MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6966964291 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0901.4511

Searching for Main-Belt Comets Using the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey

2009· preprint· en· W6966964291 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsteroidCometTelescopeBrightnessStarsOrbit (dynamics)Object (grammar)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope Legacy Survey, specifically the Very Wide segment of data, is used to search for possible main-belt comets. In the first data set, 952 separate objects with asteroidal orbits within the main-belt are examined using a three-level technique. First, the full-width-half-maximum of each object is compared to stars of similar magnitude, to look for evidence of a coma. Second, the brightness profiles of each object are compared with three stars of the same magnitude, which are nearby on the image to ensure any extended profile is not due to imaging variations. Finally, the star profiles are subtracted from the asteroid profile and the residuals are compared with the background using an unpaired T-test. No objects in this survey show evidence of cometary activity. The second survey includes 11438 objects in the main-belt, which are examined visually. One object, an unknown comet, is found to show cometary activity. Its motion is consistent with being a main-belt asteroid, but the observed arc is too short for a definitive orbit calculation. No other body in this survey shows evidence of cometary activity. Upper limits of the number of weakly and strongly active main-belt comets are derived to be 630+/-77 and 87+/-28, respectively. These limits are consistent with those expected from asteroid collisions. In addition, data extracted from the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope image archive of main-belt comet 176P/LINEAR is presented.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.127 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicAstro and Planetary Science→French-language works237,207→