adsabs/AstroCLIMB huggingface dataset:
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: Central peak dimensions with crater rim-to-rim diameter. Ceres data are visualized by a gray data cloud, constructed by tracing the outermost data points, to show the spread of all 160 data points. The 18 freshest Ceres craters of this work are displayed as triangular data points along with the fresh craters of P. M. Schenk et al. (2021). (A) Peak diameter. There are clear trends of peak diameter with crater size: Pluto Dcp = 0.22D1.1 (R2 = 0.9), Charon Dcp = 0.16D1.23 (R2 = 0.94), Ceres Dcp = 0.35D0.90 (R2 = 0.74), and Ganymede 0.2D1.2 (R2 = 0.83). (B): Peak heights. Pluto, Charon, and Ceres show generally positive trend in peak height with crater size: Pluto Hcp = 0.0071D1.19 (R2 = 0.45), Charon Hcp = 0.048D0.78 (R2 = 0.75), and Ceres Hcp = 0.16D0.48 (R2 = 0.21).
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: Comparison of wall slopes for the Pluto, Charon, and Ceres craters from this work, with Ganymede (V. J. Bray et al. 2008; 2012b) and the Moon (R. J. Pike 1977). (A) Icy-body data, with trend lines. The trend lines shown in this figure are created from 3–6 preservation state craters only, and are not statistically significant. Pluto trend = 18.66D0.009 (R2 = 0.003), Charon slopes = 52.34D−0.27 (R2 = 0.11), Ceres slopes = 68.14D−0.43 (R2 = 0.41), and Ganymede slopes = 42.12D−0.46 (R2 = 0.54). (B) Comparison of icy bodies with the data clouds of Ceres (light gray) and the Moon (dark gray, which extends beneath the Ceres “cloud”). The “clouds” are constructed by delineating the outermost data points.
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: Example topographic profiles of central peak craters on Pluto. (A) 13 km crater at 44:44N, 140.74E. (B) 14 km crater at 5.97S, 145.35E. (C) 32 km diameter crater at 68.87N, 181.13E. (D) The 47 km diameter crater Giclas, at 39.47N, 202.05E. (E) The 82 km diameter Elliot crater at 12.01N, 138.98E, showing how the dimensions were measured from each profile. D is the rim-to-rim diameter, and d is the crater depth, measured from the maximum rim elevation to the lower point on the crater floor. The height of the crater rim above the surrounding terrain level (rim height) and the maximum elevation of the central peak above the crater floor (central peak height) are noted with “Hr” and “Hcp,” respectively. “Dcp” is the diameter of the central peak. The average wall calculation is dx/dy. In cases where terracing was obvious, the wall slope was calculated from the total rim-wall area to provide an average value.(The data used to create this figure are available in the online article.)(The data used to create this figure are available.)
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: (A) Rim heights and rim-to-rim diameter of Ceres and Charon craters profiled in this work, combined with the data of M. F. Zeilnhofer & N. G. Barlow (2021) and Robbins et al. (2021). Lines are added to guide the eye to suggested separate trends in Ceres and Charon rim heights at crater diameters above 10 and 25 km, respectively. (B) Panel (A) with the addition of the Pluto craters profiled in this work combined with the data of S. J. Robbins et al. (2021) and the Ganymede data of V. J. Bray et al. (2008, 2012b).
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: Preservation states 6–3 for craters on Pluto ((A)–(D)) and Charon ((E)–(H)). (A) Preservation state 6 example: a 11 km diameter Hardaway crater at 46.69N:141.03E; clear ejecta blanket still visible, sharp rim, terraces, and central uplift visible. (B) Preservation state 5 example: a 34 km diameter crater at 47.20N:135.25E; sharp rims, terraces, and central uplift visible, but ejecta blanket gone. This example shows some blanketing “B” of the terrain. (C) Preservation state 4 example: the 33 km diameter Gibson crater at 62.85N:215.49E; uplift and terraces still notable, but topography subdued relative to class 5. This example likely has a softer appearance due to blanketing. (D) Preservation state 3 example: 27 km diameter crater at 36.48N:106.6E; some evidence of glacial action “G”, bobbling of the crater rims, and dark infill “F.” (E) Preservation state 6 example on Charon 35 km diameter crater at 20.58N, 35.42E. (F) Preservation state 5 example: 30 km diameter crater at 10.72N, −17.63E. (G) Preservation state 4 example: 24 km diameter crater at −8.69N, −21.71E. (H) Preservation state 3 example: 33 km diameter crater at 31.64N, 32.387E.
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: (A) Annona crater is an example of a preservation class 3 crater with a diameter of 60 km centered at 48.14°S 8.43°E on Ceres. Preservation class 3 craters were too degraded to be included in this work. Craters images with insufficient resolution or extreme incidence angles that obscured crater morphology were also excluded. (B) Sintana crater is an example of a preservation class 4 crater with a diameter of 58 km centered at 48.07°S 46.20°E. (C) Kupalo crater is an example of a preservation class 5 crater on Ceres with a diameter of 26 km centered at 39.44°S 173.20°E (images obtained from the Low Altitude Mapping Orbit clear filter global mosaic; T. H. Roatsch et al. 2017).
Paper: Crater Dimensions on the Dwarf Planets
Authors: Veronica J. Bray, Michael F. Zeilnhofer, S. J. Robbins, P. M. Schenk, Kelsi M. Singer, O. L. White, S. A. Stern, S. D. Benecchi, K. A. Durfey, H. A. Weaver, C. B. Olkin, J. R. Spencer
Figure caption: Comparison of Pluto crater dimensions on Belton Regio and the regions adjacent to the Sputnik basin. (A) Depth. (B) Rim height. (C) Wall slope. (D) Peak diameter. (E) Peak height.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: PITMS TVac test data for methane (CH4) compared with the reference NIST fragmentation pattern. The NIST pattern is convolved to the asymmetric Lorentz function and scaled to the PITMS data for ease of comparison while preserving the relative peak intensity defined by the NIST fragmentation pattern. The inset plots the peak height ratios for m/z 15/16 and 14/16, showing that the PITMS data have lesser abundances of the low-mass fragments (“softer” electron impact energy) than the NIST data.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: GRM data (black squares) showing the H3O+/H2O+ peak area ratio as a function of known Pwater in the test chamber. A linear fit to the GRM data (black line) was used to calculate Pwater in PITMS data using the H3O+/H2O+ peak area ratios collected during operation in flight (colored symbols). Error bars correspond to a ±32% uncertainty in the partial pressure measured using the GRM.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: SPARTA collisional simulation of a N2O4 leak located on Deck B of the Peregrine lander, localized along a hypothetical MLI seam line. The color bar shows the pressure of N2O4. This simulation is done with an open geometry and shows that a considerable amount of gas flows through the spacecraft, enabling it to reach PITMS on the other side of the lander.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: Estimated time required for water to dissipate from the Peregrine lander in space to the limits observable by PITMS. Linear, exponential, and power-law fits to the PITMS data after the dust cover was opened are shown in the inset on a linear scale and in the main panel on a logarithmic scale. Note that the PITMS data are sparse and do not provide very meaningful constraints to the fit (all fits have relatively low R2 values).
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: Change in peak area for key regions (m/z = 18, 19, 30, and 46) and ratios (m/z = 18/19) in SF4 data during the PITMS mission in order of collection (note that the x-axis is scaled differently in each panel to better show data and trends). The small changes or trends within each experiment are primarily the result of changing conditions in the instrument itself, such as offgassing from the filament in the early spectra.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: Pressure calculated from the total counts in spectra acquired using SF4 throughout the mission. The gray line shows when the dust cover was opened.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: Comparison of two calibration methods applied to PITMS in-flight data for water partial pressure, comparing the GRM-based calibration shown in Figure 9 using H3O+/H2O+ peak area ratios against the QC (Section 3.2). The dashed line is the 1:1 correlation.
Paper: The Peregrine Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (PITMS): Results from a CLPS-delivered Mass Spectrometer
Authors: Barbara A. Cohen, Simeon J. Barber, Aleksandra J. Gawronska, Feargus A. J. Abernethy, Natalie M. Curran, Phillip A. Driggers, William M. Farrell, David J. Heather, Christopher Howe, Peter F. Landsberg, Veneranda López-Días, Andrew D. Morse, Thomas Morse, Michael J. Poston, Parvathy Prem, Roland Trautner, Orenthal J. Tucker, Tristram J. Warren, Stefano Boccelli
Figure caption: Summed spectra and model fits for all data acquired (a) prior to and (b) after opening the dust cover. The colored curves show the fits to individual peaks and their originating source.
Paper: Mapping Venus’s Gravity Field with the VERITAS Mission
Authors: Flavia Giuliani, Daniele Durante, Gael Cascioli, Fabrizio De Marchi, Luciano Iess, Erwan Mazarico, Suzanne Smrekar
Figure caption: Comparison of degree strength maps computed using different definitions. Panel (A) is generated using the original definition, comparing Kaula’s rule to the acceleration uncertainty of coefficient of degree ﹩l﹩; in this case, the solution considered is the unconstrained one. Degree strength map (B) is generated as in F. G. Lemoine et al. (2014), comparing the cumulative error from degree 2 to degree ﹩l\,﹩to the expected acceleration computed from Kaula’s rule; in this case, the solution considered is the one constrained using Kaula’s rule. Please note that the map in panel (A) is the same as the map in panel (A) in Figure 7, but the color scale is different.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: The dust plume morphology for dust sizes of 0.1 (left), 0.5 (middle), and 1.0 (right) μm is shown with a color scale corresponding to a ratio of column density. The white contours represent the column density distribution of a gas plume with a production rate of 1 × 1028 H2O s−1 and an initial gas bulk velocity of 0.5 km s−1 (Case 2 in Table 1). Notably, the gas plume is significantly larger in scale compared to the dust plume. Both axes are presented in units of km (Europa radius = 1560 km).
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: The DSMC simulation results of Europa’s gas plumes with four case studies. Top: number density distribution (shown in contours with a color scale in units of # m−3). Middle: gas velocity distribution (shown in contours with a color scale in units of m s−1). Gas flow streamlines are presented too. Bottom: column density distribution (shown in contours with a color scale in units of # m−2). Both axes are arbitrary and presented in units of Europa radius.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: Number density distribution of the simulated dust plumes with a size distribution of f(a) ∼ a−4.3 in the range of 0.1−1 μm. Left column: the ones with an initial velocity equal to 0 km s−1 for all dust sizes. Right column: the ones with an initial size-dependent velocity distribution of a critical dust size of 0.8 μm. The four rows represent the four case studies of gas plumes listed in Table 1. The axes are shown in units of km, and the color bar represents the number density distribution in units of # m−3.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: Initial dust ejection velocity distributions as a function of particle size relative to the assumed initial gas bulk velocity and critical dust radius. The x-axis represents dust size (in meters), while the y-axis denotes the initial dust ejection velocity (in km s−1).
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: The simulated deposition rate of Europa’s plume dust on the surface using a size distribution from Y. Dong et al. (2015) for an E3 flyby parameter (f(a) ∼ a−4.3). The dust sizes, ranging from 0.001 to 10 μm, are categorized into four bins: 0.001–0.01 μm (blue), 0.01–0.1 μm (yellow), 0.1–1 μm (red), and 1–10 μm (green). The x-axis measures the angular distance from the source location in degrees, with 0 indicating the source site. The y-axis shows the mass flux deposition rate in kg m−2 s−1. From left to right, the panels represent four gas plume cases detailed in Table 1, each labeled with the corresponding gas production rate and initial gas bulk velocity at the top of the panel. The top panel displays scenarios with an initial dust velocity of 0 km s−1 for all sizes, while the bottom panel shows the distribution with an initial ejection velocity of a critical size of 0.8 μm.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: The simulated deposition rate of Europa’s plume dust on the surface using a size distribution from Y. Dong et al. (2015) for an E3 flyby parameter (f(a) ∼ a−3.0). The dust sizes, ranging from 0.001 to 10 μm, are categorized into four bins: 0.001−0.01 μm (blue), 0.01−0.1 μm (yellow), 0.1−1 μm (red), and 1−10 μm (green). The x-axis measures the angular distance from the source location in degrees, with 0 indicating the source site. The y-axis shows the mass flux deposition rate in kg m−2 s−1. From left to right, the panels represent four gas plume cases detailed in Table 1, each labeled with the corresponding gas production rate and initial gas bulk velocity at the top of the panel. The top panel displays scenarios with an initial dust velocity of 0 km s−1 for all sizes, while the bottom panel shows the distribution with an initial ejection velocity of a critical size of 0.8 μm.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: Column density distribution of the simulated dust plumes with a size distribution of f(a) ∼ a−3.0 in the size range of 0.1−1 μm. Left column: the ones with an initial velocity equal to 0 km s−1 for all dust sizes. Right column: the ones with an initial size-dependent velocity distribution of a critical dust size of 0.8 μm. The four rows represent the four case studies of gas plumes listed in Table 1. The axes are shown in units of km, and the color bar represents the number density distribution in units of # m−2.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: Column density distribution of the simulated dust plumes with a size distribution of f(a) ∼ a−4.3 in the size range of 0.1−1 μm. Left column: the ones with an initial velocity equal to 0 km s−1 for all dust sizes. Right column: the ones with an initial size-dependent velocity distribution of a critical dust size of 0.8 μm. The four rows represent the four case studies of gas plumes listed in Table 1. The axes are shown in units of km, and the color bar represents the number density distribution in units of # m−2.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: Number density distribution of the simulated dust plumes with a size distribution of f(a) ∼ a−3.0 in the size range of 0.1−1 μm. Left column: the ones with an initial velocity equal to 0 km s−1 for all dust sizes. Right column: the ones with an initial size-dependent velocity distribution of a critical dust size of 0.8 μm. The four rows represent the four case studies of gas plumes listed in Table 1. The axes are shown in units of km, and the color bar represents the number density distribution in units of # m−3.
Paper: Hot Spot Detections and Volcanic Changes on Io during the Juno Epoch: Orbits PJ5 to PJ55
Authors: Jason E. Perry, Ashley Gerard Davies, David A. Williams, David M. Nelson
Figure caption: Global views of Io from Juno/JIRAM acquired during orbit 55 showing Io’s anti-Jovian/leading-hemisphere (a) and northern trailing hemisphere (b) at 4.8 μm. (a) is a composite of 26 JIRAM frames from sequence JRM_027 and has an original pixel scale of 8.7 km. (b) is a composite of 22 JIRAM frames from sequence JRM_030 and has an original pixel scale of 6.9 km. Prominent volcanoes in each hemisphere are labeled.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: The total deposition rate of Europa’s plume dust on the surface using a size distribution from Y. Dong et al. (2015) for an E3 flyby parameter (f(a) ∼ a−4.3). The dust sizes, ranging from 0.001 to 10 μm, are aggregated for analysis. The x-axis measures the angular distance from the source location in degrees, with 0 indicating the source site. The y-axis shows the mass flux deposition rate in kg m−2 s−1. Four different colors correspond to the gas production rates and initial gas bulk velocities for the gas plume scenarios listed in Table 1.
Paper: Surface Deposition of Icy Dust Entrained in Europa’s Plumes
Authors: Wei-Ling Tseng, Ian-Lin Lai, Hsiang-Wen Hsu, Wing-Huen Ip, Jong-Shinn Wu
Figure caption: The total deposition rate of Europa’s plume dust on the surface using a size distribution from Y. Dong et al. (2015) for an E3 flyby parameter (f(a) ∼ a−3.0). The dust sizes, ranging from 0.001 to 10 μm, are aggregated for analysis. The x-axis measures the angular distance from the source location in degrees, with 0 indicating the source site. The y-axis shows the mass flux deposition rate in kg m−2 s−1. Four different colors correspond to the gas production rates and initial gas bulk velocities for the gas plume scenarios listed in Table 1.
Paper: Hot Spot Detections and Volcanic Changes on Io during the Juno Epoch: Orbits PJ5 to PJ55
Authors: Jason E. Perry, Ashley Gerard Davies, David A. Williams, David M. Nelson
Figure caption: Variation in wavelength of peak thermal emission with temperature (as determined using Wien’s Law), with the wavelength ranges of different imagers that have observed Io. The curve is annotated with cooling times for newly emplaced basalt on the surface of Io and, in brackets, for a similar basalt flow on Earth. Like Galileo NIMS, JIRAM is ideal for studying thermal emission from surfaces with ages typically from hours to months as it is capable of detecting pixel brightness temperatures down to ≈200 K. NIMS and SSI were on Galileo. LEISA, LORRI, and MVIC were on New Horizons. VIMS was on Cassini. AO refers to ground-based telescopes such as Keck and Gemini that are equipped with adaptive optics. IRTF is the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility. LBT is the Large Binocular Telescope (infrared imaging). Base image from A. G. Davies et al. (2010).