × 7 km study region. Gaussian fits to each unit, G(x, a, μ, σ), are shown as dotted lines; variations in color shading indicate where populations overlap. These histograms are based on the data shown in Figure 8. The height progression from low to high for on-, to diffuse-, to off-swirl is apparent.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Histograms of heights for the high-resolution data of the subregion with two (top) and three (bottom) swirl classification units for the MLC (left) and K-means (right) methods. The unit classifications were performed using the subregion-only data. Gaussian fits to each unit are shown as dotted lines; variations in color shading indicate where populations overlap. These histograms are based on the data shown in Figure 10. The on-swirl heights are lower than off-swirl heights in all cases. The differences in heights between units is more pronounced when three units are considered.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Results from the regional slope correction across the study region but applied to high-resolution data that cover only the subregion. (A) Original SPC DTM at 80 cm GSD. (B) Slope-removed topography with impact craters and large features masked. Note that additional craters were masked within this data set. (C) Slope-removed topography with step-wise seams smoothed out.
Paper: The Search for Topographic Correlations within the Reiner Gamma Swirl
Authors: John R. Weirich, Deborah L. Domingue, Frank C. Chuang, Amanda A. Sickafoose, Matthew D. Richardson, Eric E. Palmer, Robert W. Gaskell
Figure caption: Results from the regional slope correction across the study region but only within the subregion. (A) Original SPC DTM at 2.6 m GSD. (B) Slope-removed topography with impact craters and large features masked. (C) Slope-removed topography with step-wise seams smoothed out. Note the significant reduction in seams in panel C as compared to panel B.
Paper: Optical Monitoring of the Didymos–Dimorphos Asteroid System with the Danish Telescope around the DART Mission Impact
Authors: Agata Rożek, Colin Snodgrass, Uffe G. Jørgensen, Petr Pravec, Mariangela Bonavita, Markus Rabus, Elahe Khalouei, Penélope Longa-Peña, Martin J. Burgdorf, Abbie Donaldson, Daniel Gardener, Dennis Crake, Sedighe Sajadian, Valerio Bozza, Jesper Skottfelt, Martin Dominik, J. Fynbo, Tobias C. Hinse, Markus Hundertmark, Sohrab Rahvar, John Southworth, Jeremy Tregloan-Reed, Mike Kretlow, Paolo Rota, Nuno Peixinho, Michael Andersen, Flavia Amadio, Daniela Barrios-López, Nora Soledad Castillo Baeza
Figure caption: The figure shows the apparent fading of the Didymos–Dimorphos system in the Johnson V band. The blue crosses represent the averaged brightness in the 2″ aperture for each night and red “x” symbols correspond to the brightness in the 5″ aperture. Panel (a) shows the heliocentric- and geocentric-distance-corrected brightness of the asteroids and ejecta cloud. The straight colored lines represent linear trend fits to subsets of data and the curved lines show the asteroid brightness as predicted by the photometric models. In panel (b) we remove the contribution from the Didymos–Dimorphos system by using the photometric model from Pravec et al. (2012) and remeasure the brightness fading rates—illustrated again with colored straight lines; the horizontal line illustrates the straight-line fit to the preimpact photometry.
Paper: Optical Monitoring of the Didymos–Dimorphos Asteroid System with the Danish Telescope around the DART Mission Impact
Authors: Agata Rożek, Colin Snodgrass, Uffe G. Jørgensen, Petr Pravec, Mariangela Bonavita, Markus Rabus, Elahe Khalouei, Penélope Longa-Peña, Martin J. Burgdorf, Abbie Donaldson, Daniel Gardener, Dennis Crake, Sedighe Sajadian, Valerio Bozza, Jesper Skottfelt, Martin Dominik, J. Fynbo, Tobias C. Hinse, Markus Hundertmark, Sohrab Rahvar, John Southworth, Jeremy Tregloan-Reed, Mike Kretlow, Paolo Rota, Nuno Peixinho, Michael Andersen, Flavia Amadio, Daniela Barrios-López, Nora Soledad Castillo Baeza
Figure caption: Ejecta evolution in the DK images over the first observing night postimpact. The dominant feature in these images is the ejecta cone, fanning out in the direction from which the DART probe arrived. The tail extending in the antisolar direction can be seen forming in panels (d)–(g). Each panel represents a stack of images with the exposure start UT time on 2022 September 27 for the first and last frame in each sequence included in the panel captions; individual images were exposed for 7 s. Each image stack was produced by aligning images on Didymos, taking a 501 × 501 pixel cutout and then taking the sigma-clipped mean of the corresponding pixels in each image. The color scale goes from white and red for low values to dark blue and black for high values; the minimum and maximum mapped pixel values are taken to be 0.5σ below and 25σ above the mean pixel value in each stack. The NoiseChisel detection contours are overlain on the images; the blue outline marks the specific detection that includes the asteroid plus the ejecta, and magenta outlines all other detections. The arrow set in the corner of the image represents north (black arrow labeled “N,” east is to the left), the antisolar direction (orange, “⊙”), the direction opposite to the system’s projected orbital velocity (blue, “v”), and the direction from which the DART probe approached the system (unlabeled magenta arrow). Image scale is indicated with a ruler corresponding to 1000 km at the asteroid system.
Paper: Optical Monitoring of the Didymos–Dimorphos Asteroid System with the Danish Telescope around the DART Mission Impact
Authors: Agata Rożek, Colin Snodgrass, Uffe G. Jørgensen, Petr Pravec, Mariangela Bonavita, Markus Rabus, Elahe Khalouei, Penélope Longa-Peña, Martin J. Burgdorf, Abbie Donaldson, Daniel Gardener, Dennis Crake, Sedighe Sajadian, Valerio Bozza, Jesper Skottfelt, Martin Dominik, J. Fynbo, Tobias C. Hinse, Markus Hundertmark, Sohrab Rahvar, John Southworth, Jeremy Tregloan-Reed, Mike Kretlow, Paolo Rota, Nuno Peixinho, Michael Andersen, Flavia Amadio, Daniela Barrios-López, Nora Soledad Castillo Baeza
Figure caption: Illustration of the ejecta cloud and tail evolution throughout our postimpact observing campaign. The tail extending in the antisolar direction (indicated with the orange arrow) can seen forming in panels (a) and is clearly identifiable through the rest of our campaign. Each frame is a 1501 × 701 pixel cutout, created by stacking all the images taken throughout each night in the intervals listed in Table 1. The captions for individual panels denote the UT date the observations were taken. The stacking was done through aligning all images taken on a given night and then taking the sigma-clipped mean of the corresponding pixels. More details in caption for Figure 3.