MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stardust—An artificial, low‐velocity “meteor” fall and recovery: 15 January 2006

2007· article· en· W2057434968 on OpenAlexaff
D. O. Revelle, W. N. Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueMeteoritics and Planetary Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonic boomMeteor (satellite)InfrasoundGeologyMeteoroidHypersonic speedGeodesyPhysicsMeteorologyAcousticsSupersonic speedAstronomyMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract— On January 15, 2006, Stardust, a man‐made space capsule, plummeted to Earth for a soft landing after spending seven years in space. Since the expected initial speed of the body was about 12.9 km/s, a four‐element ground‐based infrasound array was deployed to Wendover, Nevada, USA, to measure the hypersonic booms from the re‐entry. At a distance of ∼33 km from the nominal trajectory, we easily recorded the weak acoustic arrivals and their continued rumbling after the main hypersonic boom arrival. In this paper, we report on subsequent analyses of these data, including an assessment of the expected entry characteristics (dynamics, energetics, ablation and panchromatic luminosity, etc.) on the basis of a bolide/meteor/fireball entry model that was specifically adapted for modeling a re‐entering man‐made object. Throughout the infrasonic data analyses, we compared our results for Stardust to those previously obtained for Genesis. From the associated entry parameters, we were also able to compute the kinetic energy density conservation properties for the propagating line source blast wave and compared the inviscid theoretical predictions against observed ground‐based infrasound amplitude and wave period data as a function of range. Finally, we made a top‐down bottom‐up assessment of the line source wave normals propagating downward into the complex temperature/sound speed and horizontal wind speed environment during January 15, 2006. This assessment proved to be generally consistent with the signal processing analysis and with the observed time delay between the known Stardust entry and the time of observations of infrasound signals, and so forth.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeteoritics and Planetary ScienceSame topicIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsFrench-language works237,207