A Survey of Orbits of Co-orbitals of Jupiter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jupiter's Trojan asteroids fulfill the prediction of Lagrange that orbits can be stable when a small body orbits in specific locations relative to its 'parent' planet and the Sun.The first such Trojan asteroid was discovered in 1906 and subsequently similar asteroids have been discovered associated with Mars and with Neptune.To date no Trojans have been discovered associated with Earth, but several horseshoe asteroids, coorbital asteroids moving along a large range of the Earth's orbit, have been found.Other planets also are not known to have Trojan-type asteroids associated with them.Since the number of detected Jupiter Trojans has increased dramatically in the last few years, we have conducted a numerical survey of their orbital motions to see whether any in fact move in horseshoe orbits.We find that none do, although there is some possibility that escaped Trojans have been detected.Here we also use the enlarged database of information about Trojans to summarize their orbital properties as now known.Résumé: Les astéroïdes Troïens de Jupiter vérifient la prevision de Lagrange que des orbites stables sont possibles lorsqu'un objet de petite masse fait son orbite dans certains endroits par rapport à une planète associée et au soleil.Le premier de ce type d'astéroïde fut découvert en 1906 et ensuite de tels astéroïdes ont été découverts associés à Mars et à Neptune.Jusqu'au present il n'y a pas d'analogue des Troïens associé à la terre, mais plusieurs astéroïdes avec des orbites en 'fer de cheval', qui se déplacent le long de l'orbite de la terre, ont été trouvés.Les autres planètes n'ont pas d'asteroïde suivant leurs orbites.Avec l'accroissement dramatique du chiffre des Troïens de Jupiter connus dans les dernières années, nous avons fait un réperage numérique des mouvements orbitaux afin de determiner si certains se déplacent en fait dans des orbites à fer de cheval.Nous trouvons qu'il n'y en a aucun qui fait ce genre d'orbite en ce moment, mais il existe la possibilité que certains objets soient des Troïens echappés.En plus de presenter nos resultats à ce sujet, nous profitons de notre étude pour presenter les propriétés des orbites des Troïens de Jupiter en general.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".