THE RETURN OF THE ANDROMEDIDS METEOR SHOWER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Andromedid meteor shower underwent spectacular outbursts in 1872 and 1885, producing thousands of visual meteors per hour and described as `stars fell like rain' in Chinese records of the time. The shower originates from comet 3D/Biela whose disintegration in the mid-1800's is linked to the outbursts, but the shower has been weak or absent since the late 19th Century. This shower returned in December 2011 with a zenithal hourly rate of approximately 50, the strongest return in over a hundred years. Some 122 probable Andromedid orbits were detected by the Canadian Meteor Orbit Radar. The shower outburst occurred during 2011 Dec 3-5. The radiant at RA +$18\degree$ and Dec +$56\degree$ is typical of the `classical' Andromedids of the early 1800's, whose radiant was actually in Cassiopeia. The orbital elements indicate that the material involved was released before 3D/Biela's breakup prior to 1846. The observed shower in 2011 had a slow geocentric speed (16 km s$^{-1}$) and was comprised of small particles: the mean measured mass from the radar is $\sim5 \times 10^{-7}$ kg corresponding to radii of 0.5 mm at a bulk density of 1000 kg/m$^3$. Numerical simulations of the parent comet indicate that the meteoroids of the 2011 return of the Andromedids shower were primarily ejected during 3D/Biela's 1649 perihelion passage. The orbital characteristics, radiant, timing as well as the absence of large particles in the streamlet are all consistent with simulations. Predictions are made regarding other appearances of the shower in the years 2000-2047 based on our numerical model. We note that the details of the 2011 return can, in principle, be used to better constrain the orbit of 3D/Biela prior to the comets first recorded return in 1772.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".