Physically based alternative to the PE criterion for meteoroids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Meteoroids impacting the Earth atmosphere are commonly classified using the PE criterion. This criterion was introduced to support the identification of the fireball type by empirically linking its orbital origin and composition characteristics. Additionally, it is used as an indicator of the meteoroid tensile strength and its ability to penetrate the atmosphere. However, the level of classification accuracy of the PE criterion depends on the ability to constrain the value of the input data, retrieved from the fireball observation, required to derive the PE value. To overcome these uncertainties and achieve a greater classification detail, we propose a new formulation using scaling laws and dimensionless variables that groups all the input variables into two parameters that are directly obtained from the fireball observations. These two parameters, α and β, represent the drag and the mass-loss rates along the luminous part of the trajectory, respectively, and are linked to the shape, strength, ablation efficiency, mineralogical nature of the projectile, and duration of the fireball. Thus, the new formulation relies on a physical basis. This work shows the mathematical equivalence between the PE criterion and the logarithm of 2αβ under the same PE criterion assumptions. We demonstrate that log(2αβ) offers a more general formulation that does not require any preliminary constraint on the meteor flight scenario and discuss the suitability of the new formulation for expanding the classification beyond fully disintegrating fireballs to larger impactors including meteorite-dropping fireballs. The reliability of the new formulation is validated using the Prairie Network meteor observations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".