MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399126870 · doi:10.1093/pasj/psae043

A deep analysis for New Horizons’ KBO search images

2024· article· en· W4399126870 on OpenAlexaff
Fumi Yoshida, Toshifumi Yanagisawa, Takashi Itô, Hirohisa Kurosaki, Makoto Yoshikawa, Kohki Kamiya, Ji-an Jiang, S. A. Stern, Wesley C. Fraser, Susan Benecchi, A. Verbiscer

Bibliographic record

VenuePublications of the Astronomical Society of Japan · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
FundersNational Astronomical Observatory of JapanJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceRegional Studies AssociationJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsAsteroidNew horizonsOpposition (politics)AstronomySpacecraftRemote sensingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observation datasets acquired by the Hyper Suprime-Cam (HSC) on the Subaru Telescope for NASA’s New Horizons mission target search were analyzed through a method devised by JAXA. The method makes use of Field Programmable Gate arrays and was originally used to detect fast-moving objects such as space debris or near-Earth asteroids. Here we present an application of the method to detect slow-moving Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs) in the New Horizons target search observations. A cadence that takes continuous images of one HSC field of view for half a night fits the method well. The observations for the New Horizons Kuiper Belt Extended Mission (NH/KEM) using HSC began in 2020 May, and are ongoing. Here we show our result of the analysis of the dataset acquired from 2020 May through 2021 June that have already passed the proprietary period and are open to the public. We detected 84 KBO candidates in the 2020 June and 2021 June datasets, when the observation field was close to opposition.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublications of the Astronomical Society of JapanSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207