MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3094785021 · doi:10.5194/epsc2020-774

Source regions for meteorite falls

2020· article· en· W3094785021 on OpenAlexaff
Mikael Granvik, P. J. Brown

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteoriteAsteroidNear-Earth objectMeteoroidSolar SystemAstrobiologyTrajectoryAsteroid beltSkyPopulationOrbit determinationIdentification (biology)PhysicsAstronomyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade there has been a large increase in the number of automated camera networks that monitor the sky for fireballs. One of the goals of these networks is to provide the necessary information for linking meteorites to their pre-impact, heliocentric orbits and ultimately to their source regions in the solar system. We re-computed heliocentric orbits for the 25 meteorite falls published in or before 2016 from original data sources (Granvik and Brown 2018). Using these orbits, we constrained their most likely escape routes from the main asteroid belt and the cometary region by utilizing a state-of-the-art orbit model of the near-Earth-object population (Granvik et al. 2016), which includes a size-dependence in delivery efficiency. While we find that the general results for escape routes are comparable to previous work, the role of trajectory measurement uncertainty in escape-route identification is explored for the first time. Moreover, the improved size-dependent delivery model substantially changes likely escape routes for several meteorite falls, most notably Tagish Lake which seems unlikely to have originated in the outer main belt as previously suggested. In addition, we find that reducing the uncertainty of fireball velocity measurements below about 0.1 km/s does not lead to reduced uncertainties in the identification of their escape routes from the asteroid belt and, further, their ultimate source regions. The analysis suggests that camera networks should be optimized for the largest possible number of meteorite recoveries with measured speed precisions of order 0.1 km/s. We will present updated results based on a new NEO model (Granvik et al. 2018) and complement our data set with the falls that have been reported since 2016.References: Granvik, M. and Brown, P. (2018). "Identification of meteorite source regions in the Solar System", Icarus 311, 271-287. Granvik, M., Morbidelli, A., Jedicke, R., Bolin, B., Bottke, W. F., Beshore, E., Vokrouhlicky, D., Delbo, M., Michel, P. (2016). "Super-catastrophic disruption of asteroids at small perihelion distances", Nature 530, 303-306.Granvik, M., Morbidelli, A., Jedicke, R., Bolin, B., Bottke, W. F., Beshore, E., Vokrouhlicky, D., Nesvorny, D., Michel, P. (2018). "Debiased orbit and absolute-magnitude distributions for near-Earth objects", Icarus 312, 181-207.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstro and Planetary Science→French-language works237,207→