MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409463791 · doi:10.3847/psj/adbe74

In Search of the Potentially Hazardous Asteroids in the Taurid Resonant Swarm

2025· article· en· W4409463791 on OpenAlexafffund
Jasmine Li, Quanzhi Ye, Denis Vida, David L. Clark, Eric C. Bellm, Richard Dekany, M. J. Graham, Frank J. Masci, Josiah Purdum, B. Racine, Avery Wold

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Planetary Science Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersDeutsches Elektronen-SynchrotronTrinity College DublinNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaStockholms UniversitetNuclear Safety and Security CommissionInstitut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des ParticulesUniversity of WarwickNorthwestern UniversityWeizmann Institute of ScienceCalifornia Institute of TechnologyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAsteroidSwarm behaviourHazardous wasteAstrobiologyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceGeologyArtificial intelligenceBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Taurid Complex is a large interplanetary system that contains comet 2P/Encke, several meteoroid streams, and possibly a number of near-Earth asteroids. The size and nature of the system have led to the speculation that it was formed through a large-scale cometary breakup. Numerical investigations have suggested that planetary dynamics can create a resonant region with a large number of objects concentrated in a small segment of the orbit, known as the Taurid swarm, which approaches the Earth in certain years and provides favorable conditions for studying the Taurid Complex. Recent meteor observations confirmed the existence of the swarm for millimeter- to meter-sized objects. Here we present a dedicated telescopic search for potentially hazardous asteroids and other macroscopic objects in the Taurid swarm using the Zwicky Transient Facility survey. We determine from our nondetection that there are no more than 9–14 H ≤ 24 (equivalent to a diameter of D ≳ 100 m) objects in the swarm, suggesting that the Encke–Taurid progenitor was ∼10 km in size. A progenitor of such a size is compatible with the prediction of state-of-the-art solar system dynamical models, which expects ∼0.1 D > 10 km objects on Encke-like orbits at any given time.

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)0.003
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Planetary Science JournalSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207