MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121717634 · doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200810839

Physical characteristics of very small meteoroids

2009· article· en· W2121717634 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. B. Kikwaya, M. Campbell‐Brown, Peter Brown, R. L. Hawkes, R. Weryk

Bibliographic record

VenueAstronomy and Astrophysics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteoroidPhysicsMagnitude (astronomy)AstrophysicsApparent magnitudeLight curveRange (aeronautics)Field of viewLimiting magnitudeAstronomyStarsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have optically recorded faint meteors using a large aperture LLLTV (low light level television) system based on second generation image intensifiers. These data consist of 42 two-station meteors of which 13 were captured during an observing campaign near London, Ontario (Canada) in May 2004, and 29 during a campaign near Kiruna (Sweden) in October 2007. Among 13 meteors recorded in the London campaign, where the baseline between the two sites was 5 km, only four meteors satisfied our requirement for complete lightcurves and deceleration profiles by starting in the field of view, of at least one station and also ending in the field of view of at least one station. From the second set of 29 meteors captured in Sweden, with a baseline of 117.7 km, only two satisfied these criteria. The cameras used in both campaigns had fields of view of 6 degrees, which with an assumed range of 100 km, gives a scale of 13 m/pixel at ~60 interlaced fields per second. This resolution allows precise measurement of the deceleration of very faint meteors. The limiting magnitude for meteors on these systems is near , while +11th magnitude stars are visible in the individual fields. The meteors detected in these two campaigns have peak brightnesses between absolute magnitude +6.2 and +7.4. Their photometric masses range from 4.2 mg to 0.35 mg. An ablation model was applied to fit each complete two-station event using the high-precision metric and photometric data as a constraint, in an attempt to compute bulk meteoroid densities. Interestingly, a large proportion of our faint meteor events were found to ablate at low altitudes, a result partly of our observing biases. The orbits of these events are consistent with either asteroidal or a Jupiter-family comet origin. The meteoroids' physical properties, as determined through model fits, suggest high densities, which favors an asteroidal interpretation. The high percentage of apparently dense asteroidal meteoroids at these small sizes may call into question earlier findings that only ~1% of meteoroids at these masses are asteroidal in origin. Our results are similar to others that find ~15% of faint TV meteors had spectra consistent with pure iron meteoroids. We find that many of these apparently asteroidal objects also undergo extensive fragmentation, which may reflect melting and spraying of droplets rather than mechanical fragmentation. Some individual cases in our small dataset will be highlighted where high bulk densities (approaching that of iron) are required to adequately match the end height, peak brightness, and observed deceleration. We speculate that these meteoroids may represent metallic condensates from impact-processed asteroid regolith.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207