MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065988345 · doi:10.1088/0004-6256/147/4/89

SEARCH FOR THE RETURN OF ACTIVITY IN ACTIVE ASTEROID 176P/LINEAR

2014· article· en· W2065988345 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Henry H. Hsieh, L. Denneau, A. Fitzsimmons, O. Hainaut, Masateru Ishiguro, Robert Jedicke, H. M. Kaluna, J. V. Keane, Jan Kleyna, Pedro Lacerda, Eric MacLennan, K. J. Meech, T. Riesen, E. Schunová, C. Snodgrass, Chadwick A. Trujillo, Laurie Urban, P. Vereš, R. J. Wainscoat, Bin Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astronomical Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaScience and Technology Facilities CouncilPlanetary Science DivisionScience Mission DirectorateSmithsonian Astrophysical ObservatoryMax-Planck-Institut für AstronomieNational Central UniversityMinisterio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación ProductivaNASA Astrobiology InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoQueen's UniversityEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemEuropean CommissionJohns Hopkins UniversityQueen's University BelfastSpace Telescope Science InstituteDurham UniversitySmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAsteroidBrightnessPhysicsAstrophysicsAzimuthAstronomySurface brightnessAstrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of a search for the reactivation of active asteroid 176P/LINEAR during its 2011 perihelion passage using deep optical observations obtained before, during, and after that perihelion passage. Deep composite images of 176P constructed from data obtained between 2011 June and 2011 December show no visible signs of activity, while photometric measurements of the object during this period also show no significant brightness enhancements similar to that observed for 176P between 2005 November and 2005 December when it was previously observed to be active. An azimuthal search for dust emission likewise reveals no evidence for directed emission (i.e., a tail, as was previously observed for 176P), while a one-dimensional surface brightness profile analysis shows no indication of a spherically symmetric coma at any time in 2011. We conclude that 176P did not in fact exhibit activity in 2011, at least not on the level on which it exhibited activity in 2005, and suggest that this could be due to the devolatization or mantling of the active site responsible for its activity in 2005.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astronomical JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207