adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Cratering and Tectonic History of the Largest Uranian Satellite, Titania: New Insights Enabled by Image Reprocessing
Authors: Erica Nathan, James Head, Christian Huber
Figure caption: Larger version of the map from Figure 4(C), with named features labeled.
Paper: Cratering and Tectonic History of the Largest Uranian Satellite, Titania: New Insights Enabled by Image Reprocessing
Authors: Erica Nathan, James Head, Christian Huber
Figure caption: (A) Voyager frame (vg-iss-1-j-c1639046) of Huo Shen Patera, to the right of (1), Horus Patera (2), Kava Patera (3), and the surrounding area on Io. The black dots are control points. (B) The same as (A), but reprocessed using a nonuniform blind deconvolution to reduce camera motion blur. (C) Unprocessed Voyager frame (vg-iss-1-j-c1639044) with some overlapping coverage with (A) and (B). Common features are numbered across all panels.
Paper: Cratering and Tectonic History of the Largest Uranian Satellite, Titania: New Insights Enabled by Image Reprocessing
Authors: Erica Nathan, James Head, Christian Huber
Figure caption: Source locations for the unit examples shown in Table A2.
Paper: Dimorphos Orbit Determination from Mutual Events Photometry
Authors: Peter Scheirich, Petr Pravec, Alex J. Meyer, Harrison F. Agrusa, Derek C. Richardson, Steven R. Chesley, Shantanu P. Naidu, Cristina Thomas, Nicholas A. Moskovitz
Figure caption: Figure 1 from Gudebski et al. (2023) with the orbital lightcurve component (cyan circles), the synthetic lightcurve for the best-fit solution with the angular acceleration (solid cyan curve), and the model with the circular orbit and constant mean orbital period (dashed cyan curve) from this work overplotted.
Paper: Dimorphos Orbit Determination from Mutual Events Photometry
Authors: Peter Scheirich, Petr Pravec, Alex J. Meyer, Harrison F. Agrusa, Derek C. Richardson, Steven R. Chesley, Shantanu P. Naidu, Cristina Thomas, Nicholas A. Moskovitz
Figure caption: Continuation of Figure 5.
Paper: One-dimensional Microphysics Model of Venusian Clouds from 40 to 100 km: Impact of the Middle-atmosphere Eddy Transport and SOIR Temperature Profile on the Cloud Structure
Authors: Hiroki Karyu, Takeshi Kuroda, Takeshi Imamura, Naoki Terada, Ann Carine Vandaele, Arnaud Mahieux, Sébastien Viscardy
Figure caption: (a) Vertical profiles of the simulated liquid H2SO4 mass fraction in the Nominal Case and Cases 1, 2, and 3 in comparison with the modeling studies by Krasnopolsky (2015) and Stolzenbach et al. (2023), labeled as K2015 and S2023, respectively. The observations by Hansen & Hovenier (1974), Barstow et al. (2012), Cottini et al. (2012), and Arney et al. (2014) are labeled as HH1974, C2012, B2012, and A2014, respectively. (b) Vertical profiles of the simulated liquid-phase H2O VMR in the Nominal Case and Cases 1, 2, and 3 in comparison with the modeling studies by Dai et al. (2022) and Stolzenbach et al. (2023), labeled as D2022 and S2023, respectively.
Paper: One-dimensional Microphysics Model of Venusian Clouds from 40 to 100 km: Impact of the Middle-atmosphere Eddy Transport and SOIR Temperature Profile on the Cloud Structure
Authors: Hiroki Karyu, Takeshi Kuroda, Takeshi Imamura, Naoki Terada, Ann Carine Vandaele, Arnaud Mahieux, Sébastien Viscardy
Figure caption: Vertical profiles of the simulated cumulative chemical loss of the H2O vapor (black solid line), H2O vapor diffusion flux (red dashed line), H2O liquid diffusion flux (blue dashed–dotted line), and H2O liquid sedimentation flux (green dotted line) in (a) the Nominal Case and (b) Case 2. (c) Difference of each flux between the Nominal Case and Case 2 (Nominal Case minus Case 2 values).
Paper: One-dimensional Microphysics Model of Venusian Clouds from 40 to 100 km: Impact of the Middle-atmosphere Eddy Transport and SOIR Temperature Profile on the Cloud Structure
Authors: Hiroki Karyu, Takeshi Kuroda, Takeshi Imamura, Naoki Terada, Ann Carine Vandaele, Arnaud Mahieux, Sébastien Viscardy
Figure caption: Same as Figure 8, but the simulated results for Cases 4 and 5 are added with black and magenta dashed lines, respectively, and the Case 1 and 2 results are removed for visibility.
Paper: One-dimensional Microphysics Model of Venusian Clouds from 40 to 100 km: Impact of the Middle-atmosphere Eddy Transport and SOIR Temperature Profile on the Cloud Structure
Authors: Hiroki Karyu, Takeshi Kuroda, Takeshi Imamura, Naoki Terada, Ann Carine Vandaele, Arnaud Mahieux, Sébastien Viscardy
Figure caption: Same as Figure 7, but the simulated results for Cases 4 and 5 are added with black and magenta dashed lines, respectively, and the Case 1 and 2 results are removed for visibility. The saturation level of H2SO4 VMR (SVMR) is also indicated by a cyan dashed line for Case 4 in panel (a).
Paper: One-dimensional Microphysics Model of Venusian Clouds from 40 to 100 km: Impact of the Middle-atmosphere Eddy Transport and SOIR Temperature Profile on the Cloud Structure
Authors: Hiroki Karyu, Takeshi Kuroda, Takeshi Imamura, Naoki Terada, Ann Carine Vandaele, Arnaud Mahieux, Sébastien Viscardy
Figure caption: Same as Figure 6, but the simulated results for Cases 4 and 5 are added with black and magenta dashed lines, respectively, and the Case 1 and 2 results are removed for visibility.
Paper: One-dimensional Microphysics Model of Venusian Clouds from 40 to 100 km: Impact of the Middle-atmosphere Eddy Transport and SOIR Temperature Profile on the Cloud Structure
Authors: Hiroki Karyu, Takeshi Kuroda, Takeshi Imamura, Naoki Terada, Ann Carine Vandaele, Arnaud Mahieux, Sébastien Viscardy
Figure caption: Same as Figure 9, but the simulated results for Cases 4 and 5 are added as the black and magenta dashed lines, respectively, while Cases 1 and 2 are removed for visibility.
Paper: A New Database of Giant Impacts over a Wide Range of Masses and with Material Strength: A First Analysis of Outcomes
Authors: Alexandre Emsenhuber, Erik Asphaug, Saverio Cambioni, Travis S. J. Gabriel, Stephen R. Schwartz, Robert E. Melikyan, C. Adeene Denton
Figure caption: Final state of a selection of three, low-velocity grazing simulations, each with different masses of the colliding bodies (left, m tot ≈  1.9 × 10−4 M ⊕; middle, m tot ≈  2.2 M ⊕; right, m tot ≈  4.0 × 10−4 M ⊕); note the scale bars. Left and center panels show capture as satellite; the right panel shows unusual body shape. Colors represent material and origin body, as indicated in the legend: blue for target’s mantle, purple for impactor’s mantle, red for target’s iron core, and yellow for impactor’s core.
Paper: A New Database of Giant Impacts over a Wide Range of Masses and with Material Strength: A First Analysis of Outcomes
Authors: Alexandre Emsenhuber, Erik Asphaug, Saverio Cambioni, Travis S. J. Gabriel, Stephen R. Schwartz, Robert E. Melikyan, C. Adeene Denton
Figure caption: Time evolution of the relative semimajor axis (thick lines) and distance (thin lines) of the two largest remnants for grazing collisions resulting in satellite capture shown in Figure 4 (left and central panels). The values are given in terms of the sum of the radii of equivalent bodies with the given mass and core mass fraction, according to the results from Appendix A. Gaps indicate physical contacts between the two bodies. The satellite resulting from the collision between the low-mass bodies remains on a low-eccentricity orbit close to the primary, while the satellite in the high-mass collision is left on an eccentric orbit farther out.
Paper: A New Database of Giant Impacts over a Wide Range of Masses and with Material Strength: A First Analysis of Outcomes
Authors: Alexandre Emsenhuber, Erik Asphaug, Saverio Cambioni, Travis S. J. Gabriel, Stephen R. Schwartz, Robert E. Melikyan, C. Adeene Denton
Figure caption: Cumulative distribution of impact velocities in our giant impact database. The parameter distribution was chosen to sample regions where postimpact outcomes transition from one type of impact outcome (e.g., accretion) to another (e.g., hit-and-run).
Paper: A New Database of Giant Impacts over a Wide Range of Masses and with Material Strength: A First Analysis of Outcomes
Authors: Alexandre Emsenhuber, Erik Asphaug, Saverio Cambioni, Travis S. J. Gabriel, Stephen R. Schwartz, Robert E. Melikyan, C. Adeene Denton
Figure caption: Initial specific entropy for the core (S core) and mantle (S mant) as function of the body’s mass. The values of entropy are given in the units of ANEOS, erg g−1 eV−1.
Paper: A New Database of Giant Impacts over a Wide Range of Masses and with Material Strength: A First Analysis of Outcomes
Authors: Alexandre Emsenhuber, Erik Asphaug, Saverio Cambioni, Travis S. J. Gabriel, Stephen R. Schwartz, Robert E. Melikyan, C. Adeene Denton
Figure caption: Initial 1D radial profile of a body with mass M = 1 M⊕, and a core mass fraction Z = 30%. The red curve corresponds to the iron core, and the blue line corresponds to the forsterite mantle.
Paper: Revealing Callisto’s Carbon-rich Surface and CO2 Atmosphere with JWST
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Bryan J. Holler, Maria Camarca, Sara Faggi, Marc Neveu, Lorenz Roth, Ujjwal Raut, Christopher R. Glein, Julie C. Castillo-Rogez, Michael J. Malaska, Dominique Bockelée-Morvan, Tom A. Nordheim, Kevin P. Hand, Giovanni Strazzulla, Yvonne J. Pendleton, Katherine de Kleer, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Imke de Pater, Dale P. Cruikshank, Silvia Protopapa
Figure caption: JWST/NIRSpec integrated spectra and 1σ uncertainties (gray error bars) of Callisto's leading (purple) and trailing (red) hemisphere, normalized to 1 at 3.82 μm and offset vertically for clarity. The G395H grating has a ∼0.1 μm wide wavelength gap, shifting between ∼4 and 4.2 μm across NIRSpec IFU's 29 image slices. Some of the image slices that span Callisto's disk include wavelength coverage between ∼4 and 4.2 μm, which are shown here for Callisto's leading (bright blue) and trailing (bright orange) hemispheres. All spectral features identified in this study are labeled, with dotted lines indicating their central wavelengths. Features with confirmed compositions have bolded labels, whereas weak features, or those with multiple compositional interpretations, are italicized and followed by question marks. Possible bands and spectral structure at wavelength >4.98 μm may result from data calibration artifacts and are not analyzed in this study. The inset box shows a close-up of the 4.19–4.42 μm wavelength range, highlighting the CO2 features we have identified and the different  band centers for 12CO2 on Callisto's leading (4.254 μm) and trailing (4.250 μm) hemisphere, as well as a feature near 4.3 μm that may result from an isotope of CO2 or could be a residual solar line (Appendix A.3).
Paper: Revealing Callisto’s Carbon-rich Surface and CO2 Atmosphere with JWST
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Bryan J. Holler, Maria Camarca, Sara Faggi, Marc Neveu, Lorenz Roth, Ujjwal Raut, Christopher R. Glein, Julie C. Castillo-Rogez, Michael J. Malaska, Dominique Bockelée-Morvan, Tom A. Nordheim, Kevin P. Hand, Giovanni Strazzulla, Yvonne J. Pendleton, Katherine de Kleer, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Imke de Pater, Dale P. Cruikshank, Silvia Protopapa
Figure caption: Raw JWST/NIRSpec spectral cubes (G395H) of Callisto. Dashed lines show the approximate location of Callisto's equator and poles. Subobserver longitudes for the center and limbs of each cube are labeled.
Paper: Revealing Callisto’s Carbon-rich Surface and CO2 Atmosphere with JWST
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Bryan J. Holler, Maria Camarca, Sara Faggi, Marc Neveu, Lorenz Roth, Ujjwal Raut, Christopher R. Glein, Julie C. Castillo-Rogez, Michael J. Malaska, Dominique Bockelée-Morvan, Tom A. Nordheim, Kevin P. Hand, Giovanni Strazzulla, Yvonne J. Pendleton, Katherine de Kleer, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Imke de Pater, Dale P. Cruikshank, Silvia Protopapa
Figure caption: Integrated NIRSpec spectra for Callisto's leading (top) and trailing (bottom) hemispheres at their native resolutions (black) and continuum models (red). The residual spectra (i.e., spectrum minus continuum model) are plotted below each integrated spectrum, offset from 1.0 and scaled by a factor of 20 for clarity. Best-fit CO2 gas synthetic spectra (orange) are plotted over the residual spectra.
Paper: Revealing Callisto’s Carbon-rich Surface and CO2 Atmosphere with JWST
Authors: Richard J. Cartwright, Geronimo L. Villanueva, Bryan J. Holler, Maria Camarca, Sara Faggi, Marc Neveu, Lorenz Roth, Ujjwal Raut, Christopher R. Glein, Julie C. Castillo-Rogez, Michael J. Malaska, Dominique Bockelée-Morvan, Tom A. Nordheim, Kevin P. Hand, Giovanni Strazzulla, Yvonne J. Pendleton, Katherine de Kleer, Chloe B. Beddingfield, Imke de Pater, Dale P. Cruikshank, Silvia Protopapa
Figure caption: Callisto base map generated using Galileo Solid State Imager data (NASA/JPLCaltech/ USGS), overprinted by map-projected versions of the full NIRSpec footprints (white polygons) and the higher signal NIRSpec footprints utilized in the results and analyses reported here (red polygons). The approximate boundaries of the Asgard and Valhalla impact basins are indicated (gold circles).
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Expected SFDs after depletion following our fiducial parameters (D18 D fac) on each individual MAB subregion. As in Figure 3, top panels ((a) T = 3 Myr and (b) T = 5 Myr) are for simulations where we did not consider Jupiter’s perturbation. Bottom panels ((c) T = 3 Myr and (d) T = 5 Myr) are for simulations where we considered Jupiter’s perturbation. For reference, we show (1) a solid gray line at the bottom representing the current MAB SFD from Bottke et al. (2005a) and (2) a dashed gray line representing our inferred SFD for S-complex asteroids (Mothé-Diniz et al. 2003; see Section 4.1.). Initial MMSN cases (primordial MAB masses at T = 0.5 Myr) are represented by colors and symbols as in Figures 1 and 3 (labeled at the top right corner of panel (b); not all cases are shown for clarity purposes): 0.050 MMSN (magenta), 0.010 MMSN (red), 0.005 MMSN (blue), 0.002 MMSN (yellow), and 0.001 MMSN (green). The red shaded area represents depleted SFDs that are not compatible with the current S-complex SFD (gray dashed line) and in most cases comparable to or even higher than the total MAB SFD (gray solid line).
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Evolved SFDs. Top panels ((a) T = 3 Myr and (b) T = 5 Myr) are for simulations where we did not consider Jupiter’s perturbation. Bottom panels ((c) T = 3 Myr and (d) T = 5 Myr) are for simulations where we considered Jupiter’s perturbation. For reference, we show (1) a solid gray line at the bottom representing the current MAB SFD from Bottke et al. (2005a) and (2) a dashed gray line representing our inferred SFD for S-complex asteroids (Mothé-Diniz et al. 2003; see main text.). Other colored symbols/lines are the same as in Figure 1, but only a few cases are highlighted to improve visualization. Those are (from top to bottom): 2.000 MMSN (black), 0.200 MMSN (yellow), 0.050 MMSN (magenta), 0.010 MMSN (red), and 0.001 MMSN (green). The shaded blue area indicates the target diameter range where the evolved SFD slope needs to resemble that of the current MAB SFD.
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Comparison between the current MAB (see main text for our definition of the MAB) from MPC with H < 9.6 (red) and results from Deienno et al. (2018; black). Left: eccentricity vs. semimajor axis. Gray lines demarcate regions where q = 1.9 au and Q = 4.1 au. Right: inclination vs. semimajor axis. The cyan dot represents the real orbit of asteroid (4) Vesta taken from the MPC data.
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Initial cumulative SFDs adopted for our different primordial MAB populations in terms of MMSN (see main text). For reference, we show (1) a gray line at the bottom representing the current MAB SFD from Bottke et al. (2005a) and (2) gray triangles from Figure 7(a) in Morbidelli et al. (2009). Other colored symbols/lines are for the different primordial MAB masses considered in term of MMSN. From top to bottom: 2.000 MMSN (black), 1.000 MMSN (red), 0.500 MMSN (blue), 0.200 MMSN (yellow), 0.100 MMSN (green), 0.050 MMSN (magenta), 0.020 MMSN (black), 0.010 MMSN (red), 0.005 MMSN (blue), 0.002 MMSN (yellow), and 0.001 MMSN (green). See the main text for the actual mass in Earth masses for each specific case.
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Number of objects with D > 500 km formed within the entire MAB region by T = 5 Myr (blue triangles) as a function of the primordial MAB total mass in terms of MMSN fraction (Section 2) in a simulation where Jupiter was not present. Blue labels on top of blue triangles show the exact number of objects formed. These numbers are obtained by summing the number of all objects with D > 500 km formed in all five MAB subregions defined in Section 3, i.e., EiMB, IMB, CMB, OMB, and EoMB. Green triangles refer to the expected number of D > 500 km objects that would survive solar system evolution after gas nebula dispersal when applying our fiducial D18 D fac depletion factors (Table 1). Green labels on top of green triangles show how many survived depletion and in which MAB subregion (see Appendix Table A1 at T = 5 Myr). The yellow shaded region represents the acceptable number of D > 500 km objects to survive in the IMB after depletion (see main text).
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Same as Figures 4 and A2, while applying the depletion factor from C19﹩{}_{{P}_{{\rm{S}}}/{P}_{{\rm{J}}}}^{{\mathrm{AMD}}_{\mathrm{JS}}}﹩ from Table 1, i.e., only considering cases from Clement et al. (2019) where Jupiter and Saturn’s AMD remained lower than 0.1 and their period ratio did not exceed 2.5 (similar to cases from Roig & Nesvorný 2015; Deienno et al. 2016, 2018; Nesvorńy et al. 2017; D18 D fac in Table 1).
Paper: Accretion and Uneven Depletion of the Main Asteroid Belt
Authors: Rogerio Deienno, David Nesvorný, Matthew S. Clement, William F. Bottke, André Izidoro, Kevin J. Walsh
Figure caption: Same as Figure 4, but considering the potential upper limit depletion case from C19all from Table 1, i.e., where we did not exclude cases in which Jupiter and Saturn’s AMD ended larger than 0.1 and/or their period ratio P S/P J exceeds 2.5 (see Figure A2 below for a comparison).
Paper: Updated Catalog of Kepler Planet Candidates: Focus on Accuracy and Orbital Periods
Authors: Jack J. Lissauer, Jason F. Rowe, Daniel Jontof-Hutter, Daniel C. Fabrycky, Eric B. Ford, Darin Ragozzine, Jason H. Steffen, Kadri M. Nizam
Figure caption: Normalized cumulative distribution function of planetary radii of planets for specified system multiplicity. The panel on the left compares singles with planets in multis, whereas the panel on the right compares planets in two-planet systems with those in systems of higher multiplicity. We normalized the cumulative distribution functions to unity at R  p = 5 R ⊕. Candidates with S/N < 12 or b + σ +(b) ≥ 0.95 are excluded from this radius distribution, although planets are considered to be in multis even if all of their companions fail to meet one or both of these cuts. These plots include KOIs rejected because they are too large (dispositioned as R in Table 1). Only the portions of the distributions with R  p  < 30 R ⊕ are shown, although larger bodies that satisfy our criteria are included in the computation of the numbers given within brackets. No candidates in multis satisfying our upper limit on impact parameter have R  p  > 30 R ⊕, whereas one single with status P and 12 with status R are larger than this value and not shown. (The green triangle with P ≈ 150 days in Figure 1 represents KOI-1426.03, which has V-shaped transits and b > 1.)
Paper: Updated Catalog of Kepler Planet Candidates: Focus on Accuracy and Orbital Periods
Authors: Jack J. Lissauer, Jason F. Rowe, Daniel Jontof-Hutter, Daniel C. Fabrycky, Eric B. Ford, Darin Ragozzine, Jason H. Steffen, Kadri M. Nizam
Figure caption: These plots show the orbital periods of each of the planets in every Kepler multiplanet system. The three panels show systems of differing multiplicity. Within each panel, all symbols along a given vertical line represent planets belonging to the same star, and the systems are ordered horizontally according to the orbital period of the innermost planet. The top panel presents systems with two (red) or three (blue) detected transiting planets, the middle panel presents systems with four transiting planets, and the bottom panel presents systems with at least five transiting planets. The top panel does not plot KOI-1843.03 due to its short orbital period, 0.177 days, which is <40% as long as that of any other Kepler PC in a multi; however, its two companion planets are represented by blue points touching the vertical axis. In the middle and bottom panels, the symbol size is proportional to the planetary radius, although in the middle panel, planets larger than 5 R ⊕ are shown as if R  p = 5 R ⊕, and the systems are labeled by KOI number at the bottom, with red numbers being used for systems with six to eight transiting planets. Colors of planets in the lower two panels denote the TTV flag given by Kane et al. (2013); bright yellow is 8 or 9 (moderate or strong TTVs), dark green is 7 (probable TTVs), and black is no TTVs (note, however, that recently identified PCs were not examined by Kane et al. 2013). The periods of monotransit objects are constrained to be greater than the plotted values by not showing a second transit in the recorded data; see Table 3.
Paper: Updated Catalog of Kepler Planet Candidates: Focus on Accuracy and Orbital Periods
Authors: Jack J. Lissauer, Jason F. Rowe, Daniel Jontof-Hutter, Daniel C. Fabrycky, Eric B. Ford, Darin Ragozzine, Jason H. Steffen, Kadri M. Nizam
Figure caption: Cumulative distribution function of planetary radii comparing “large” PCs in multiplanet systems with similarly sized PCs in singles, as well as with planets in singles with the additional constraint P > 10 days; all curves are normalized to unity at 10 R ⊕. The four panels, upper left, upper right, lower left, and lower right, consider planets larger than 3, 4, 4.5, and 5 R ⊕, respectively. The numbers in square brackets represent PCs (plus KOIs rejected solely because they are too large and therefore dispositioned as “R” in Table 1) larger than the minimum value represented in the particular panel (no upper size cutoff). This plot uses the same criteria for inclusion as used in Figure 11.