Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the summer of 2008, the NASA Meteoroid Environments Office (MEO) began to establish a video fireball network, based on the following objectives: (1) determine the speed distribution of cm size meteoroids, (2) determine the major sources of cm size meteoroids (showers/sporadic sources), (3) characterize meteor showers (numbers, magnitudes, trajectories, orbits), (4) determine the size at which showers dominate the meteor flux, (5) discriminate between re-entering space debris and meteors, and 6) locate meteorite falls. In order to achieve the above with the limited resources available to the MEO, it was necessary that the network function almost fully autonomously, with very little required from humans in the areas of upkeep or analysis. With this in mind, the camera design and, most importantly, the ASGARD meteor detection software were adopted from the University of Western Ontario's Southern Ontario Meteor Network (SOMN), as NASA has a cooperative agreement with Western's Meteor Physics Group. 15 cameras have been built, and the network now consists of 8 operational cameras, with at least 4 more slated for deployment in calendar year 2013. The goal is to have 15 systems, distributed in two or more groups east of automatic analysis; every morning, this server also automatically generates an email and a web page (http://fireballs.ndc.nasa.gov) containing an automated analysis of the previous night's events. This analysis provides the following for each meteor: UTC date and time, speed, start and end locations (longitude, latitude, altitude), radiant, shower identification, light curve (meteor absolute magnitude as a function of time), photometric mass, orbital elements, and Tisserand parameter. Radiant/orbital plots and various histograms (number versus speed, time, etc) are also produced. After more than four years of operation, over 5,000 multi-station fireballs have been observed, 3 of which potentially dropped meteorites. A database containing data on all these events, including the videos and calibration information, has been developed and is being modified to include data from the SOMN and other camera networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".