MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3104647646 · doi:10.5194/epsc2020-443

Modeling the past and future activity of the Halleyids meteor showers

2020· article· en· W3104647646 on OpenAlexaff
Auriane Egal, Peter Brown, Paul Wiegert, M. Campbell‐Brown, J. Rendtel, Denis Vida

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeteoroidMeteor showerMeteor (satellite)CometPhysicsRange (aeronautics)MeteorologyEnvironmental scienceAstrophysicsAtmospheric sciencesAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new numerical model of the Eta-Aquariid and Orionid meteor shower. Through the modelling of millions meteoroids released from comet 1P/Halley, we simulate the characteristics of each Eta-Aquariid and Orionid apparition between 1985 and 2050. The modelled showers activity duration, shape, maximum zenithal hourly rates (ZHR) values, and mass distributions are compared with several decades of meteor observations in the optical and radar range. Our simulations suggest that the age of the Eta-Aquariids shortly exceeds 5000 years, while the Orionids are composed of older material. Several Eta-Aquariid outbursts are expected in the future, in particular around 2023-2024 and 2045-2046. The evolution of 1P/Halley's meteoroid streams is strongly influenced by mean motion resonances with Jupiter, that might be responsible of a ~12 year cycle in the Orionids activity variations.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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→