adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: An Analytical Model of Wavelength-dependent Opposition Surge in Emittance and Reflectance Spectroscopy of Airless Rocky Exoplanets
Authors: Leonardos Gkouvelis
Figure caption: Phase curves of the ultramafic scenario for selected spectroscopic bands. Four basic model phase curves are presented, where the black solid curve is the new approach for opposition surge that has the ability to adapt from a sharp to a smooth profile, according to ultramafic optical properties.
Paper: An Analytical Model of Wavelength-dependent Opposition Surge in Emittance and Reflectance Spectroscopy of Airless Rocky Exoplanets
Authors: Leonardos Gkouvelis
Figure caption: Deviation in brightness temperature. The deviation from the mean brightness temperature is shown for the spectral window 7–30 μm, which is an indicator of enhancement/suppression of spectral features from each model.
Paper: An Analytical Model of Wavelength-dependent Opposition Surge in Emittance and Reflectance Spectroscopy of Airless Rocky Exoplanets
Authors: Leonardos Gkouvelis
Figure caption: Same as Figure 5, but zoomed in ±20° around secondary eclipse and normalized by the highest value to emphasize the model differences. With the gray stripe LP 791-18d’s secondary eclipse total duration of ≈3﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\unicode{x000b0}}﹩62 is indicated.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Panel (A) shows the fractional masses from each sample abraded in this study. These fractional mass percent values are calculated using volume percent results from the measured PSDs and summing the fractions within the given ranges. Panel (B) shows the fractional masses of each sample renormalized for the <67 μm mass. Panel (C) compares the fractional mass of the average PSD produced from glacial grinding of basalts to fractional masses from dust produced via eolian abrasion of basalts, volcanic eruptions, and lunar regolith.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: The average PSD of glacial grinding samples from this study is shown in red compared with PSDs of volcanic dust from different eruptions, lunar regolith, and dust from experimental eolian abrasion of basalt sands from Hawaii and Iceland (S. M. Adams & G. S. Soreghan 2025, in preparation). Note that lunar and volcanic PSDs are plotted with a different volume percent axis on the right. W. I. Rose & A. J. Durant (2009) and A. Costa et al. (2016) Eolian data from S. M. Adams & G. S. Soreghan (2025, in preparation), volcanic data adapted from W. I. Rose & A. J. Durant (2009) and A. Costa et al. (2016), lunar regolith adapted from J. C. Laul et al. (1987).
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: PSDs of all samples are shown in the top plot with the average PSD of all samples in black. Pointed clasts are solid lines, and flat clasts are dashed lines. PSDs of each lithology type and their corresponding clasts are shown in the bottom five PSD plots. Each sample shows the PSD of four samples, two from pointed clasts (solid) and two from flat clasts (dashed).
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Sample series MG5 clasts before and after grinding. Clasts on the top row are before grinding, and clasts on the bottom row are after grinding. Clasts are approximately 1 cm wide and between 2 and 3 cm tall.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Sample series MG1 clasts before and after grinding. Clasts on the top row are before grinding, and clasts on the bottom row are after grinding. Clasts are approximately 1 cm wide and between 2 and 3 cm tall.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Photomicrograph images for samples MG1 and MG2. MG1 is the top photo, and MG2 is the bottom photo.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Sample series MG4 clasts before and after grinding. Clasts on the top row are before grinding, and clasts on the bottom row are after grinding. Clasts are approximately 1 cm wide and between 2 and 3 cm tall.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Sample series MG3 clasts before and after grinding. Clasts on the top row are before grinding, and clasts on the bottom row are after grinding. Clasts are approximately 1 cm wide and between 2 and 3 cm tall.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Sample series MG2 clasts before and after grinding. Clasts on the top row are before grinding, and clasts on the bottom row are after grinding. Clasts are approximately 1 cm wide and between 2 and 3 cm tall.
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Posterior distributions of model values for all TRAPPIST-1 planets in all plausible model scenarios. Plausible model scenarios are derived by first executing the full parameter sweep and then applying empirical and theoretical filters to eliminate model runs, described in Section 2.2. The most likely scenario on the TRAPPIST-1 planets is that they have (a) low magma emplacement rates, (b) present mantle water content consistent with Earth or lower (although wetter mantles are possible), and (c) a water outgassing rate lower than Earth’s (although it can be up to an order of magnitude higher). Vertical bars are values from the solar system or filter application. Panel (a): Q for Mars, Earth, and Io are 0.06, 30, and 413 km3 yr−1, respectively (Section 2.1.3). Panel (b): Earth ﹩{m}_{{{\rm{H}}}_{2}{\rm{O}}}^{\mathrm{mantle}}﹩ is 0.049–0.24 wt% (E. Ohtani 2021). Panels (c) and (g): Earth’s H2O and CO2 outgassing rates are 1.35 × 1012–2.07 × 1012 kg yr−1 and 2.86 × 1011–4.62 × 1011 kg yr−1, respectively (D. Catling & J. F. Kasting 2017). Panel (d): energy-limited H2 escape rates from filter 1 (Section 2.2).
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Posterior distributions of model values for TRAPPIST-1 c in plausible model scenarios with fixed magma emplacement rates based on those of Earth, Mars, and Io. Plausible model scenarios are derived by first executing the full parameter sweep but with Q fixed to one of the solar system values, then applying empirical and theoretical filters to eliminate model runs that violate known empirical and theoretical constraints, as described in Section 2.2. In this case, we apply the filters using the mass and radius of TRAPPIST-1 c as a representative case. Vertical bars are values from the solar system. Panel (a): Q for Mars, Earth, and Io are 0.06, 30, and 413 km3 yr−1, respectively (Section 2.1.3). Panel (b): Earth ﹩{m}_{{{\rm{H}}}_{2}{\rm{O}}}^{\mathrm{mantle}}﹩ is 0.049–0.24 wt% (E. Ohtani 2021). Panels (c) and (g): Earth’s H2O and CO2 outgassing rates are 1.35 × 1012–2.07 × 1012 kg yr−1 and 2.86 × 1011–4.62 × 1011 kg yr−1, respectively (D. Catling & J. F. Kasting 2017).
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Parameter distributions and correlations with varying maximum mantle water content for TRAPPIST-1 c. Plots are derived from 100,000 model runs where the full parameter sweep is executed, then the two filters are applied to eliminate model runs, described in Section 2.2. Panels (a), (c), and (f): posterior parameter distributions. Panels (b), (d), and (e): parameter correlations. The contours contain 95% of the model runs, which are homogeneously distributed within.
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Water concentration in melt (﹩{m}_{{{\rm{H}}}_{2}{\rm{O}}}^{\mathrm{melt}}﹩) as a function of bulk mantle water content (﹩{m}_{{{\rm{H}}}_{2}{\rm{O}}}^{\mathrm{mantle}}﹩) considering water saturation and fractional melting. The dashed lines are the solubility-limited H2O content of the magma under the maximum and minimum values of primary magma pressure, Pprim = 1 and 3 GPa. The black solid lines are the abundance-limited H2O content of the magma assuming fractional melting under the maximum and minimum values of melt fraction, F = 10 and 20%. For a given ﹩{m}_{{{\rm{H}}}_{2}{\rm{O}}}^{\mathrm{mantle}}﹩, F, and Pprim, the true value of ﹩{m}_{{{\rm{H}}}_{2}{\rm{O}}}^{\mathrm{melt}}﹩ is the minimum from water saturation or fractional melting. The gray shaded region is the range of possible values allowed based on this procedure. The green shaded region labeled “MORB” shows the range for mid-ocean ridge basalt magma water content (0.1–1.5 wt%; H. Sigurdsson et al. 2015) and Earth’s mantle water concentration (0.049–0.24 wt%; E. Ohtani 2021).
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Schematic diagram of steps in the theoretical model. Further description of key parameters, sampled ranges, and calculation procedures is found in Methods.
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Additional posterior distributions of model values for all TRAPPIST-1 planets in all plausible model scenarios. Plausible model scenarios are derived by first executing the full parameter sweep and then applying empirical and theoretical filters to eliminate model runs, described in Section 2.2.
Paper: Characterization of the DART Ejecta Using Computer Modeling of the Ground-based and HST Photopolarimetric Data
Authors: Ludmilla Kolokolova, Johannes Markkanen, Quentin Ludet, Zuri Gray, Stefano Bagnulo, Cyrielle Opitom, Brian Murphy
Figure caption: Tail cuts. Top panel: FORS2 polarization, B filter (left column) and R filter (right column). Bottom panel: MUSE color (left column) and HST photometry (right column). Since our resolution did not allow us to separate Didymos and Dimorphos, the center was assumed to be located on Didymos. The inserts provide illustrative views of the observed images.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Mass fraction of heavy elements, Z, as a function of normalized radius in the model Saturn-mass planet shown in Figure 7. The distribution of Z is color coded by the total mass fraction within a given radius. The inner core lies inside r/Rp ≈ 0.1. Filled circles represent results of a Saturn model from C. R. Mankovich & J. Fuller (2021), whereas open circles are results from a centrally condensed model of N. Nettelmann et al. (2021). The radius in these latter two models is normalized by the actual radius of Saturn.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Structure of a model Saturn-mass planet at age 4.57 × 109 yr. All quantities are plotted as a function of radius, as labeled. The temperature is indicated on the right axis. The mass fraction of heavy elements includes iron, silicates, and water. The thin vertical bar at the top marks the outer boundary of the outer core.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Distributions of composition (mass fractions) in the model Saturn-mass planet shown in Figure 7. Quantities, as labeled, are plotted as a function of radius. The sharp drops in the abundances of Fe and SiO2 at about ﹩\mathrm{log}r=9.55﹩ are caused by condensation and rainout. The drop in He abundance at this radius corresponds to the rain region.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Mass fraction of heavy elements, Z, as a function of normalized radius in the model Saturn-mass planet shown in Figure 9 (model without helium separation). The distribution of Z is color coded by the total mass fraction within a given radius. The inner core lies within r/Rp ≈ 0.1. Filled circles represent results of a Saturn model from C. R. Mankovich & J. Fuller (2021); open circles are results from a centrally condensed model of N. Nettelmann et al. (2021).
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Evolution of a model Saturn-mass planet up to just past the end of accretion in Run VISC (see Section 4.1 for details). Time is given in years; masses are in Earth masses, as indicated. Symbols are the same as in Figure 3. The ends of the various phases are indicated by small circles. Phase IV begins at the end of Phase II, and there is no Phase III. Note that short-term decreases in MXY are likely to be caused by minor numerical inaccuracies in the accretion procedure.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Evolution of Saturn models, up to the end of Phase II, for test cases with an initial surface density of solids σ = 2.7 g cm−2 (left) and with smaller planetesimals 5 km in radius (right). See Section 4.2 for details. Time is given in years; masses are in Earth masses, as indicated. Symbols are the same as in Figures 3 and 12.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Distributions of composition (mass fractions) in the model Saturn-mass planet at age 4.57 × 109 yr, calculated without helium separation. Quantities as labeled are plotted as a function of radius. Compare with Figure 8.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Structure of a model Saturn-mass planet at age 2.87 × 106 yr, about the time of the end of accretion. All quantities are plotted as a function of radius, as labeled. The temperature is indicated on the right axis. The mass fraction of heavy elements includes iron, silicates, and water. The total mass of heavy elements is 20.33 M⊕. The thin vertical bar at the top marks the outer boundary of the outer core.
Paper: Formation and Evolution Simulations of Saturn, Including Composition Gradients and Helium Immiscibility
Authors: Peter Bodenheimer, David J. Stevenson, Jack J. Lissauer, Gennaro D'Angelo
Figure caption: Distributions of composition (mass fractions) in a model Saturn-mass planet at the end of accretion (t = 2.87 × 106 yr). Quantities, as labeled, are plotted as a function of radius.
Paper: An Analytical Model of Wavelength-dependent Opposition Surge in Emittance and Reflectance Spectroscopy of Airless Rocky Exoplanets
Authors: Leonardos Gkouvelis
Figure caption: Retrieved optical properties of the ultramafic scenario. Parameter ω is the single-scattering albedo, B0 is the amplitude of the surge term, b is the scattering asymmetry factor, and h is the angular width parameter that controls the spread of the opposition surge, as a sum of SHOE and CBOE, in phase-angle space.
Paper: An Analytical Model of Wavelength-dependent Opposition Surge in Emittance and Reflectance Spectroscopy of Airless Rocky Exoplanets
Authors: Leonardos Gkouvelis
Figure caption: Comparison of model surface spectra of the case study rocky exoplanet LP 791-18d for four compositions: ultramafic, feldspathic, metal-rich, and basaltic.
Paper: An Analytical Model of Wavelength-dependent Opposition Surge in Emittance and Reflectance Spectroscopy of Airless Rocky Exoplanets
Authors: Leonardos Gkouvelis
Figure caption: Brightness temperature for the four composition scenarios and each model. Brightness temperature can be directly compared with observations but also is an indicator of numerical behavior, when simulated. As an example, numerical instabilities can be seen in the Gaussian surge model for feldspathic and basaltic scenarios around 4–5 μm.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: (A) Schematic of glacial abrasion device showing the cart used to move the clast (“stylus” as labeled above) across the basal rock slab, which sits in a basin of water. The clast is pressed into contact with the basal slab by a weighted piston that transfers ∼5 kg of weight to the clast, producing a ∼50 N contact force. Panel (B) illustrates the abrasion device during operation. The basal slab is held in place while the cart is pulled and pushed, dragging the clast across the basal slab in 20 cm lengths for a combined travel distance of 5 m. Panel (C) shows a mounted clast in the base of the piston. Panel (D) shows the basal slab inside the water basin. The water basin rests inside a hole cut in a thin board so the slab is held in place while the clast moves.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Sample names used in the text and corresponding locations of collection, age of the rocks, textures of the rocks, parent formation, location of sample collection, and photomicrographs showing the minerals and texture of each lithology. Larger images of photomicrographs are provided in the Appendix (A6–A8).
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Before-and-after photographs of basalt clasts used in the grinding experiments. Each sample is approximately 1 cm wide and 3 cm tall.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Mass of sediment produced from the abrasion of each clast. Columns with points represent pointed clasts, and flat columns represent flat clasts. Samples not shown had masses below our measurable threshold.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Photomicrograph images for sample MG5.
Paper: Producing Dust through Simulated Glacial Abrasion of Basalt Clasts with Implications for Mars
Authors: Steven M. Adams, Gerilyn S. Soreghan
Figure caption: Photomicrograph images for samples MG3 and MG4. MG3 is the top photo, and MG4 is the bottom photo.
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Additional posterior distributions of model values for TRAPPIST-1 c in plausible model scenarios with fixed magma emplacement rates based on those of Earth, Mars, and Io. Plausible model scenarios are derived by first executing the full parameter sweep but with Q fixed to one of the solar system values, then applying empirical and theoretical filters to eliminate model runs that violate known empirical and theoretical constraints, as described in Section 2.2. In this case, we apply the filters using the mass and radius of TRAPPIST-1 c as a representative case. Panel (a): vertical bars are ground truth values of Q from the solar system: Mars, Earth, and Io are 0.05, 31, and 413 km3 yr−1, respectively (Section 2.1.3).
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Posterior distributions of outgassing fluxes in mol s−1 m−2 for TRAPPIST-1 c in plausible model scenarios with fixed magma emplacement rates based on those of Earth, Mars, and Io. Plausible model scenarios are derived by first executing the full parameter sweep but with Q fixed to one of the solar system values, then applying empirical and theoretical filters to eliminate model runs that violate known empirical and theoretical constraints, as described in Section 2.2. In this case, we apply the filters using the mass and radius of TRAPPIST-1 c as a representative case. Q for Mars, Earth, and Io is 0.05, 31, and 413 km3 yr−1, respectively (Section 2.1.3).
Paper: Statistical Geochemical Constraints on Present-day Water Outgassing as a Source of Secondary Atmospheres on the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanets
Authors: Trent B. Thomas, Victoria S. Meadows, Joshua Krissansen-Totton, Megan T. Gialluca, Nicholas F. Wogan, David C. Catling
Figure caption: Posterior distributions of outgassing fluxes in mol s−1 m−2 units for all TRAPPIST-1 planets in all plausible model scenarios. Plausible model scenarios are derived by first executing the full parameter sweep and then applying empirical and theoretical filters to eliminate model runs, described in Section 2.2.
Paper: Characterization of the DART Ejecta Using Computer Modeling of the Ground-based and HST Photopolarimetric Data
Authors: Ludmilla Kolokolova, Johannes Markkanen, Quentin Ludet, Zuri Gray, Stefano Bagnulo, Cyrielle Opitom, Brian Murphy
Figure caption: Modeled g − r color and polarization in the B and R filters for the compact aggregate of large irregular monomers (on the left) and for solid irregular particles (on the right). The modeled particles are shown in inserts in the second row. The stars show the observed values of color and polarization for several other dates of observations. The error bars for polarization are smaller than the marker sizes in the figure, and hence they are not plotted.