MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1666609200

Using Boundary-based Mapping Projections for Morphological Classification of Small Bodies

2008· article· en· W1666609200 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueLunar and Planetary Science Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePhysics and Astronomy
ThématiqueAstro and Planetary Science
Établissements canadiensWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGeologyGeometryProjection (relational algebra)Boundary (topology)Orientation (vector space)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithm
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Purpose: We present a systematic approach to interpreting asteroid shape and surface morphology [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] using Constant Scale Natural Boundary (CSNB) map projection applied to Deimos, Phobos, Eros, and Ida. With the CSNB projection, the ridges and troughs, ‘event horizons’ acting as encoders of asteroid history, can be prominently featured as map edges at constant scale. For consistency and orientation, we locate the blunt ‘nose’ in the center of all maps in the equatorial plane, because most asteroids are elongated along the equatorial axis, and the blunt nose is a recognizable feature, but less morphologically complex than the ‘sharp’ end. The external boundaries then become the ridges connecting ‘peaks’, which typically run parallel to the equator, and troughs connecting ‘basins’, which typically separate the promontories. Three maps, two ridge-bound and one trough-bound, exist for each object (Figure on next page). Segmented maps (right column) show separation of the surface into geodesic ‘facets’, preserve resolution, and fold to a 3D facsimile of the asteroid. Compact maps (left colums) preserve orientation and are suitable for use as continuous maps with physical meaning to their edges. CSNB Map Comparison to other Projections: Understanding morphological patterns requires minimizing the distortion in important features. Simple cylindrical and mercator maps, although familiar and instantly orientating, produce great distortions, particularly for irregular objects and particularly at higher latitudes [9]. 3D mosaics require more than one view to illustrate what CSNB and conformal projections show in flat maps. CSNB projection combines the best features of 3D mosaics and conformal maps, emphasizing highly irregular faceted shape in one view, with minimal distortion, on a flat map. CSNB maps are designed to be conformal for antipodal areas and to preserve proportions in map interiors. The CSNB map shows the crater distribution, as well as the radial distribution of albedo and morphological features relative to the most prominent features, on one map. ‘Segmented’ CSNB projections preserve resolution as well. A disadvantage in use of the less traditional segmented CSNB projection is the vigilance required to keep track of features to allow orientation. Asteroid Morphology: Morphological parameters manifested in CSNB map shape include E/W and N/S distribution of segments, roughness of boundaries associated with each segment, and aspect ratios for each segment. Based on comparison of these parameters (see table below), Phobos and Deimos, are more spherical and regular than Eros or Ida, implying a more disruptive history for the latter two asteroids. Phobos is composed of considerably elongated segments, due to network of radial grooves extending from the Crater Stickney on the nose. Deimos and Eros show considerably greater asymmetry in the N/S directions. Eros and Ida both exhibit considerably more roughess on segment boundaries indicating that Deimos and Phobos, with their less disruptive facet boundaries, may be somewhat shielded from bombardment by the planet Mars. Asymmetry in Deimos shape is caused by the sharp, southward hooking nose in the equatorial region and the cavity, presumably formed by an impact event, near the south pole. References: [1] Clark C.S. (2002), LPS XXXIII, #1794; [2] Clark C.S. (2003) ISPRS, 34, XXX; [3] Clark P.E and Clark C.S. (2005) LPS XXXVI, #1423; [4] Thomas P. et al (2002) Icarus, 155, 1, 18-37; [5] http://near.jhuapl.edu; [6] Cheng A. and Barnouin-Jha O. (2002), LPS XXXIIII, #1522; [7] Oner A.T., http://www.solarviews.com/eng/asteroid.htm; [8] Stooke P., http://www.ssc.uwo.ca/geography/ spacemap/contents.htm; [9] Krantz S. (1999), American Scientist, 84, 436.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,401
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,505

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,159
Tête enseignante GPT0,281
Écart entre enseignants0,122 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle