MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401630075 · doi:10.1088/1674-4527/ad7079

A Study of the Comets with Large Perihelion Distances C/2019 L3 (ATLAS) and C/2019 O3 (Palomar)

2024· article· en· W4401630075 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alberto Silva Betzler

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in Astronomy and Astrophysics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSpace Telescope Science InstituteNuclear Safety and Security CommissionScience and Technology Facilities CouncilQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhysicsCometObservatoryAstrophysicsAtlas (anatomy)AstronomyWater iceRADIUSAstrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work analyzes the photometric data of the Oort spike comets C/2019 L3 (ATLAS) and C/2019 O3 (Palomar) obtained between 2016 and 2023 by the ATLAS network and the Belgian Olmen Observatory. The comets Palomar and ATLAS have a typical and unusually high activity level, respectively, based on the Af ρ parameter corrected to phase angle zero at perihelion. The absolute magnitude of comets ATLAS and Palomar in the o -band is 4.71 ± 0.05 and 4.16 ± 0.02 respectively. The cometary activity of comets ATLAS and Palomar probably began at r > 13 au before perihelion and will end at r >14 au after perihelion, which means that they could remain active until the second half of 2026. The nucleus of comet ATLAS has a minimum radius of 7.9 km, and the nucleus of comet Palomar could be a little larger. The c − o colors of the comets ATLAS and Palomar are redder and bluer, respectively, at perihelion than the solar twin YBP 1194. These comets showed a bluish trend in the coma color with decreasing heliocentric distance. Comet Palomar probably had two outbursts after its perihelion, each releasing about 10 8 kg of dust. The slopes of the photometric profile of the comae of these comets were between 1 and 1.5, indicating a steady state during the observation campaign.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in Astronomy and AstrophysicsSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207