The frequency of window damage caused by bolide airbursts: A quarter century case study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We have empirically estimated how often fireball shocks produce overpressure (∆ P ) at the ground sufficient to damage windows. Our study used a numerical entry model to estimate the energy deposition and shock production for a suite of 23 energetic fireballs reported by U.S. Government sensors over the last quarter century. For each of these events, we estimated the peak ∆ P on the ground and the ground area above ∆ P thresholds of 200 and 500 Pa where light and heavy window damage, respectively, are expected. Our results suggest that at the highest ∆ P , it is the rare, large fireballs (such as the Chelyabinsk fireball) which dominate the long‐term areal ground footprints for heavy window damage. The height at the fireball peak brightness and the fireball entry angle contribute to the variance in ground ∆ P , with lower heights and shallower angles producing larger ground footprints and more potential damage. The effective threshold energy for fireballs to produce heavy window damage is ~5–10 kT; such fireballs occur globally once every 1–2 years. These largest annual bolide events, should they occur over a major urban center with large numbers of windows, can be expected to produce economically significant window damage. However, the mean frequency of heavy window damage (∆ P above 500 Pa) from fireball shock waves occurring over urban areas is estimated to be approximately once every 5000 yr. Light window damage (∆ P above 200 Pa) is expected every ~600 yr.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it