adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Testing the Bus–DeMeo Asteroid Taxonomy Using Meteorite Spectra
Authors: Thomas H. Burbine, Iman Khanani, Deepika Kumawat, Ahlay Hussain, Sydney M. Wallace, M. Darby Dyar
Figure caption: Reflectance spectra of objects classified as X-types. Plotted are (22) Kalliope (black open squares; DeMeo et al. 2009), CM2 chondrite Boriskino (<35 μm; red line), iron meteorite Mundrabilla (flat surface; blue line), and EH4 chondrite Abee (<125 μm; green line). The Kalliope spectrum was normalized to unity at 0.55 μm and then multiplied by 0.1419 (IRAS albedo; Tedesco et al. 2004). The error bars for the asteroid spectrum are 1σ.
Paper: Testing the Bus–DeMeo Asteroid Taxonomy Using Meteorite Spectra
Authors: Thomas H. Burbine, Iman Khanani, Deepika Kumawat, Ahlay Hussain, Sydney M. Wallace, M. Darby Dyar
Figure caption: Reflectance spectra of objects classified as Sq-types. Plotted are (3) Juno (black open squares; DeMeo et al. 2009), H4 chondrite Monroe (<125 μm; red line), L6 chondrite Karkh (<150 μm, metal removed; blue line), and the anomalous ureilite MET 01085 (<75 μm; green line). The Juno spectrum was normalized to unity at 0.55 μm and then multiplied by 0.2383 (IRAS albedo; Tedesco et al. 2004). The error bars for the asteroid spectrum are 1σ.
Paper: Testing the Bus–DeMeo Asteroid Taxonomy Using Meteorite Spectra
Authors: Thomas H. Burbine, Iman Khanani, Deepika Kumawat, Ahlay Hussain, Sydney M. Wallace, M. Darby Dyar
Figure caption: Reflectance spectra of objects classified as V-types. Plotted are (4) Vesta (black open squares; DeMeo et al. 2009), the eucrite Bouvante (<25 μm; red line), howardite QUE 97002 (<75 μm; blue line), and Martian meteorite (shergottite) Zagami (<125 μm; green line). The Vesta spectrum was normalized to unity at 0.55 μm and then multiplied by 0.4228 (IRAS albedo; Tedesco et al. 2004). The error bars for the asteroid spectrum are 1σ.
Paper: Testing the Bus–DeMeo Asteroid Taxonomy Using Meteorite Spectra
Authors: Thomas H. Burbine, Iman Khanani, Deepika Kumawat, Ahlay Hussain, Sydney M. Wallace, M. Darby Dyar
Figure caption: Reflectance spectra of objects classified as D-types. Plotted are (1143) Odysseus (black open squares; DeMeo et al. 2009), CM2 chondrite Mighei (<100 μm; red line), iron meteorite Odessa (45–90 μm; blue line), and CO3 chondrite MIL 07687 (<35 μm; green line). The Odysseus spectrum was normalized to unity at 0.55 μm and then multiplied by 0.0753 (IRAS albedo; Tedesco et al. 2004). The error bars for the asteroid spectrum are 1σ.
Paper: The Faustini Permanently Shadowed Region on the Moon
Authors: Jean-Pierre Williams, Prasun Mahanti, Mark S. Robinson, Robert V. Wagner, Marley Chertok, Norbert Schörghofer, Erwan Mazarico, Brett W. Denevi, Shuai Li, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a) Polar stereographic map of surface roughness (RGB composite of VRM at 20, 40, and 80 m pixel−1) of the region around Faustini crater. The Faustini PSR is outlined by a white solid line, and the Faustini floor is outlined by a white dotted line. Roughness is generally elevated on the cold wall within the PSR (right side) relative to the warm equator-facing side (left side). Linear zones of elevated roughness with two distinct orientations are highlighted with red lines in panel (b) and are likely ray segments from Tycho and Jackson craters given their orientations. Two other zones of elevated roughness are outlined by white ellipses and may result from ejected debris originating from Shackleton. Arrows illustrate the direction of delivery. (c) Portion of ShadowCam mosaic showing part of the poleward-facing wall. The red line is the PSR boundary, and the thin white line is the wall-floor contact. The white ellipse highlights a region of elevated roughness with possible degraded secondary craters from Shackleton. The location of the image is shown as the white box in panel (a).
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: South polar map of Miranda, showing the linear features, craters, and terrain making up Elsinore Corona, Inverness Corona, and Arden Corona. Features outside of Elsinore Corona and Arden Corona are also mapped for context. The two sets of scarps, mapped as terraces because of sharing orientations within each set (indicated by black arrows), are southeast of Arden Corona. The terraces appear to be connected to the furrows making up Arden Corona and may together form an extensional basin. Note the difference in color from Figures 1, 4, and 5 because of being made in ArcGIS Pro instead of JMARS. Inverness Corona and the cratered terrain (not colored) are also mapped for context to show that most geologic activity observable on Miranda is localized to the coronae rather than evenly distributed across the visible hemisphere.
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: Map of Miranda’s southern hemisphere made using JMARS and a base map by P. M. Schenk (2013). The map is shown to give context to the regional maps of Arden Corona and Elsinore Corona in Figures 4 and 5. The map shows how Arden Corona and Elsinore Corona are on opposite hemispheres from each other and made up of concentric ridges. The upper mapped region represents Elsinore Corona. Elsinore Corona is divided between ropelike folded terrain in the south (ECFT), rugged ridged terrain in the northwest (ECRT) and a mixture of the two terrains to the northeast (ECMT). Ridges are positive relief grooves. Furrows are negative relief grooves. The lower region represents Arden Corona (AC). Arden Corona is made up of a series of furrows. Prominent impact basins are also mapped for geographic context. Elsinore Corona and Arden Corona are mapped in this figure because their analysis required higher-resolution imagery, but the cratered terrain and Inverness Corona are mapped only in Figure 3 because of lower-resolution requirements, since they were not the main focus of the study. Labels of each unit mapped are added to clarify colors because of transparency issues.
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: A geologic structure and terrain map of Elsinore Corona. Yellow lines indicate furrows, while black lines indicate ridges. Elsinore Corona appears to consist of three different terrain types: a flow-like, folded terrain to the south (ECFT); a more rugged ridged terrain to the north (ECRT); and a mixture of the two terrains to the northeast (ECMT). An east–west massif appears to demarcate the boundary between the southern and northern terrains of Elsinore Corona. The alternating ridges and furrows across Elsinore Corona suggest a different formation mechanism for Elsinore Corona than Arden Corona, which consists of a series of furrows without ridges (see Figure 4). See Figure 1 for global context. The map was adapted from a base map by P. M. Schenk (2013).
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: A map of Arden Corona. Arden Corona has an oblong shape. It appears to consist of concentric grooves that become squarer with increasing distance from the center. Arden Corona is depicted in green. The white lines represent the concentric grooves that form Arden Corona. The grooves have negative relief based on illumination direction, so they are mapped as furrows. Prominent impact craters are also mapped for geographic context. Base map by P. M. Schenk (2013). See Figure 1 for the global context for this map.
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: Eccentricity tidal stress results in symmetric antipodal stress where, at any given time during a diurnal rotation, two opposite hemispheres will have the same stress pattern, whether compressional or tensile. Tension is positive and shown in red. Compression is negative and shown in blue. The lower ice shell thickness is 80 km with a 50 km thick ocean. The brittle crust thickness is 1 km, and the lower ductile ice shell viscosity is 1E15 Pa-s. Note that the scale bar is only −1 to 1 kPa, indicating the very weak tidal stress because of the extremely low eccentricity of modern Miranda (e = 0.0013). The orbital phase of the plot and subsequent plots is the orbital phase where tensile stress is maximum.
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: For lower ice shell viscosity values ≥1E14 Pa-s, the stress magnitude increases significantly for a lower ice shell thickness of ≤30 km compared to an ice shell >30 km in thickness. For lower ice shell viscosity values ≥1E12 Pa-s and <1E14 Pa-s, tidal stress magnitude changes with ice shell thickness, but more gradually. Note that the maximum tidal stress magnitude from eccentricity tidal stress is shown to be <1000 kPa. The vertical axis is on a logarithmic scale. Circles and triangles are added for clarity and not to indicate data points.
Paper: Constraining Ocean and Ice Shell Thickness on Miranda from Surface Geological Structures and Stress Modeling
Authors: Caleb Strom, Tom A. Nordheim, D. Alex Patthoff, Sherry K. Fieber-Beyer
Figure caption: A diagram of the four-layer model used for Miranda in SatStressGUI. The diagram shows an ice shell with a more brittle upper layer and less brittle lower layer, a subsurface ocean, and a rocky core.
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: Disk-integrated properties of Kalliope and Linus from ALMA. (a) Flux density of Kalliope plotted alongside its projected area according to the SAGE shape model from M. Ferrais et al. (2022). (b) The average brightness temperature of Kalliope 〈T  b,K〉 according to these flux densities and areas. (c) The flux density and average brightness temperature 〈T  b,L〉 of Linus. Linus is ∼20 K warmer than Kalliope on average.
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: Images of Kalliope and Linus over ∼3/4 of Kalliope’s rotation period. Each image is labeled with the center time and the sub-observer longitude based on the SAGE shape model of M. Ferrais et al. (2022). The ellipse in the lower left corner indicates the size and shape of the resolution element.
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: Linus’ orbit in R.A. and decl. offset in milliarcseconds from Kalliope from the ephemerides of F. Vachier et al. (2012) and J. D. Drummond et al. (2021) calculated at the time of the ALMA observations. In the zoomed panel, the squares and stars are the two ephemerides calculated at the exact time of the ALMA observation of the same color (corrected for light travel time).
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: Residual images (data minus model) for Kalliope for the ALMA observations. The data image for each frame corresponds to Figure 1 and the model is the best-fit global model for each epoch. The black outline indicates the shape and location of Kalliope in each frame, and the ellipse in the lower left corner indicates the size and shape of the resolution element.
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: Polarization fraction as a function of emission angle at 1.3 mm, binned across all ALMA observations. Kalliope shows no evidence for polarization. (16) Psyche is shown for comparison (data from K. de Kleer et al. 2021b).
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: VLA images of Kalliope at 9 mm (Ka band) on UT 2020 December 19 and 20. Markings and labels are the same as in Figure 1.
Paper: Surface Properties of the Kalliope–Linus System from ALMA and VLA Data
Authors: Katherine de Kleer, Saverio Cambioni, Bryan Butler, Michael Shepard
Figure caption: VLA images of Kalliope at 2 cm (Ku band) on UT 2020 December 18 and 19. Markings and labels are the same as in Figure 1.
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a) Diviner two-parameter model RGB composite overlaid on a Kaguya TC image mosaic (see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of frames used) for the mare craters Messier (right) and Messier A (left). The white box indicates the location of Figure 12. The inset shows a portion of the Kaguya optical maturity (OMAT) 512 ppd map around the two craters, highlighting the extent of their bright rays (P. G. Lucey et al. 2000; M. Lemelin et al. 2016). (b) Diviner colorized RA from the map of T. M. Powell et al. (2023), overlaid on the same Kaguya TC mosaic. (c) Arecibo S-band CPR (color) modulated by same-sense polarized return (lightness). (d) Mini-RF bistatic X-band CPR (color) modulated by same-sense polarized return (lightness), overlaid on the same Kaguya TC mosaic as panels (a) and (b). Note the different range of CPR values in panels (c) and (d). Arrows in panels (c) and (d) indicate the slightly elevated radar backscatter and CPR at both wavelengths associated with the westward-extending rays seen in the inset of panel (a).
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a) Overview and (b, c) close-up views of the crater Lowell H (13.°3 south, 102.°5 west, D = 9.7 km) from a 1 m pixel−1 LROC NAC mosaic (see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of frames used), showing impact melt flows and other ejecta emanating from its western rim. (d–f) Diviner two-parameter model RGB composite over NAC mosaic for the same locations as in panels (a)–(c). U and L indicate approximate locations of the upper and lower facies, respectively. See Figures 2, 6, and 8–10 in J. B. Plescia & P. D. Spudis (2014).
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: Example of values in the (a) red, (b) green, and (c) blue channels, as well as (d) the final RGB composite image for the highlands crater Tharp (30.°61 south, 145.°61 east, D = 13.5 km), overlaid on an LROC NAC mosaic over the 100 m pixel–1 LROC Wide Angle Camera (WAC) Global Morphology map (E. J. Speyerer et al. 2011); see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of frames used. Colored markers in panel (b) correspond to close-up images and nighttime temperature curves plotted in Figure 4. In this and all subsequent RGB model parameter maps, light-gray lines indicate the boundary between one-parameter and two-parameter model results (see Section 5.3).
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a–e) Close-ups of distal ejecta from Mirzakhani. (a) Mixture of light- and dark-toned ejecta emplaced on the wall of Gibbs, near the edge of the 5 km crater’s continuous ejecta blanket. The box shows the location of panel (b). (b) Close-up of lobate flow morphology present near the edge of the continuous ejecta, where the RGB composite shows a transition from predominantly blocky to predominantly melt-rich materials. (c–e) Small flows with lobate morphology emerging from ejecta (c) ∼5 crater radii west of the crater rim, (d) ∼5 crater radii north of the crater rim, and (e) ∼4 crater radii east of the crater rim. Arrows in panels (c)–(e) indicate the location of the flows, for comparison to the locations of high thermal inertia in the two-parameter model RGB composite (green-cyan pixels). Panels (c)–(e) have an additional 10% stretch applied to the blue and green channels to bring out the faint signature of higher thermal inertia materials.
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a–f) Close-up views of several representative ejecta regions around Tharp corresponding to distinct colors in the RGB map in Figure 3, and (g) their corresponding nighttime bolometric surface temperatures and best-fit modeled temperature curves, as well as (h) their variation in I 273K with depth.
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption:  I  d,273K  vs. H for all 128 ppd spatial bins within each of the six ejecta units from the map of E. Lev et al. (2021). The “pond,” “hummocky,” and “crater wall” units were excluded, as they are either mostly or entirely within the crater rim. The H/I  d,273K  ranges used to define “clastic,” “melt,” and “blocky” ejecta types in our analysis are shown with black boundaries, and gray contours indicate 10% intervals of scatter point density.
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a) Results of the two-parameter thermal model RGB composite overlaid on a mosaic of LROC NAC low-Sun images (see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of frames used) for the crater Mirzakhani (17.°5 south, 85.°2 east, D = 5.0 km), showing concentrations of impact melt to the north and east (green) and rockier ejecta to the southwest (yellow). (b) LROC NAC high-Sun mosaic for comparison (see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of frames used). Boxes in panels (a) and (b) indicate the locations of images in Figure 10.
Paper: Thermophysical Diversity of Young Lunar Crater Ejecta Revealed with LRO Diviner Observations
Authors: Cailin L. Gallinger, Jean-Pierre Williams, Catherine D. Neish, Tyler M. Powell, Catherine M. Elder, Rebecca R. Ghent, Paul O. Hayne, David A. Paige
Figure caption: Comparison between (a) the two-parameter thermal model RGB composite of J.-P. Williams et al. (2022, see their Figures 4(a)) and (b) our two-parameter model output RGB composite overlaid on NAC mosaics (see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of frames used) for the highlands crater Giordano Bruno.
Paper: Asteroid Impact Hazard Warning from the Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: Oliver Lay, Joe Masiero, Tommy Grav, Amy Mainzer, Frank Masci, Edward Wright
Figure caption: (a) 5 yr survey completeness as a function of hazard for asteroid diameters of 35–1600 m. Each dot represents the completeness for a given PHA orbit and asteroid diameter. The dashed line is an approximate delineation between objects that are found by NEO Surveyor and those that are not. (b) Relative probability of impact per half-decade of impact energy. (c) Probability of prior discovery by 5 yr NEO Surveyor survey for each half-decade of impact energy.
Paper: Asteroid Impact Hazard Warning from the Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: Oliver Lay, Joe Masiero, Tommy Grav, Amy Mainzer, Frank Masci, Edward Wright
Figure caption: Impact geometry. (a) View normal to the plane containing the Earth and asteroid velocity vectors,  v  Earth and  v  ast. (b) View in the plane of (a), normal to the Earth velocity vector. The Earth and asteroid trajectories are shown in blue and red, respectively. The MOID is d min. The circles represent the Earth at two points in its orbit spanning the possible range for an impact, with impact points denoted by X 1 and X 2.
Paper: Asteroid Impact Hazard Warning from the Near-Earth Object Surveyor Mission
Authors: Oliver Lay, Joe Masiero, Tommy Grav, Amy Mainzer, Frank Masci, Edward Wright
Figure caption: Histogram of MOID for the 144,000 orbits in the Granvik PHA synthetic population.
Paper: The Faustini Permanently Shadowed Region on the Moon
Authors: Jean-Pierre Williams, Prasun Mahanti, Mark S. Robinson, Robert V. Wagner, Marley Chertok, Norbert Schörghofer, Erwan Mazarico, Brett W. Denevi, Shuai Li, David A. Paige
Figure caption: (a) A portion of ShadowCam image M15308992S showing an LRC that contains a DPSR within its interior (M. S. Robinson et al. 2024). (b) The interior of the LRC with the image stretched to highlight the DPSR (orange outline) identified by P. O’Brien & S. Byrne (2022). (c) Model temperatures from within the DPSR polygon in panel (b) for each Earth day for years 2023 and 2024. Markers and error bars are the mean and standard deviation of the temperatures within the polygon. The red point corresponds to the date that image M15308992S was acquired, showing that the image was acquired near an annual temperature maximum. See Figure 14 for the location of the LRC.
Paper: The Faustini Permanently Shadowed Region on the Moon
Authors: Jean-Pierre Williams, Prasun Mahanti, Mark S. Robinson, Robert V. Wagner, Marley Chertok, Norbert Schörghofer, Erwan Mazarico, Brett W. Denevi, Shuai Li, David A. Paige
Figure caption: Portions of the ShadowCam mosaic in Figure 1(a) (left column) and colorized by elevation (right column) highlighting irregular depressions. (a–b) A quasi-circular depression with an elongated segment in the Lower unit. (c–d) An elliptical, rimless depression in the Lower unit. (e–f) Two deeper depressions, likely remnant impact craters, at the boundary of the Middle and Upper units, with depressions extending beyond the former crater rims. The smaller crater has a more extensive, elongated depression that abuts the central mound on the left side of the figure. White scale bars are 500 m. See Figure 1 for their locations.
Paper: The Faustini Permanently Shadowed Region on the Moon
Authors: Jean-Pierre Williams, Prasun Mahanti, Mark S. Robinson, Robert V. Wagner, Marley Chertok, Norbert Schörghofer, Erwan Mazarico, Brett W. Denevi, Shuai Li, David A. Paige
Figure caption: Shaded relief of the Faustini floor showing (a) where the time-average sublimation rates from N. Schörghofer & J.-P. Williams (2024) are below 1 kg m−2 Gyr−1 for HCN, SO2, and NH3 and (b) the subsurface depth at which the loss rate of 1 kg m−2 Gyr−1 of solid CO2 occurs at 500 m resolution from N. Schörghofer et al. (2021). Black lines are unit boundaries from Figure 1.