MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081908583 · doi:10.1002/asna.201011550

Mining the CFHT Legacy Survey for known Near Earth Asteroids

2011· article· en· W2081908583 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomische Nachrichten · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsteroidMinor planetNear-Earth objectAstrometryPlanetEphemeris

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canada‐France‐Hawaii Legacy Survey (CFHTLS) comprising about 25 000 MegaCam images was data mined to search for serendipitous encounters of known Near Earth Asteroids (NEAs) and Potentially Hazardous Asteroids (PHAs). A total of 143 asteroids (109 NEAs and 34 PHAs) were found on 508 candidate images which were field corrected and measured carefully, and their astrometry was reported to Minor Planet Centre. Both recoveries and precoveries (apparitions before discovery) were reported, including data for 27 precovered asteroids (20 NEAs and 7 PHAs) and 116 recovered asteroids (89 NEAs and 27 PHAs). Our data prolonged arcs for 41 orbits at first or last opposition, refined 35 orbits by fitting data taken at one new opposition, recovered 6 NEAs at their second opposition and allowed us to ameliorate most orbits and their Minimal Orbital Intersection Distance (MOID), an important parameter to monitor for potential Earth impact hazard in the future (© 2011 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

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)0.002
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 score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.778

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomische NachrichtenSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207