THE 2014 KCG METEOR OUTBURST: CLUES TO A PARENT BODY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The κ Cygnid (KCG) meteor shower exhibited unusually high activity in 2014, producing ten times the flux of KCG meteors compared to normal years. The shower was detected during the routine operation of several radar and optical systems. Meteoroids associated with the outburst ranged from approximately 10 −6 –10 −5 kg for radar meteors and from 10 −3 to 2 kg for optical meteors. The Canadian Meteor Orbit Radar, Czech part of the European Fireball Network, and NASA All Sky and Southern Ontario Meteor Networks produced thousands of KCG meteor trajectories in total. Using these data, we have undertaken a new and improved characterization of the dynamics of this little-studied, variable meteor shower. The KCGs have a diffuse radiant and a significant spread in orbital characteristics. Our analysis of the highest quality KCG trajectories reveals concentrations of stream members near major resonances with Jupiter. We conducted a new search for parent bodies and find that several known asteroids are orbitally similar to the KCGs. Our meteor stream simulations show that the two best parent body candidates readily transfer meteoroids to the Earth in recent centuries, but neither produces a match to the KCG radiant, velocity, and solar longitude. We nevertheless identify asteroid 2001 MG1 as a promising parent body candidate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".