Model predictions for the 2001 Leonids and implications for Earth-orbiting satellites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A numerical model of the Leonid stream is developed, based on an earlier model which has been applied to the Perseid stream. The results for this model are applied to the 2001 Leonid return. By examining the full three-dimensional dispersion of individual ‘streamlets’ released from the Leonid parent comet, 55P/Tempel–Tuttle, we have derived an estimate for the temporal change in spatial density of each trail. Using this result along with an estimate for the location of the centres for individual streamlets and fits to previous Leonid storm profiles, we estimate that the activity from the shower will be broad and relatively strong (zenithal hourly rates perhaps in excess of 1000). In particular, streamlets from the 1766 and 1799 ejections contribute to activity peaking near 10 and 12 ut on 2001 November 18, respectively. Additional older material from 1633, 1666 and 1699, as well as more recent ejections from 1866 and 1833, contributes to a much broader secondary maximum near 17.5 ut on November 18. Comparison with other published models of predicted Leonid activity in 2001 shows general agreement in terms of timing, but the models differ significantly in terms of the relative magnitude of the activity (which other models suggest will be larger). Significant anisotropy in the impact hazard exists for satellites in the geostationary belt, with those over western longitudes most likely to be affected. Integrated fluences for the 2001 Leonid return suggest a hazard of order one magnitude greater than occurred for the 1999 Leonid storm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".