MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2747815250 · doi:10.11648/j.ajaa.20170503.12

The Vulcanoid Asteroids: Past, Present and Future

2017· article· en· W2747815250 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Beech

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaCampion College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsteroidAstrobiologyPopulationAstronomyPhysicsSublimation (psychology)Epoch (astronomy)AstrophysicsDemographyGalaxy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A review and discussion of both the historical and contemporaneous ideas pertaining to the putative population of Vulcanoid asteroids is presented. Current observations indicate that no objects larger than between 5 to 10 km in diameter reside in the orbital stability zone between 0.06 and 0.2 AU from the Sun, and that, at best, only a small population of Vulcanoid asteroids might exist at the present epoch. We review the physical processes (sublimation mass loss, evolution of the Sun’s luminosity, Poynting-Robertson drag, the Yarkovsky effect, the YORP effect, unipolar heating and collisions) that will control the lifetime against destruction of objects, either primordial or present-day, that chance to reside in the Vulcanoid region. It is argued that there are no overriding and/or absolute physical mechanisms that fully rule-out the present-day existence of a small Vulcanoid population, but we note that the gap between what the observations allow and what the theoretical models deem possible is closing rapidly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics→Same topicAstro and Planetary Science→French-language works237,207→