MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108419037 · doi:10.5194/epsc2020-502

Craters on (101955) Bennu’s boulders

2020· article· en· W3108419037 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald‐Louis Ballouz, K. J. Walsh, W. F. Bottke, D. N. DellaGiustina, M. Al Asad, Patrick Michel, Chrysa Avdellidou, Marco Delbò, E. R. Jawin, Erik Asphaug, O. S. Barnouin, C. A. Bennett, E. B. Bierhaus, H. C. Connolly, M. G. Daly, Terik Daly, D. R. Golish, J. L. Molaro, M. Pajola, B. Rizk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryImpact craterBiophysicsCrystallographyPhysicsBiologyAstrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction:The OSIRIS-REx mission’s observation campaigns [1] using the PolyCam instrument, part of the OSIRIS-REx Camera Suite (OCAMS) [2 3], have returned images of the surface of near-Earth asteroid (NEA) (101955) Bennu. These unprecedented-resolution images resolved cavities on Bennu’s boulders (Fig. 1) that are near-circular in shape and have diameters ranging from 5 cm to 5 m. We made hundreds of measurements of these cavities in image and laser altimeter data and found more than 100 boulders that exhibit at least one on their surface (Fig. 1). The most likely mechanism for the creation of these cavities is impacts. However, it is unclear whether these “mini-craters” were formed during Bennu’s residence in the main asteroid belt, or if they were formed more recently, after Bennu became a near-Earth asteroid (NEA). We use our observations of mini-craters to derive the strength of solid C-type objects against impacts. Our results have implications for Bennu’s history in the main-belt and in near-Earth space.The Strength of Monolithic C-type Objects:The strength of asteroids against collisions is crucial for understanding the surface evolution of airless planetary bodes, the dynamical evolution of asteroids throughout Solar System history, and the incorporation of planetesimals into planets [4,5].Laboratory data on centimeter-scale meteorites have been extrapolated and buttressed with numerical simulations and analytic formalisms to derive the cratering threshold at the asteroid scale [6–8]. However, thus far it has not been possible to directly assess the strength of the boulders that constitute the building blocks of a rubble-pile asteroid. Apollo lunar rocks and spacecraft missions to near-Earth asteroids indicate only two modes of impact-induced breakdown of boulders: 1) abrasion by micro-meteorites (sand-blasting), and 2) catastrophic rupture by a single large impact [9–11]. Widespread cratering on boulders has not been observed heretofore.Figure 1: Centimeter-scale impact features on the sur-face of a boulder (image 20190703T044506S720_pol, taken July 3, 2019, by the OCAMS PolyCam imager; 1 cm/pixel). We developed a new method to derive the cratering efficiency and the disruption threshold of C-type objects by combining scaling laws and observations of craters on C-type boulders and asteroids [12­–14]. We postulate that the largest crater on a boulder of a given size signifies an impact energy close to that required for disrupting that boulder. This type of analysis has been previously done for the study of the largest craters on planetary bodies larger than tens of kilometers using scaling laws [6] and laboratory experiments [15]. Here, we extend that analysis to objects of smaller size.We find that the crater to impactor size ratio on C-type objects is ~ 15, and that the collisional disruption of 1-m radius boulders on the surface of Bennu is efficient in the main belt (~ 1 Myr) but effectively ceases in near-Earth space as their collisional lifetime (~50 Myr) becomes greater than the dynamical lifetime of NEAs (

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)0.000
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207