adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Illustration showing the shape-matching method for correcting radiance profiles of clipped images. A least-squares procedure is used to recover the albedo ratio A/Aref and bias offset ΔB that accounts for plume radiance offset. These transform the truncated radiance curve to a scaled version of the reference shape (shown by blue arrow). (A) Central row plot from green channel, Image #10 (α =  96﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\unicode{x000b0}}﹩2) showing the retrieved downward shift ΔB of the bias model. (B) Thin green line shows the uncorrected radiance curve from post-CA Image #10 (α =  96﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\unicode{x000b0}}﹩2)  that lies near the edge of the LUKE FOV (inset). The corrected I(r) (thick green line) is the reference curve Iref(r) (dotted green line) multiplied by A/Aref. In this example, Iref(r) is taken from post-CA reference Image #14 at α =105﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\unicode{x000b0}}﹩3.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Radiance measurements in the green channel for wide-field images. (A) Sample row (orange) and column (blue) plots, through Image #0 center, compared with cuts through the planar bias surface bp(r, θ), shown as dotted lines. Solid lines show the concavity-corrected models b(r, θ), needed to flatten the cumulative radiance curve. (B) Cumulative radiance profiles I(r) for pre- and post-close-approach integrations (Images #0 [orange] and #14 [blue] in Table 1). Sources of uncertainty (shaded bands) are discussed in Section 2.4
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: (A) LICIACube encounter with evolving optical scattering geometry: LICIACube Flyby Geometry based on A. F. Cheng et al. (2020); origin at impact and ejecta plume centered on the y-axis. The “Line of-sight” is the reverse of the position vector (as function of time) of LICIACube and vF is the relative velocity of LICIACube; ΔxCA is the distance from the origin at closest approach (t = tCA = 167 s); α is the phase angle, i.e., 180° − θ, where θ is the scattering angle, and ε is the Sun elevation angle. (B) Observing circumstances for LICIACube observations of the DART impact plume, during approach and flyby of Dimorphos.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Bias correction and plume spatial integration geometry for wide-field images, illustrated by a sample 1024 × 1024 LUKE frame centered on Dimorphos. Didymos and Dimorphos outlines are in orange, and Didymos light is removed using an oversized mask elongated in the Sun direction. The annular blue-gray area defines the pixel values used to apply a planar fit to the bias surface. The outer radius defines the spatial integration region for plume light, computed by radially summing the azimuthally averaged signal, excluding Didymos (pink band) in addition to remaining stray light observed beyond the mask edge. (Inset) Zoomed-in detail of the image center showing Didymos, Dimorphos, and ejecta.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: LICIACube image (adapted from Figure 5 from N. L. Chabot et al. 2024) acquired at t = 143 s after impact of the DART spacecraft, showing a complex system of ejecta rays with filamentary structures. Each rectangle represents a different level of contrast in order to better see the fine structure in the ejecta. The innermost rectangle is roughly 1.3 km wide. (LICIACube LUKE image triplet acquired at 23:16:47 UTC; Credit: ASI/NASA/APL.)
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Phase curves showing geometric albedo in five grain size categories, derived from modeling, lab measurements, and observations. Radii listed for each category are the average values of its members, and bold lines show the average curves (aVE indicates volume-equivalent radius). Geometric albedo of small grains typically declines at small phase angles, then increases as a result of forward scattering, whereas mm-Grains and larger particles decrease monotonically in brightness with increasing phase angle. This fundamental change in scattering behavior occurs at particle radii of around 1 mm.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Map showing degree of agreement (objective function) between LICIACube measurements of plume intensity in the green channel and model predictions, expressed as χ2 (see the text for definition). Smaller values (darker regions) represent better agreement. White contours indicate plume mass in units of 107 kg. Particle mass density used in the models is ρ = 3500 kg m−3, and size distribution parameters ﹩{a}_{{\rm{\min }}}﹩, at, and ﹩{a}_{{\rm{\max }}}﹩ are fixed at 1.0 μm, 3.0 mm, and 5.0 cm, respectively. No single minimum in χ2, hence no unique k1, k2 solution appears in the plot, indicating that visible-band measurements alone cannot provide information on the size distribution when those populations are spatially overlapping. However, a single coefficient solution (k1 = k2, white dashed line) follows a path of steepest descent, reaching a minimum at k = −2.4 and plume mass of ≈8.5 × 106 kg.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Differential intensity (calculated using Equation (14)) and mass relations for a single power-law (k = −2.5) size distribution and plume mass of 1 × 107 kg (see Figure 11, green). Grain sizes contributing to the observed scattering are strongly controlled by the size and phase-angle dependence of particle albedo. A constant albedo model (Ap = 0.10) is included for comparison.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Sample ﹩I/{ \mathcal F }﹩ images showing the overall decrease in plume peak brightness (left to right) between small phase-angle measurements clustered between 50﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\unicode{x000b0}}﹩6 and 52﹩\mathop{.}\limits^{\unicode{x000b0}}﹩9, and the large phase-angle images which span 94° to 110°. Dimorphos interior is set to zero, and Didymos outlines are shown dotted. Peak brightness in each plot is indicated in the annotation. The authors attribute the downward trend in brightness to the decline in albedo of millimeter to centimeter particles with increasing phase angle, as well as changing plume perspective during LICIACube flyby. There may also be some minor influence from a redistribution of plume optical density as particles flow outward from the impact site. Thin, gray zones indicate the transition between optically thin and thick regions (τ = 0.2 to 0.25), albeit with large uncertainties.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Estimates of plume mass in the R, G, and B channels, determined by mapping the goodness of fit between error-weighted measurements I and models Imdl(M, k). The left panels show contour plots of ﹩{\mathrm{log}}\,({\chi }^{2})﹩ as described in the text. Smaller values represent better agreement, and unique solutions (located by inspection) lie at the positions of the crosshairs. Other model parameters are as stated in Figure 10. The right panels show the corresponding best-fit models overlaid with the data points. Sources of systematic error obtained from the responsivity calibration (Section 2.1) are not included in the weighting or in the data error bars. As in Figure 6, target distance is proportional to symbol size, squares indicate reference images from Table 1, and gray symbols are “heavily clipped” images excluded from the analysis.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Panel (A): map showing plume areal mass density m (kg m−2) and brightness (﹩I/{ \mathcal F }﹩), obtained from measured Image #0. Azimuthal averages of mass density ﹩\bar{m}(r)﹩ are computed in narrow rings extending from the outer boundary at 0.9 rb, inward to r = 0. Optically thick scattering occurs within the τ = 0.1 contour outlined in red. Panel (B): gray plot shows the noise resulting from single-pixel sampling along the central image row, while the blue line shows vastly improved sensitivity that results from azimuthal averaging in contiguous 1 pixel-wide rings (excluding the Didymos zero mask). Ring average (﹩\bar{m}﹩) and optical depth profiles are shown mirrored around r = 0.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Panel (A): log–log plot showing mass density estimated by single-scattering (black line) vs. distance from center. Black dots indicate ring outer boundaries. Within the region of high SNR and small optical depth (τ < 0.2), the plot shows a remarkably linear relation, leading to an empirical extrapolation of plume mass density to near center as determined by a three-point linear fit (red dots). The gray area at the left indicates the 2 px (resolution) limit. Panel (B): cumulative plume mass, extending to center. The extrapolated curve shows the projected mass enhancement from the optically thick inner plume region. Darker shading represents the statistical uncertainty in the derived intensities (Section 2.4) and lighter shading the added calibration uncertainty described in Section 2.1 and Appendix A.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Sample LUKE observations of the (A) Pleiades and (B) ξ2 Ceti (see the text). Pixel signals within an 18 pixel radius are summed. Bias and background corrections are made by subtracting the mean of the annular points from the interior values. Pleione is excluded from this analysis because of its proximity to the much brighter Atlas.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Linearly interpolated spectra of the Pleiades, derived from their listed magnitudes (lines with solid circles) used to derive RGB fluxes for calibration. The LICIACube RGB bandpass curves are given by the thick curves colored for each channel, respectively. The dashed lines in the background are for the JC UBVRI bandpass curves.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Top row: scanning electron micrographs of lunar dust grains from Apollo samples taken from J. S. Park et al. (2006) showing their jagged and irregular shape. Bottom row: corresponding DDA model showing the “Irregular” grain shape from three different rotated perspectives.
Paper: Simulating the (99942) Apophis Earth Flyby Using a Contact Binary Model
Authors: Hai-Shuo Wang, Paul Sánchez, D.J. Scheeres
Figure caption: The contact models used in this study are based on the radar-derived shape of Apophis as reported by M. Brozović et al. (2018), represented as a polyhedron with 2000 vertices and 3996 facets. Using the V-HACD algorithm (K. Mammou 2016; K. Mamou et al. 2016; X. Wei et al. 2022), the shape was decomposed into convex granular elements, fitted with spheres, and smoothed to ensure realistic mass-shift predictions. Models include the DPM and DSM, with a mass ratio of m1/m2 = 0.24, as well as the TPM/QPM. To enhance realism, regolith boulders were added: the DPM-NB/DSM-NB concentrate boulders in the neck, while the DPM-FB/DSM-FB distribute them across the surface, enabling granular dynamics analysis during the flyby.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Panel (A): interpolated phase coefficient curves for Bennu particles, obtained from the phase coefficients and positions of “Best Observed” particles (C. W. Hergenrother et al. 2020) and their fractional distance between basis functions βH and βL. Panel (B): resulting plots of physical albedo (green lines) after correcting for Didymos/Bennu albedo ratio. The black line shows the error-weighted average, and dashed lines represent 1σ uncertainties.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Scatter plot showing Pleiades-derived conversion factors SR, SG, SB and their uncertainties. Applying these conversions to measurements of standard star ξ2 Ceti (filled, black circles) demonstrates overall consistency of the calibration.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Interpolated phase coefficient curves for Bennu particles, obtained from locations of phase coefficients of “Best Observed” particles (C. W. Hergenrother et al. 2020) and their fractional distance between basis functions βH and βL.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Curves showing phase coefficient (−dm/dα) obtained from Figure 19. Smoothed versions of these curves (dashed lines) form the basis functions for creating interpolated phase coefficient curves of the Bennu particles.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Phase functions (F11) of millimeter-grains with very different brightness slopes (left-hand side). Relative magnitude curves (Δm) are shown as dashed lines.
Paper: Ejecta Mass Estimates from the DART Impact Plume Inferred from LICIACube Images
Authors: Ramin Lolachi, David A. Glenar, Timothy J. Stubbs, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Olga Muñoz, Tony L. Farnham, Masatoshi Hirabayashi, Pedro H. Hasselmann, Vincenzo Della Corte, J. D. Prasanna Deshapriya, Elisabetta Dotto, Elena Mazzotta Epifani, Alessandro Rossi, Angelo Zinzi
Figure caption: Graphical representation of the broken power-law size distribution for distinctly different k-values (k1 = −2.7 and k2 = −3.6).
Paper: Evolution of Mercury’s Volatile-bearing Crust within Raditladi Basin
Authors: Deborah L. Domingue, John R. Weirich, J. Alexis P. Rodriguez, Samuel W. Courville, Frank C. Chuang, Matthew D. Richardson, Bryan J. Travis, Eric E. Palmer, Mario Zarroca
Figure caption: (Top) Location of the hollow regions examined in Raditladi basin. These are a subset of the regions examined by J. A. P. Rodriguez et al. (2023) that display hollows within glacier-like flows associated with the basin’s peak ring. (Bottom) Identification of different morphological features within areas I, II, and III (left to right). Blue lines identify the boundaries between the flow-like features, the basin floor, and the peak ring structures. The red stars identify the basin floor interior, and the magenta star identifies the basin floor outside of the peak ring structure. Blue arrows identify the flow-like feature, yellow arrows identify hollows, and blue-green arrows identify halos. Brown arrows identify mesa tops (these are occupied by hollow features), and brown circles identify interpeak terrains within the peak ring structure.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: Calculated total escape amount of hot O atoms for different flare intensities. The opacities of the bars in the plot are scaled by the ratio of the escape rate at a given flare intensity to the sum of the escape rates at all intensities. So, a higher escape rate corresponds to a darker color of the bar. It can be seen that although the total escape amount peaks at 7× flare intensity, the escape rate peaks at 5× flare intensity. This plot acts as an important tool to visualize the lagging relationship between the total escape amount and the escape rates for a given flare intensity.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: The altitude profiles of three key quantities in calculating the DR rate—ne, Te, and ﹩{n}_{{{\rm{O}}}_{2}^{+}}﹩—in the postflare period are plotted. MAVEN observations are plotted in circles, while the line plots represent MGITM simulation results.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: Left: escape probabilities of hot O with increasing flare intensities. As the intensity of the flare increases, it gets harder for the produced hot O atoms to escape. As a result, the probability becomes nonzero only at higher altitudes. Right: the escape flux (in cm−2 s−1) of hot O at different flare intensities. We see that the flux peaks at 5× the flare intensity.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: The violin plot is an independent representation of the distribution of calculated escape probabilities across different flare intensities. The distributions illustrate the influence of flare intensity on the probability of atmospheric escape, capturing variations in response to different exposure durations. The width of each violin represents the density of escape probability values, highlighting the spread and central tendency across different conditions. Wider sections of a violin indicate a higher density of hot O atoms with that specific escape probability, meaning more atoms are likely to have that probability of escape.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: Pictorial representation of the atmospheric layers of Mars. The purpose of this figure is to show the integrated nature of the planetary atmosphere and reemphasize the need to study these coupling processes.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: The total hot O escape amount as a function of intensities for different flare durations.
Paper: A Systematic Study of Hot O Production and Escape from Martian Atmosphere in Response to Enhanced Extreme-ultraviolet Irradiance from Solar Flares
Authors: Chirag Rathi, Dimitra Atri, Dattaraj B. Dhuri
Figure caption: The escape flux as a function of time for different flare intensities.