MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2066409984 · doi:10.1029/2010je003761

Results from the NMSU-NASA Marshall Space Flight Center LCROSS observational campaign

2011· article· en· W2066409984 on OpenAlexaff
N. J. Chanover, Charles Miller, Ryan T. Hamilton, Robert M. Suggs, R. McMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsApache (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelescopeRemote sensingImpact craterObservatoryPlumeSurface brightnessPhysicsSatelliteGeologyRidgeSpacecraftBrightnessAstronomyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[1] We observed the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) lunar impact on 9 October 2009 using three telescope and instrument combinations in southern New Mexico: the Agile camera with a V filter on the Astrophysical Research Consortium 3.5 m telescope at Apache Point Observatory (APO), a StellaCam video camera with an R filter on the New Mexico State University (NMSU) 1 m telescope at APO, and a Goodrich near-IR (J and H band) video camera on the NMSU 0.6 m telescope at Tortugas Mountain Observatory. The three data sets were analyzed to search for evidence of the debris plume that rose above the Cabeus crater shortly after the LCROSS impact. Although we saw no evidence of the plume in any of our data sets, we constrained its surface brightness through analysis of our photometrically calibrated data. The minimum surface brightness that we could have detected in our Agile data was 9.69 magnitudes arc sec−2, which is 177 times fainter than the brightest part of the foreground ridge of Cabeus. In our near-IR data, our minimum detectable surface brightness was 8.58 magnitudes arc sec−2, which is 370 times fainter than the brightest part of the foreground ridge in the J and H bands. The debris plume was detected by the LCROSS shepherding spacecraft and the Diviner radiometer on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. Given the plume radiance observed by LCROSS, we cannot distinguish between a conical or cylindrical plume geometry because when seen from Earth, both are below our detection thresholds.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicPlanetary Science and Exploration→French-language works237,207→