adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Regions of interest at each swirl site outlined in black. Blue locations are regolith ROIs, and red locations are fresh crater ejecta ROIs. Lighter colors signify on-swirl locations, and darker colors signify off-swirl locations for both with intermediate colors in transitional areas. (a) Reiner Gamma, (b) Firsov, and (c) Ingenii. Figure B1 shows ROI locations with numbers overlaid.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Regional view of each study area with LROC WAC mosaic overlain with the footprint of the NAC photometric suite. (a) Reiner Gamma (301.1°E, 7.3°N), (b) Firsov (114.9°E, 4.4°N), (c) Ingenii (163.5°E, 33.5°S).
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Mare Ingenii swirl site phase curves. Left panels in blue are regolith, and right panels in red are fresh crater ejecta. Lighter colors signify on-swirl locations, and darker colors signify off-swirl locations for both with intermediate colors in transitional areas. (a), (b) The average reflectance for individual NAC observations at each ROI across the phase range superposed by the empirical photometric model fit (A. K. Boyd & M. S. Robinson 2019) with normalized model residuals below. (c), (d) The same empirical model fit to the data as in (a) and (b) using uniform incidence and emission (i = e = 60°) as well as the photometric models for high-TiO2 mare, low-TiO2 mare, and immature mare in purple. (e), (f) The empirical model fits to the data normalized to the high-TiO2 mare photometric model.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Hapke parameter model values for single-scattering albedo (w), degree of backscattering (c), and the angular width of the SHOE (hs) at each swirl site. Uncertainty bars indicate the degree of uncertainty of the model fit for each parameter (Equation (C11)). Blue indicates regolith, and red indicates fresh crater ejecta deposits, with lighter colors signifying on-swirl locations and darker colors signifying off-swirl locations for both with intermediate colors in transitional areas. Gray shaded regions show global range of values in the maria (dark gray) and highlands (light gray) for w, c, and hs to one standard deviation for the 643 nm band using standard angles of i = ﹩\alpha ﹩ = 60°, e = 0° as derived by H. Sato et al. (2014). Figure B2 shows model results with ROI numbers overlaid.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Reiner Gamma image registration residuals. Sample error indicates across-track error, and line error indicates along-track registration error. Magnitude is the overall registration error regardless of direction. Across-track error is larger at Reiner Gamma than other swirl sites due to more high-emission images (see Figure 3). Since pixel values are averaged for each ROI, offsets within this range are not expected to contribute significantly to the results.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Mare Ingenii image registration residuals. Sample error indicates across-track error, and line error indicates along-track registration error. Magnitude is the overall registration error regardless of direction.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Results from Hapke modeling (Figure 8) with ROI numbers for reference to supporting data. Note that numbers are not necessarily consecutive due to an early iterative ROI selection process.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Regions of interest at each swirl site with ROI numbers (Figure 4) for reference to supporting data. (a) Reiner Gamma, (b) Firsov, and (c) Ingenii. Note that numbers are not necessarily consecutive due to an early iterative ROI selection process.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Plots of S(0) vs. w in 698 nm band for 5°S–5°N. The red dashed line shows the fit method used by H. Sato et al. (2014). The black squares show the median values, which deviate from a linear trend.
Paper: Photometry of Lunar Swirls in Comparison to Fresh Crater Ejecta
Authors: Mallory J. Kinczyk, Brett W. Denevi, Hiroyuki Sato, Aaron K. Boyd, Anna C. Martin, Emerson J. Speyerer, Bruce W. Hapke
Figure caption: Firsov image registration residuals. Sample error indicates across-track error, and line error indicates along-track registration error. Magnitude is the overall registration error regardless of direction.
Paper: A Pluto–Charon Sonata. V. Long-term Stability of the HST State Vector
Authors: Scott J. Kenyon, Benjamin C. Bromley
Figure caption: Median eccentricity for calculations with f = 0.5 from the iterative most circular (filled circles; B. C. Bromley & S. J. Kenyon 2021), geometric (open circles), geometric with most circular corrections (open diamonds; B. C. Bromley & S. J. Kenyon 2021), and Keplerian (filled squares) approaches for each Pluto–Charon satellite. Vertical lines indicate interquartile ranges for the Keplerian estimates. Interquartile ranges for the most circular and the two geometric approaches are smaller than the symbols. At large orbital separations, all four approaches yield similar estimates. For smaller orbital separations, the Keplerian (geometric) approach(es) diverges significantly (minimally) from the most circular estimate.
Paper: A Pluto–Charon Sonata. V. Long-term Stability of the HST State Vector
Authors: Scott J. Kenyon, Benjamin C. Bromley
Figure caption: Comparison of the median orbital elements inferred from the numerical calculations described in the text (filled circles) with elements derived from HST data (large open squares; M. R. Showalter & D. P. Hamilton 2015). For Nix, Kerberos, and Hydra, elements from the numerical calculations agree very well with the HST-only elements. The numerical calculations derive much smaller estimates for the eccentricity and inclination of Styx. The lower panel includes an initial for each satellite at e = 0.
Paper: A Pluto–Charon Sonata. V. Long-term Stability of the HST State Vector
Authors: Scott J. Kenyon, Benjamin C. Bromley
Figure caption: Eccentricity of the small satellites as a function of mass factor f during a 1000 yr orbital integration. The symbols show the geometric eccentricity, corrected for ubiquitous influence of the central binary to highlight the free eccentricity. The most circular estimates follow the trends shown in the figure. The values for Styx have been shifted as indicated for clarity.
Paper: Spectral Effects of Shock Darkening on Ordinary Chondrite and Howardite, Eucrite, and Diogenite Meteorites
Authors: Juan A. Sanchez, Vishnu Reddy, Lucille Le Corre, Neil Pearson, Adam Battle
Figure caption: Left: spectra of the LL5 ordinary chondrite Chelyabinsk corresponding to 0%, 50%, and 100% shock darkening (SD). Right: the same spectra normalized to unity at 1.5 μm.
Paper: A Pluto–Charon Sonata. V. Long-term Stability of the HST State Vector
Authors: Scott J. Kenyon, Benjamin C. Bromley
Figure caption: Comparison of the median orbital elements inferred from numerical calculations with the M. Brozović et al. (2015) state vector (filled circles) with similarly derived elements from the S. B. Porter & R. M. Canup (2023, open squares) and M. Brozović & R. A. Jacobson (2024, open diamonds) state vectors. For Nix, Kerberos, and Hydra, e and ı agree. For Styx, the numerical estimate for e (ı) from the new state vectors is 37% larger (85% smaller) than the estimate from the M. Brozović et al. (2015) state vector. The lower panel includes an initial for each satellite at e = 0.
Paper: Spectral Effects of Shock Darkening on Ordinary Chondrite and Howardite, Eucrite, and Diogenite Meteorites
Authors: Juan A. Sanchez, Vishnu Reddy, Lucille Le Corre, Neil Pearson, Adam Battle
Figure caption: Ordinary chondrites (OC) and meteorites belonging to the HED clan used in the present study.
Paper: Spectral Effects of Shock Darkening on Ordinary Chondrite and Howardite, Eucrite, and Diogenite Meteorites
Authors: Juan A. Sanchez, Vishnu Reddy, Lucille Le Corre, Neil Pearson, Adam Battle
Figure caption: Left: spectra of the H5 ordinary chondrite Chergach corresponding to 0%, 50%, and 100% shock darkening (SD). Right: the same spectra normalized to unity at 1.5 μm.
Paper: Spectral Effects of Shock Darkening on Ordinary Chondrite and Howardite, Eucrite, and Diogenite Meteorites
Authors: Juan A. Sanchez, Vishnu Reddy, Lucille Le Corre, Neil Pearson, Adam Battle
Figure caption: Left: spectra of the L6 ordinary chondrite Viñales corresponding to 0%, 50%, and 100% shock darkening (SD). Right: the same spectra normalized to unity at 1.5 μm.
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: (A–B) General view of the area where TUR12 stromatolites outcrop. The high erosion resistance to the surrounding sediments, and possibly the use of these rocks as burial piles, accumulate these stromatolites in boulder fields (Y. Garcin et al. 2012; J. E. Hargrave et al. 2014). (C) Detail of a stromatolite section view with the oyster material where stromatolite nucleated used to date these stromatolites in Y. Garcin et al. (2012) to ∼5500 cal. yr BP.
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: (A) General view of the stratigraphic section of the Koobi Fora Formation (P. I. Abell et al. 1982; C. S. Feibel et al. 1989; J. C. Joordens et al. 2013) where the targeted layer (TUR2 samples) of stromatolites outcrop and stromatolite specimens are extracted. (B) Detail of the layer where stromatolites are found with hammer (30 cm length) for scale. (C) Planimetric view of the layer of interest.
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: Study area elevation map of the eastern Lake Turkana with sample points and blue line indicating the maximum extent of the Turkana lake during the Holocene at 460 m above sea level (retrieved from Y. Garcin et al. 2012).
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: Flow diagram of the chemical procedure used to extract and concentrate plutonium from stromatolites (rare earth elements or lanthanides, from lanthanum to lutetium, and actinides like uranium, thorium, and plutonium).
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: General view to the west (A) and to the north (B) of the actual Lake Turkana water in the area where samples were retrieved (TUR10/11).
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: 244Pu fluence at Earth orbit using stromatolite samples from Lake Turkana Basin and the time-resolved 60Fe signal given by the terrestrial fluence. The y error bars for 60Fe indicate (1σ) statistical uncertainties, while the result for 244Pu fluence indicates the (2σ) confidence interval.
Paper: Discovery of Extraterrestrial 244Pu in 2 Million Year Old Fossilized Stromatolites
Authors: Shawn Bishop, Iuliana Stanciu, Albert Cabré, Craig Feibel, Doru Pacesila, Alexandru Petre, Paul Mereuta, Livius Trache, Marian Virgolici, Cosmin Pintilie, Andreea Serban, Antonio Petraglia, Filippo Terrasi, Fabio Marzaioli, Giuseppe Porzio, Raffaele Buompane, Lucio Gialanella
Figure caption: (A) 1.9–2.0 Ma old Turkana stromatolite. (B) SEM image. (C) SEM image and EDS.
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: CMS model results for J2 and J4. (a) All compositional and structural models are overplotted with V2 measurements. Two V2 data analyses are plotted: (gray) R. A. Jacobson (2014; hereafter J14) and (cyan) a recent reanalysis by R. G. French et al. (2024; hereafter F24). (b) Distinct-layer models with high atmospheric metallicities (Zatm ≥ 25%). Lines represent linear fit to CMS Jn results. CMS simulation uncertainty (blue) and predicted UOP measurement uncertainty ×50 from M. Parisi et al. (2024; orange) are plotted for comparison. (c) Distinct-layer models with low atmospheric metallicities (Zatm = 12.5%). Pure H2O mantle models are confidently ruled out, while mixed H2O–H/He, SPI, and empirical density models are consistent with V2 measurements. The high Zatm models are consistent with the F24 analysis with smaller J4, while the low Zatm models are consistent with the J14 analysis. Future UOP measurements of J2 and J4, with much smaller uncertainties than V2, will rule out one category of atmospheric metallicity model. SPI models with higher levels of mixing are more consistent with V2 data (see Section 3.1).
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: Simulated Jn gravity harmonics as a function of degree n. Spacecraft measurement uncertainties are plotted for comparison. The light orange and blue shaded regions show Jn parameter spaces spanned by empirical ρ(z) models and distinct-layer models (except for the pure H2O mantle models), respectively. The red squares show J2 and J4 measured by V2. The measurement uncertainties are smaller than the marker size. Juno uncertainties are shown as a green solid line (L. Iess et al. 2018). Cassini uncertainties during (L. Iess et al. 2019) and before (R. A. Jacobson et al. 2006) the Grand Finale are shown as black solid and dotted lines, respectively. Predicted UOP uncertainties are colored blue, where the blue dotted line assumes equatorial orbits (E. Mazarico et al. 2023) while the blue solid line assumes inclined polar orbits with periapsis inside the rings (M. Parisi et al. 2024). Close-in polar orbits are more sensitive to zonal gravity harmonics, allowing the UOP to robustly measure J6 and possibly J8.
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: CMS model results for J6 and J8. (a) All compositional and structural models are overplotted with predicted UOP measurements. The width of the gray line/region represents predicted UOP uncertainty assuming a close-in inclined polar orbit (M. Parisi et al. 2024). (b) Distinct-layer models with high atmospheric metallicities (Zatm≥25%). Two hypothetical J6 measurements are shown (indicated by arrows with annotations). (c) Distinct-layer models with low atmospheric metallicities (Zatm = 12.5%). The UOP J6 measurement can potentially rule out some uniformly rotating distinct-layer models, thanks to its small uncertainty. The UOP J8 measurement will offer limited information due to large uncertainty.
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: P–T phase diagram of MgSiO3. Simulated data points for rock–water mixtures and H2O melt curve (blue) are shown for context. The green shaded region outlines adiabatic P–T profiles of distinct-layer Uranus models. The gray solid line is the melt boundary of MgSiO3 (D. E. Fratanduono et al. 2018), separating MgSiO3 solid (blue shaded region) from MgSiO3 melt (red shaded region). The gray dashed line is the MgSiO3 melt curve measured by another group (Y. Fei et al. 2021). The green line shows the melt boundary of another rocky material, MgO (F. Soubiran & B. Militzer 2020). Circles show DFT-MD simulations of the H2O–MgSiO3 system (T. Kovacevic et al. 2022) at P–T locations where they are separate (blue) or miscible (red). Triangles show DFT-MD simulations of the H2O–MgO system (T. Kovacevic et al. 2023) at locations where they are separate (blue) or miscible (red). Squares show simulations for the rock–water compound (SiO2)2(H2O) (H. Gao et al. 2022) at locations where they are in a superionic ice phase (orange) or become liquid (red). In summary, rock–water mixtures become fluid and miscible at temperatures higher then predicted adiabatic P–T profiles of Uranus, implying that rock-rich interiors need to be hotter than ice-rich interiors to generate magnetic dynamo. The (SiO2)2(H2O) compound may have implications for the deep interior magnetic field (see Section 4.2.2).
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: Density profiles from CORGI. Shown are the density of all forward models as a function of scaled radius (z ≡ r/Rp) in two different ranges: (a) the entire planet from z = 0 to z = 1 and (b) a zoomed-in view of the atmosphere from z = 0.6 to z = 1. The gray shaded area with black contours is the baseline region defined in N. Movshovitz & J. J. Fortney (2022), which is spanned by all ρ(z) profiles that integrate to the correct total mass. The orange curves are empirical ρ(z) profiles of empirical density models. The cyan curves are ρ(z) profiles of SPI mantle models generated by the distinct-layer method. The red solid and red dashed curves are two distinct-layer Uranus models from N. Nettelmann et al. (2013) for comparison. Background colors represent the approximate radius ranges of rocky core (blue), icy mantle (green), and H/He envelope (red) for the distinct-layer structure. The empirical density models span a much wider parameter space than the distinct-layer models.
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: Uranus P–T profiles plotted over a H2O phase diagram. The shaded region shows adiabatic P–T profiles of distinct-layer structure models, assuming mixed H2O–H/He composition, in the envelope (orange), mantle (green), and core. The red solid and red dashed lines show two Uranus P–T ​​​​​​ models from N. Nettelmann et al. (2013). White lines are H2O phase boundaries (W. Wagner & A. Pru 2002; A. N. Dunaeva et al. 2010). The background color represents H2O density (J. Haldemann et al. 2020). Water phases are annotated. The region at which the magnetic dynamo in Uranus is generated (15–250 GPa), according to the convective thin shell geometry (S. Stanley & J. Bloxham 2004, 2006), is demarcated with black dashed lines. P–T profiles of distinct-layer Uranus models traverse superionic ice XVIII (M. Millot et al. 2019), ionic fluid, and supercritical phases, which have implications for magnetic field generation (see Section 4.2) and interactions between the H/He envelope and the ice layer (see Section 4.3).
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: Ternary diagram showing the retrieved probability distribution of the interior composition of Uranus, assuming a mixed H2O–H/He composition. The best-fit interior composition is ﹩{x}_{{\rm{core}}}=0.1{1}_{-0.07}^{+0.14}﹩, ﹩{x}_{{\rm{mantle}}}=0.7{1}_{-0.14}^{+0.13}﹩, and ﹩{x}_{{\rm{atm}}}=0.1{4}_{-0.09}^{+0.12}﹩. The most probable compositions are outlined by contours enclosing (from innermost to outermost, colored green, red, and blue, respectively) 30%, 50%, and 68% of all data points in the densest region. The two Uranus models presented in N. Nettelmann et al. (2013) are shown as triangle markers (upper marker for U2 and lower marker for U1) and fall within the retrieved 30% contours.
Paper: Interior and Gravity Field Models for Uranus Suggest a Mixed-composition Interior: Implications for the Uranus Orbiter and Probe
Authors: Zifan Lin, Sara Seager, Benjamin P. Weiss
Figure caption: Validation of Earth interior models generated by CORGI. (a) ρ(r) profile compared to the PREM. (b) T(r) profile compared to the geotherm (K. Hirose et al. 2013). The CORGI model in (a) assumes an isothermal temperature profile (red), while models in (b) assume a fully convective and adiabatic interior (red) and a mixing length theory temperature profile with both convective and conductive components (blue) (F. W. Wagner et al. 2012). Both the ρ(r) and T(r) profiles display reasonable agreement with measured Earth profiles, validating our forward interior structure model.