MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413803679 · doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfa8b

The Potential Danger to Satellites due to Ejecta from a 2032 Lunar Impact by Asteroid 2024 YR<sub>4</sub>

2025· article· en· W4413803679 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul Wiegert, Peter Brown, J. A. Peas Lopes, Martin Connors

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Astrophysical Journal Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversityWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNuclear Safety and Security CommissionNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsEjectaMeteoroidAstrobiologyImpact craterAsteroidMeteoriteSolar SystemPhysicsImpact energyInterplanetary dust cloudAsteroid beltGeologyAstronomyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract On 2032 December 22, the 60 m diameter asteroid 2024 YR 4 has a 4% chance of impacting the Moon. Such an impact would release 6.5 MT TNT equivalent energy and produce a ∼1 km diameter crater. We estimate that up to 10 8 kg of lunar material could be liberated in such an impact by exceeding lunar escape speed. The current overall probability is about 1% that the asteroid will impact the Moon at a location such that more than 10% of the ejected material would accrete to the Earth on timescales of a few days. If this were to occur, the lunar-ejecta-associated particle fluence at 0.1–10 mm sizes could produce up to several years of equivalent background meteoroid impact exposure to satellites in near-Earth space late in 2032. Our results demonstrate that planetary defense considerations should be more broadly extended to cislunar space and not confined solely to near-Earth space.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Astrophysical Journal LettersSame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207