adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
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: Examples of previous data sets used to map the physical properties of lunar crater ejecta, overlaid on an LROC NAC image mosaic of the lunar farside crater Tharp (30.°61 south, 145.°61 east, D = 13.5 km; see Table 3 in Appendix A for the list of NAC frames used). (a) Mini-RF S-band (12.6 cm) CPR (color) modulated by total backscattered power (lightness). (b) Diviner RA, from the map of T. M. Powell et al. (2023). (c) Diviner H-parameter, from the map of P. O. Hayne et al. (2017). Boxes mark locations of images in Figure 2.
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, b) Portions of LROC NAC image M1107332576L/R for areas of the ejecta blanket of Tharp indicated in Figure 1, showing (a) a region with a large quantity of impact melt and (b) a region covered with many large (>2 m diameter) boulders. (c) Bolometric surface temperatures extracted over these regions at the locations of the markers in panels (a) and (b), compared to a range of predicted temperatures from the model of P. O. Hayne et al. (2017) for various values of H, along with (d) depth profiles of density for each value.
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Left: filter (LSST ugrizy) of every pointing covered by the simulated nominal data set. Lightcurve points are discarded from the final data set first by S/N, then heliocentric distance r  h . Right: final lightcurve for the nominal case of this study, with 325 individual points remaining within imposed 5σ and r  h  limits. Marker color represents time from first observation. Points were corrected for solar phase by linear phase function slope value β  L  and phased to period P  i  = 14.8978 hr. The misalignment of the lightcurve profiles is due to synodic effects (i.e., the object viewing geometry varying with respect to the observer over the 10 yr lightcurve baseline).
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Left: periodogram for a period search using the nominal lightcurve. The χ 2 minimum is consistent with Pi , and the next strongest “peaks” occur at Pi  multiples and submultiples. Other peaks are due to sampling aliases. Right: distribution of rotation pole solutions. Darker regions indicate a lower value of χ 2 and therefore a better fit to the input lightcurves. The yellow dot depicts the ecliptic coordinates corresponding to the pole orientation with the best fit to the lightcurves, and yellow circles show regions within which χ 2 values are within 10% of this minimum value.
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Reduced magnitude as a function of phase angle α for the nominal lightcurve. The solid line gives the best fit to the lightcurve points from linear regression with a slope value β = (0.0565 ± 0.0014) mag deg–1. The dashed line is the phase function used as input (slope β  L ) to generate lightcurves. The scatter in the points is due solely to lightcurve amplitude, no photometric noise is incorporated at this stage, and error bars are not used to weight the phase function fit.
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Nucleus phase function for the nominal lightcurves. Blue colored points show the synthetic magnitudes corrected for the effects of rotation by the solution 1 shape model, colored according to heliocentric distance r h . The translucent gray points depict the lightcurve points before the rotational correction. The solid line shows the best linear fit to the corrected points (slope value β corr = 0.0588 ± 0.0002 mag deg−1, intercept H(1, 1, 0) = 15.634 ± 0.002), and the dashed line shows the fit to the original, scattered points (slope value β scat = 0.0565 ± 0.0014 mag deg−1, intercept H(1, 1, 0) = 15.665 ± 0.012).
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Histograms from the MC phase function (left) and period (right) analysis for the nominal case. The true phase function slope β  L  is given by the dashed vertical line in the left panel. The period values shown are twice the most likely period value identified by the Lomb–Scargle analysis.
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Lomb–Scargle periodogram for a single-peaked rotation period search on the nominal lightcurve. The highest peak corresponds to a most likely synodic rotation period P = 14.898088 hr.
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: A comparison of the input 67P shape model (top) with the final convex models corresponding to pole solution 1 (center) and the mirror at solution 2 (bottom). Three orthogonal views are given for each model, with the viewing angle oriented along the axis indicated in bold above the model. The rotation axis is aligned with the Z-axis.
Paper: Predictions for Sparse Photometry of Jupiter-family Comet Nuclei in the LSST Era
Authors: A. Donaldson, C. Snodgrass, R. Kokotanekova, A. Rożek
Figure caption: Results from a 5° × 5° pole search on synthetic lightcurves with pole obliquity (upper) I = 0° and (lower) I = 180° projected onto the ecliptic sphere.
Paper: The Discovery and Evolution of a Possible New Epoch of Cometary Activity by the Centaur (2060) Chiron
Authors: Matthew M. Dobson, Megan E. Schwamb, Alan Fitzsimmons, Charles Schambeau, Aren Beck, Larry Denneau, Nicolas Erasmus, A. N. Heinze, Luke J. Shingles, Robert J. Siverd, Ken W. Smith, John L. Tonry, Henry Weiland, David. R. Young, Michael S. P. Kelley, Tim Lister, Pedro H. Bernardinelli, Marin Ferrais, Emmanuel Jehin, Grigori Fedorets, Susan D. Benecchi, Anne J. Verbiscer, Joseph Murtagh, René Duffard, Edward Gomez, Joey Chatelain, Sarah Greenstreet
Figure caption: (a): ATLAS c-filter lightcurve of Chiron. (b): ATLAS c-filter phase curve of Chiron. (c): ATLAS o-filter lightcurve of Chiron. (d): ATLAS o-filter phase curve of Chiron. The 1σ uncertainty error bars are plotted but may be smaller than the plot markers. All observing seasons are labeled as per Table 2.
Paper: The Discovery and Evolution of a Possible New Epoch of Cometary Activity by the Centaur (2060) Chiron
Authors: Matthew M. Dobson, Megan E. Schwamb, Alan Fitzsimmons, Charles Schambeau, Aren Beck, Larry Denneau, Nicolas Erasmus, A. N. Heinze, Luke J. Shingles, Robert J. Siverd, Ken W. Smith, John L. Tonry, Henry Weiland, David. R. Young, Michael S. P. Kelley, Tim Lister, Pedro H. Bernardinelli, Marin Ferrais, Emmanuel Jehin, Grigori Fedorets, Susan D. Benecchi, Anne J. Verbiscer, Joseph Murtagh, René Duffard, Edward Gomez, Joey Chatelain, Sarah Greenstreet
Figure caption: (a) Color-corrected reduced magnitudes vs. time of Chiron in ATLAS c and ZTF g filters. (b) Color-corrected reduced magnitudes vs. time of Chiron in ATLAS o and ZTF r filters. (c) ATLAS reduced magnitude values vs. time. (d) ZTF reduced magnitude values vs. time. Error bars are 1σ uncertainties. Note that the ATLAS and ZTF reduced magnitudes are not color-corrected in this figure. All observing seasons are labeled as per Table 2. The earliest data in this plot start at observing season G (2015–2016), as observing seasons A–F (2012–2014) have insufficient data to fully sample Chiron’s brightness across time. Vertical blue lines indicate the time at which Chiron was at aphelion.
Paper: BYORP and Dissipation in Binary Asteroids: Lessons from DART
Authors: Matija Ćuk, Harrison Agrusa, Rachel H. Cueva, Fabio Ferrari, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Seth A. Jacobson, Jay McMahon, Patrick Michel, Paul Sánchez, Daniel J. Scheeres, Stephen Schwartz, Kevin J. Walsh, Yun Zhang
Figure caption: Distribution of BYORP coefficients B for sets of 1000 synthetic asteroids for each of the four combinations of parameters i and h shown in Figure 1. The BYORP force F  B  along the intermediate axis of the secondary is related to parameter B by the relation F  B  = BR 2Φ/c, where R is the secondary’s shortest radius, Φ is the solar flux experienced by the secondary, and c is the speed of light. For each set of synthetic shapes, the largest absolute value of B was used as the outer bound on the set of 40 equal-sized bins, and we plotted the number of synthetic shapes within each bin. As the sized bins vary from one set to the other, the plotted distributions cannot be directly quantitatively compared. For comparisons between dispersions for each distribution, see Figure 3.
Paper: BYORP and Dissipation in Binary Asteroids: Lessons from DART
Authors: Matija Ćuk, Harrison Agrusa, Rachel H. Cueva, Fabio Ferrari, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Seth A. Jacobson, Jay McMahon, Patrick Michel, Paul Sánchez, Daniel J. Scheeres, Stephen Schwartz, Kevin J. Walsh, Yun Zhang
Figure caption: Four different realizations of an ellipsoidal synthetic asteroid with axis ratios a/c = 1.3 and b/c = 1.1, with facet subdivision parameter i and vertical relief parameter h indicated in each panel (the scale is set by c = 1). This illustration simply shows lines connecting vertices in numbering order, the asteroid being fully “transparent”; the goal is simply to illustrate trends with changing i and h.
Paper: BYORP and Dissipation in Binary Asteroids: Lessons from DART
Authors: Matija Ćuk, Harrison Agrusa, Rachel H. Cueva, Fabio Ferrari, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Seth A. Jacobson, Jay McMahon, Patrick Michel, Paul Sánchez, Daniel J. Scheeres, Stephen Schwartz, Kevin J. Walsh, Yun Zhang
Figure caption: Comparison of BYORP dispersions as cyan empty circles shown in Figure 3 with the BYORP parameters of real binary asteroids with detected mutual period drift (Scheirich et al. 2015, 2021; Scheirich & Pravec 2022). In order to assign the vertical roughness parameter h to real secondaries, we divided 15 m by the mean radii of the secondaries. This 15 m absolute roughness scale was chosen in order for the model to match the observed data, although the sizes of the largest boulders on Dimorphos are roughly consistent with this value (Pajola et al. 2024). We ignored any tidal contribution to the orbital evolution when calculating the real asteroids’ B parameters.
Paper: BYORP and Dissipation in Binary Asteroids: Lessons from DART
Authors: Matija Ćuk, Harrison Agrusa, Rachel H. Cueva, Fabio Ferrari, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Seth A. Jacobson, Jay McMahon, Patrick Michel, Paul Sánchez, Daniel J. Scheeres, Stephen Schwartz, Kevin J. Walsh, Yun Zhang
Figure caption: Timescales for tidal evolution (based on the model of Goldreich & Sari 2009) and BYORP (this work) for different-sized primaries with synchronous satellites orbiting at a distance of three primary radii. Magenta lines are for systems with r 2/r 1 = 0.2, green lines for r 2/r 1 = 0.32, and blue lines for r 2/r 1 = 0.5. For BYORP timescales, solid lines plot values for the average heliocentric distance of 1 au, while dashed lines plot values for 2.5 au (the former are typical of near-Earth asteroids, while the latter apply to the inner main asteroid belt). The open circles plot the observed orbital evolution rates for select systems (see Figure 4), while the filled circles plot the same values scaled to an average heliocentric distance of 1 au. Left to right, the four systems are 1996 FG3 (r 2/r 1 = 0.29), Moshup (r 2/r 1 = 0.42), Didymos (r 2/r 1 = 0.2), and 2001 SL9 (r 2/r 1 = 0.24).
Paper: BYORP and Dissipation in Binary Asteroids: Lessons from DART
Authors: Matija Ćuk, Harrison Agrusa, Rachel H. Cueva, Fabio Ferrari, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Seth A. Jacobson, Jay McMahon, Patrick Michel, Paul Sánchez, Daniel J. Scheeres, Stephen Schwartz, Kevin J. Walsh, Yun Zhang
Figure caption: Distribution of dispersions in BYORP parameter B for a number of sets of synthetic asteroids, plotted against the shape parameter h. Different symbols indicate which value of i (determining the number of facets) was used for the set: asterisks signify i = 2, circles i = 3, squares i = 4, and the triangle i = 5. All sets included 1000 synthetic asteroids, except the i = 5 one that had 100. Dispersion was calculated as ﹩{\sigma }_{B}^{2}=\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}{\sum }_{i=0}^{n}{({B}_{i}-0)}^{2}﹩. Solid lines plot approximating power laws with exponents 4/3 (black line), one (shallow gray line), and 3/2 (steeper gray line).
Paper: Imaging Spectroscopy: Earth and Planetary Remote Sensing with the PSI Tetracorder and Expert Systems from Rovers to EMIT and Beyond
Authors: Roger N. Clark, Gregg A. Swayze, K. Eric Livo, Philip G. Brodrick, Eldar Noe Dobrea, Srinivasan Vijayarangan, Robert O. Green, David Wettergreen, Alberto Candela, Amanda Hendrix, Carlos Pérez García-Pando, Neil C. Pearson, Melissa D. Lane, Adolfo González-Romero, Xavier Querol
Figure caption: Generalized Tetracorder flowchart with our expert system. Instrument data (1) are analyzed in groups, i.e., wavelength ranges that analyze absorption or emission features with certain characteristics. Analysis can include a spectral library (2). A reference material might be rejected owing to physical constraints, like temperature or pressure (3). For each reference spectrum defined for a group, the various algorithms are applied to the observed spectrum and each reference spectrum (4). The results are compared, including applying additional constraints (5), and if the results pass the scoring, the top score is selected as the answer for that group. Sometimes an answer will call for additional analyses through a new action (7) and then a case is defined (8) for that action and #4 is run on that action, which may use different algorithms. An action can call other cases without limits (except for computer memory). More decisions are made for each case (5), and the cycle repeats until all cases are analyzed. Then, the next group (9) is started and the cycle repeats (10) until all groups and cases have been analyzed. The exact flow of groups and cases depends on the expert system commanding.
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: Resulting sin of the lag angle (first row), amplitude (second row), and torque (amplitude times lag; third row) of the thermal tide for varying longwave optical depth (τ LW; red), shortwave optical depth (τ SW; green), ASR (purple), and surface pressure (p  s ; orange). In the first column, black stars in the longwave optical depth test indicate real-gas experiments run with increasing H2O content in an N2 atmosphere. The open black star demonstrates the effect of disabling N2–N2 collisional absorption. In the last column, open orange circles indicate simulations with Rayleigh scattering. Closed circles indicate simulations where Rayleigh scattering is disabled. In all sensitivity tests, the rotation rate is set to 2n.
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: (a) Schematic demonstrating the amplitude and lag angles of the gravitational tide and the atmospheric thermal tide. The lag angle is measured from the planet−star axis and is given by δ  g  for the gravitational tide and δ  a  for the atmospheric thermal tide. As long as the pressure bulge (the blue ellipsoid) leads the planet−star axis, the thermal tide will produce a torque that opposes the gravitational tide. (b–d) Summary of results from J. Leconte et al. (2015), demonstrating the forcing frequency, σ = Ω − n, dependence of the thermal tide, decomposed into (b) the lag angle, (c) the amplitude, and (d) the torque due to the thermal tide. Inset boxes display the functional form of each component, derived from their simple model of a periodically heated thermal slab. A forcing frequency of zero corresponds to a tidally locked case where the rotation rate, Ω, is equal to the mean orbital rate, n.
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: Equilibrium rotation rate (as a ratio of the period of a year, T  y , and the period of one rotation, T  r , both in Earth days) of an Earth-mass planet calculated using Equation (40) as a function of τ LW and p  s . Purple regions correspond to synchronous rotation. For each stellar mass, we calculate the equilibrium rotation at an orbital semimajor axis, a, such that the incoming stellar radiation is equal to 1360 W m−2. The dashed white line shows the path through the parameter space when ﹩{\tau }_{\mathrm{LW}}\propto {p}_{s}^{2}﹩, and the solid white line shows τ LW ∝ p  s . The colored contour lines show how the boundary between synchronous (purple) and asynchronous rotation varies with the albedo of the planet: 0.3 (red), 0.5 (orange), 0.7 (yellow), 0.9 (blue). In all cases, τ SW = 0.1.
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: Demonstration of how atmospheric parameters determine a planet’s equilibrium rotation rate, (a) τ LW, (b) τ SW, (c) ASR, and (d) p  s . All panels assume that the planet orbits a 0.5 M ⊙ star at 0.33 au. Unless stated, atmospheric parameters are set at their base value. The time derivative of the spin rate is calculated using Equation (1) and the analytic model of the torque due to the thermal tide. Filled circles mark the equilibrium forcing frequency, calculated using Equation (40). The inset plots in each panel show the equilibrium rotation rate (σ eq/n) as a function of each variable.
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: Comparison of the analytic model with the results of the targeted GCM sensitivity study. Colors indicate output from the GCM (following the color convention in Figure 2), and black circles are results from the analytic model (Equations (33)–(35)).
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: Critical semimajor axis, a  c , for asynchronous rotation for varying atmospheric parameters. In all panels, the results from J. Leconte et al. (2015) are shown for the 1-bar (orange) and 10-bar (blue) cases. The shading represents how the critical semimajor axis shifts as you vary (a) longwave optical depth (between 5 and 50 for 10 bars and between 1 and 10 for 1 bar), (b) shortwave optical depth (between 0.6 and 2 for 10 bars and 1 bar), and (c) planetary albedo (between 0.2 and 0.9 for 10 bars and 1 bar). Gray circles present confirmed exoplanets between 0.5 and 3 Earth radii from the NASA Exoplanet Archive.
Paper: The Feasibility of Asynchronous Rotation via Thermal Tides for Diverse Atmospheric Compositions
Authors: Andrea M. Salazar, Robin Wordsworth
Figure caption: Same as in Figure 5, but for τ SW and p  s . In all cases, τ LW = 1.
Paper: A Detailed Study of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot over a 90-day Oscillation Cycle
Authors: Amy A. Simon, Michael H. Wong, Phillip S. Marcus, Patrick G. J. Irwin
Figure caption: The GRS’s appearance at wavelengths from 275 to 889 nm on 2023 December 10. The GRS is dark in the UV (F275W), violet (F395N), and green (F502N) filters but shows little contrast at red wavelengths (F631N). The methane absorption bands (FQ727N and FQ889N) are sensitive to clouds at different tropospheric altitudes, but not as high as in the UV, which is sensitive to stratospheric haze. Common features are labeled for reference.
Paper: A Detailed Study of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot over a 90-day Oscillation Cycle
Authors: Amy A. Simon, Michael H. Wong, Phillip S. Marcus, Patrick G. J. Irwin
Figure caption: GRS velocity fields over time. Top left: the December 10 velocity magnitude diagram clearly shows the high-velocity collar; velocities can be averaged along a best-fit ellipse or radially on spokes following M. H. Wong et al. (2018). Top right: individual velocity vectors from December 10 plotted across the entire field show the center of the GRS has little motion. Bottom left: the December 28 velocity magnitude diagram shows that vectors could not be found in some regions of the high-velocity collar, resulting in a lower overall average velocity. Bottom right: some variability is evident, with minimum and maximum mean speeds differing by about 20 m s−1, but the differences are only marginally significant (with a mean uncertainty on the speed at each epoch of about 13 m s−1), and the pattern of variability did not follow a 90 days sinusoidal oscillation.
Paper: A Detailed Study of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot over a 90-day Oscillation Cycle
Authors: Amy A. Simon, Michael H. Wong, Phillip S. Marcus, Patrick G. J. Irwin
Figure caption: Enhanced color composite maps for each date analyzed. The composites use the F631N (R), F502N (G), and F395N (B) filters, and have been further enhanced with an unsharp mask to bring out details. Each map spans ±15° of latitude and longitude, centered on −23° planetographic latitude and the GRS longitude. Note the open “chimney” above the GRS on December 10, February 24, and March 8. An animation of this sequence is available online (Figure A4 in the Appendix).
Paper: A Detailed Study of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot over a 90-day Oscillation Cycle
Authors: Amy A. Simon, Michael H. Wong, Phillip S. Marcus, Patrick G. J. Irwin
Figure caption: The GRS position over time. Top left: the GRS longitude from December 10 to March 8 shows a small oscillation when compared with the position expected from a constant drift rate of 0.319° day−1 (dashed line); uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size. Top right: the variations in drift rate are more apparent when plotted against a fixed time and location, 2023 January 13 (blue points) and 2023 September 9 (red points); the longer time base dilutes the variations. Bottom left: the absolute drift rates between each date show large variations in drift rate and set the phase of the 90 days oscillation. The dynamical data (offset by 0.5 day for clarity) agree with the measured core data, except for December 28. Bottom right: the GRS central and core latitudes also vary, but do not show any 90 days oscillation; the dashed line indicates the dynamical mean latitude.
Paper: A Detailed Study of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot over a 90-day Oscillation Cycle
Authors: Amy A. Simon, Michael H. Wong, Phillip S. Marcus, Patrick G. J. Irwin
Figure caption: GRS brightness over time. Left: core brightness for each filter in Figure 6; the F395N and F631N filters were offset for clarity. Dashed lines indicate mean values. Middle: collar brightness for each filter in Figure 6; F631N was offset for clarity. Dashed lines indicate mean values. Right: F275W core brightness and F395N collar brightness showed the best correlations with a 90 days oscillation.
Paper: A Detailed Study of Jupiter’s Great Red Spot over a 90-day Oscillation Cycle
Authors: Amy A. Simon, Michael H. Wong, Phillip S. Marcus, Patrick G. J. Irwin
Figure caption: GRS maps in the F502N filter for each date. Note the separated southern edge on February 12, as well as ragged edges on many other dates. Each map spans ±15° of latitude and longitude, centered on −23° latitude and the GRS longitude.