Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Characterization of of (98943) 2001 CC$_{21}$, the target of Hayabusa2$\#$

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Ground-based observations build a full portrait of the asteroid Hayabusa2# will fly past in 2026: a 0.44-km, space-weathered, ordinary-chondrite-like rock spinning every 5.02 hours.

desk verdict Solid, mission-relevant characterization of Torifune; the b-axis derivation in Section 3.5 needs clarification because it may bias the reported size. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.15644 v1 pith:AA3LLXH6 submitted 2025-01-26 astro-ph.EP

Marcel M. Popescu , Eri Tatsumi , Javier Licandro , Miguel R. Alarcon , Javier Rodríguez Rodríguez , Miquel Serra-Ricart , Julia de León , Joaquín Fernandez Martin
show 6 more authors
David Morate Gabriel N. Simion Bogdan Alexandru Dumitru Daniel Nicolae Berteşteanu George Pantelimon Prodan Masatoshi Hirabayashi
This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.EP
keywords near-Earthasteroid(98943)TorifunelightcurveinversionrotationperiodconvexshapemodelSq-typetaxonomyordinarychondritespaceweathering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to establish, from ground-based data, what the near-Earth asteroid (98943) Torifune is like before the Hayabusa2# spacecraft flies past it in 2026. It reports a rotation period $P = 5.021516 \pm 0.000106$ h, an absolute magnitude $H = 18.78 \pm 0.14$, an ecliptic pole at $\lambda = 301^\circ \pm 35^\circ$, $\beta = 89^{+1}_{-6}^\circ$, a prograde obliquity $\epsilon = 5^\circ \pm 3^\circ$, and an equivalent ellipsoid with axes about $0.42 \times 0.16 \times 0.17$ km, giving a volume-equivalent diameter $D_{\rm eq} = 0.44 \pm 0.06$ km. Spectroscopically it classifies the surface as Sq-type with a mineralogy like LL/L ordinary chondrites and signs of moderate space weathering, and it finds no large-scale color heterogeneity. If these results are correct, the mission will encounter a small, oblate, spectroscopically uniform, space-weathered ordinary-chondrite-like rock, and the ground-based picture can be checked directly against the spacecraft's resolved images and spectra.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is a combined photometric-geometric model: a convex lightcurve inversion of 21 lightcurves over a 100-day arc that solves for period, pole, and shape, joined to an occultation-determined long axis and a lightcurve amplitude used for the intermediate axis. The amplitude-to-axis relation $b/a = 10^{-A/2.5}$ converts the 0.96 mag lightcurve amplitude into the $b$ axis once the occultation fixes $a$ and $c/a$. On the spectral side, the analysis uses the two silicate absorption bands near 1 and 2 $\mu$m, whose centers, band-area ratio, and temperature corrections are fed through calibrations that yield the olivine/pyroxene ratio and Fa/Fs contents.

What would settle it

A resolved image from the 2026 flyby, or a stellar occultation that crosses the short axis, would directly measure the b-axis; if the recovered b is significantly smaller than 0.16 km, the lightcurve-amplitude interpretation is wrong. A more immediate test is to fit the whole lightcurve set with a fixed pole and let the equatorial amplitude be a free parameter; if the best-fit equatorial amplitude differs from 0.96 mag, the axis ratios and $D_{\rm eq}$ shift accordingly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Torifune is a small, oblate, prograde-rotating near-Earth asteroid. The lightcurve data spanning 100 days pin its sidereal period to $5.021516 \pm 0.000106$ h, and the convex shape model places the pole near the ecliptic north pole ($\lambda = 301^\circ \pm 35^\circ$, $\beta = 89^{+1}_{-6}^\circ$) with obliquity $\epsilon = 5^\circ \pm 3^\circ$. Combining the model shape with a stellar-occultation measurement of the long axis gives an equivalent ellipsoid $a = 0.42^{+0.08}_{-0.06}$ km, $b = 0.16^{+0.05}_{-0.04}$ km, $c = 0.17 \pm 0.03$ km and $D_{\rm eq} = 0.44 \pm 0.06$ km. The visible-to-near-infrared spectrum is best matched by the Sq class in the Bus-DeMeo system, and the band centers and band-area ratio point to an LL/L ordinary chondrite composition ($\mathrm{ol/(ol+px)}=0.60$, Fa $28.5$ mol%, Fs $23.4$ mol%) with moderate space weathering, consistent with laboratory spectra of pulse-laser-irradiated L6/LL6 meteorites. Simultaneous four-filter colors show no variation over a rotation cycle, indicating a surface without large-scale heterogeneity.

Load-bearing premise

The reported size depends on treating a 0.96-magnitude brightness variation as the asteroid's full end-to-end variation; if that measurement was taken at a viewing angle that foreshortens the variation, the asteroid would be more elongated and smaller than this paper estimates.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Mission planning can use the sidereal period and pole to predict which longitudes are visible at closest approach, letting the flyby sequence target the same hemisphere that the ground-based lightcurves sampled.
  • If the object is as homogeneous as the colors suggest, spacecraft images of different terrain will be expected to show little compositional contrast, and any strong spectral variation would point to small fresh craters or boulders rather than global heterogeneity.
  • The measured size and albedo set expectations for the spacecraft's thermal-infrared observations; agreement would validate the ground-based $H$ and albedo, while a discrepancy would indicate that one of the two is biased.
  • If the LL/L ordinary chondrite interpretation is correct, Torifune can be compared directly with the returned-sample body Itokawa, and the flyby will test whether the difference in spectral slope is indeed a difference in space-weathering degree.
  • The prograde, low-obliquity pole implies that the asteroid's rotation axis is nearly perpendicular to its orbital plane, which shapes how solar illumination and thermal behavior will appear during the encounter.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension the authors do not pursue: correct the 0.96 mag amplitude to an equator-on value using the reported pole and aspect angle, and check how much the implied $b$ axis and $D_{\rm eq}$ move; the flyby will provide the ground truth.
  • The claim of no large-scale heterogeneity is based on disk-integrated colors; resolved imaging could still reveal small-scale fresh spots, as seen on Itokawa, so the ground-based result sets an upper limit on the area fraction of fresh material rather than ruling it out.
  • If Torifune's surface is more weathered than Itokawa's, then among small near-Earth asteroids the residence time or regolith turnover rate, not just composition, must differ; comparing the band-depth ratio measured at the flyby with laboratory laser-irradiation series would test this.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents a ground-based physical characterization of the near-Earth asteroid (98943) Torifune (2001 CC21), the flyby target of Hayabusa2#. Using photometry from 51 nights between 2022 and 2024, the authors determine the sidereal rotation period P = 5.021516 ± 0.000106 h, the absolute magnitude H = 18.78 ± 0.14, and a DAMIT convex-shape/pole solution with λ = 301° ± 35°, β = 89+1/-6°, and prograde rotation. Combining the shape model with the Arimatsu et al. (2024) occultation chords and a lightcurve amplitude, they estimate ellipsoid axes a = 0.42+0.08/-0.06 km, b = 0.16/0.17 km, c = 0.17/0.16 km, and Deq = 0.44 ± 0.06 km. Simultaneous multi-band photometry yields colors consistent with an S-complex object and no large-scale heterogeneity, and the merged GTC+IRTF spectrum is classified as Sq type with LL/L ordinary-chondrite mineralogy (ol/(ol+px) = 0.60, Fa = 28.5 mol%, Fs = 23.4 mol%) and moderate space weathering.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a valuable pre-encounter reference for Hayabusa2#: it gives the mission a period, pole, approximate shape, size, spectral type, and compositional context before the 2026 flyby, and it helps resolve the earlier L-type versus S-type ambiguity. The observational basis is strong: 31,637 exposures over 51 nights, a standard DAMIT inversion with 100 bootstrap resamples for the uncertainties, an independent occultation-based anchor for the absolute scale, two independent taxonomic classifiers, cross-checks between colors and spectroscopy, and comparisons against the RELAB meteorite library. The central weak point is the derivation of the intermediate axis in Section 3.5, which directly controls the reported b and Deq; this is fixable but currently undermines the headline size.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3.5] The derivation of the intermediate axis b is ambiguous in a load-bearing way. The text states 'The third semi-axis can be estimated from the light-curve amplitude which is 0.96 mag. resulting in b/a = 0.41' and applies the equator-on triaxial relation b/a = 10^(-A/2.5), but it does not state whether 0.96 mag is the observed peak-to-peak amplitude or the maximum amplitude of the DAMIT convex shape model when viewed equator-on. The March 2023 lightcurves were obtained at aspect angles Θ ≈ 51° (Table 8), where a triaxial ellipsoid's amplitude is reduced relative to equator-on viewing. If 0.96 mag is the observed amplitude at Θ ≈ 51°, then with a = 0.42 km and c = 0.16 km the implied b is about 0.13 km, not 0.17 km; conversely, the reported b = 0.17 km predicts only about 0.76 mag at Θ = 51°, so the values are internally inconsistent unless 0.96 mag is the model's equatorial maximum. Because b and Deq = 0.44 ± 0.06 km are headline results for the Hayabusa2# flyby, the text must specify which amplitude is used and recompute b (and Deq) accordingly.
  2. [Abstract and Section 3.5 / Conclusions] The labeling of the b and c semi-axes is inconsistent across the paper. The abstract and the conclusions report b = 0.16+0.05/-0.04 km and c = 0.17 ± 0.03 km, while Section 3.5 derives c = 0.16+0.05/-0.04 km from the occultation c/a ratio and then estimates b = 0.17 ± 0.03 km from the lightcurve amplitude. The two orderings assign the intermediate axis differently and change the oblateness parameter R = c(a+b)/(2ab) by a small but nonzero amount. The authors should choose one convention and apply it consistently in the abstract, Section 3.5, and the conclusions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title and header] The title and the draft header contain 'Characterization of of (98943)' and 'T orifune'; these typographical errors should be corrected.
  2. [Section 2.1] The text says the photometric observations were acquired during 51 different nights and then immediately says they were acquired during 52 different nights; the observing log in Table 7 should be checked and the number made consistent.
  3. [Section 2.1] The phrase 'The errors introduced by this transformation are negligible gracefully to the large number of points' should read 'negligible due to' or similar.
  4. [Section 2.1] The sentence 'The observations were performed using the broadband filters, the Luminance covers the 0.4 to 0.7 µm wavelength interval, and the standard Sloan g, r, i, and zs filter' has a grammatical issue ('filter' should be 'filters'), and similar typos such as 'Tabel', 'the the Two-meter Twin Telescope', and 'miss-match' appear in several places.
  5. [Figure 12] The caption cites '2024PASJ..tmp...71A' rather than the published Arimatsu et al. (2024) reference; the published journal reference should be used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the period, pole, size, taxonomy, and mineralogy results are anchored to independent external data and standard calibrations; the only weak point is an ambiguity in the Section 3.5 amplitude input, which is a correctness issue rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and does not reduce any headline result to its own inputs. The rotation period is found by an independent chi-square search over 21 lightcurves, seeded by the external periods of Fatka et al. (2023) and Warner (2023), and the final value is not forced by those seeds. The pole and convex shape come from the publicly available DAMIT inversion code applied to the authors' own photometry, with no imported uniqueness theorem. The ellipsoid axes use the external Arimatsu et al. (2024) occultation radii for a and c/a, and the intermediate axis b is estimated from the standard triaxial-ellipsoid amplitude relation b/a = 10^(-A/2.5). The stated 0.96 mag amplitude is not identified as observed at aspect angle ~51 deg or as the model's equatorial maximum, which is a genuine ambiguity in input specification; however, the relation itself is an external geometric formula, not a restatement of the fitted shape model, so this is a correctness/robustness concern rather than circularity. The absolute magnitude H is obtained from standard H,G and H,G1,G2 phase-function fits with external photometric conversions (Tonry et al. 2012) and an external albedo from Fornasier et al. (2024) for the diameter estimate. The taxonomic classification is cross-checked between the M4AST tool and the external SMASS classifier, with the training set including external MITHNEOS classifications; the mineralogy uses the external Dunn et al. (2010) calibrations, and the space-weathering inference is based on matching to externally measured RELAB meteorite spectra. No quoted equation reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing claim rests on a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The characterization rests on standard phase-function models (Muinonen et al. 2010), convex lightcurve inversion, empirical mineralogy calibrations (Dunn et al. 2010 with Sanchez et al. 2012 temperature corrections), and two external inputs: the Arimatsu occultation axes and the Fornasier albedo. The phase-function slopes G, G1, G2 are fit to the data and directly affect H. The one ad hoc step is the aspect-uncorrected amplitude-to-axis-ratio mapping for b in Section 3.5. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • G (H,G slope parameter) = 0.283 ± 0.025
    Fitted to the reduced-magnitude phase curve in Section 3.1; the H determination depends on it.
  • G1, G2 (three-parameter phase function) = G1 = 0.259, G2 = 0.372
    Fitted via the Penttilä et al. (2016) web interface; the alternative H = 18.706 is averaged with the H,G value to get the final H = 18.78.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The IAU H-G and H-G1-G2 photometric phase function models describe the brightness-phase behavior (Muinonen et al. 2010)
    Used in Section 3.1 to reduce V magnitudes to H; the model choice contributes to the 0.14 mag spread in H.
  • domain assumption The convex lightcurve inversion model in DAMIT (Kaasalainen/Durech) with its scattering law and convexity constraint recovers the true shape and pole
    Used for the period, pole, and shape in Section 3.2; convex models can bias axis ratios for irregular or non-convex bodies.
  • ad hoc to paper The peak-to-peak lightcurve amplitude maps directly to the axis ratio via b/a = 10^(-A/2.5) with no aspect-angle correction
    Section 3.5: 'The third semi-axis can be estimated from the light-curve amplitude which is 0.96 mag resulting in b/a = 0.41'; applied at aspect angle about 51 degrees where geometry lowers the observed amplitude, so the mapping is questionable.
  • domain assumption The geometric albedo pV = 0.216 ± 0.016 from Fornasier et al. (2024) is applicable to Torifune
    Used in Eq. 13 for the H-based diameter D = 0.505 km, cross-checked with the ellipsoid Deq.
  • domain assumption The Dunn et al. (2010) calibrations (with Sanchez et al. 2012 temperature corrections) relate band area ratio and band I center to ol/(ol+px), Fa, and Fs for this NEA
    Applied in Section 3.4, Eqs. 10-12, to derive the LL/L mineralogy.
  • domain assumption Torifune's surface is homogeneous, so Luminance and g magnitudes can be transformed to V using fixed color offsets
    Section 3.1 applies Eqs. 1, 2, and 7 with (g-r) = 0.663; the assumption is later supported by the small color variation found in Section 3.3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Characterization of of (98943) 2001 CC$_{21}$, the target of Hayabusa2$\#$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AA3LLXH6

@misc{pith2026250115644,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Characterization of of (98943) 2001 CC$_21$, the target of Hayabusa2$\#$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AA3LLXH6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.15644}
}
abstract

The near-Earth asteroid (98943) Torifune, previously designated 2001 CC$_{21}$, is the flyby target of the Hayabusa2 extended mission, nicknamed Hayabusa2$\#$ (SHARP: Small Hazardous Asteroid Reconnaissance Probe). The ground-based telescope observations offer a key science input for the mission's scientific investigation. During 2022 - 2024 this asteroid was at visible apparent magnitudes brighter than 18.5, allowing for a detailed characterization using ground-based telescope observations. We determined its rotation period $P~=~5.021516\pm0.000106$ h and its absolute magnitude H = 18.78 $\pm$ 0.14 and. The large number of lightcurves allows to estimate its axes ratio, its convex shape and its pole orientation $\lambda = 301^{\circ} \pm 35^{\circ}$, $\beta = {89^{+1}_{-6}}^{\circ}$ and $\epsilon = 5^{\circ} \pm 3^{\circ}$ which indicate a prograde rotation. We report the semi-axis of the equivalent ellipsoid, $a$ = 0.42$^{+0.08}_{0.06}$ km, $b$ = 0.16$^{+0.05}_{0.04}$ km, and $c$ = $0.17\pm0.03$ km. Consequently, the volume equivalent diameter is $D_{eq}$ = $0.44 \pm 0.06$ km . Using observations conducted simultaneously with four broadband filters, we determined $(g-r) = 0.663 \pm 0.022$ mag, $(r-i) = 0.177 \pm 0.012$ mag, and $(i-z_s) = -0.061 \pm 0.032$ mag. Additionally, we found that Torifune exhibits no detectable large-scale heterogeneity. We classified the object using a high signal-to-noise ratio spectrum (over the visible and near-infrared region) as Sq-type in the Bus-DeMeo taxonomy. We estimate a mineralogy similar to LL/L ordinary chondrites, with an ol/(ol+px) = 0.60, a Fa content of 28.5 mol$\%$, and a Fs content of 23.4 mol$\%$. The spectral data indicate a surface affected by moderate space weathering effects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.15644 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The reduced magnitude Vred as a function of phase angle α. Each of the blue points represents the average of the observations made with an instrument during a night. The log of these observations is shown in Tabel 7. The fitted red curve corresponds to {H, G} model where H = 18.846 and G = 0.294, while the red dashed curve represents the {H, G1, G2} model where H = 18.706, G1 = 0.259, and G2 = 0.372. The reduced mag… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Period search tool output plot for (98943) Torifune. This search was performed in an interval from 5.010 h to 5.035 h, with a coefficient p (period step) of 0.2. Each obtained period is represented as a black dot, with the red line representing a 10% threshold from the lowest χ 2 obtained. The presence of 5 values under this threshold is an indicator that more data will refine the period value [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figu… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Pole solutions statistical quality for (98943) Torifune. The values of λ and β are shaded by its χ 2 red value, while the best solution, (λ = 280◦ , β = 85◦ with χ 2 red = 1.04) is plotted as a white square. The red border represents the solutions that are within a 3σ level of uncertainty from the best solution of 4.88 %. values, finding a minimum close to P = 5.021521 h in most cases, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Graphical representation of the fit between four light curves and the best-obtained model for Torifune. The observed data is plotted as red dots, while the shape model is plotted as a solid blue line for each observation. The geometry is described by its solar phase an…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Obtained shape model of (98943) Torifune. Left top: North Pole View (Y axis = 0◦ ). Left bottom: South Pole View (Y axis = 180◦ ). Right top: Equatorial View with Z axis rotated 0◦ . Right bottom: Equatorial View with Z axis rotated 90◦ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The folded lightcurve for a period of P = 5.021516 ± 0.000106 h. We selected the data with phase angles between 4 ◦ and 23 ◦ . The reference Julian day is 2460286.642715431. model, with a value near the 90◦ , makes it possible for another pole solution to be valid, wit…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The simultaneous lightcurves obtained with g, r, i, and zs filters. The observations were performed with TCS/MuSCAT2 instrument. The data corresponding to (g − r) for the night of Dec. 23, 2022, has a low SNR due to the magnitude limit of the instrument. 16, 2023), one…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The (g −r), (r −i), (i−zs) color-color diagram of the 155 objects with known spectral classification, used as training data. The values corresponding to Torifune are shown in magenta. The title shows the classification according to the K nearest neighbors (KNN) and Ran…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The comparison between the spectrum of Torifune and the Sq-type (left) and the S-, Q- and L- types (center) as they were defined by Bus-DeMeo taxonomy (DeMeo et al. 2009). (Right) Comparison between the visible spectrum of Torifune obtained with GTC and the spectro-pho…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The comparison between the spectrum of Torifune and the spectrum of a sample from the meteorites Chateau Renard (L6) chip pulse-laser irradiated (Sample ID: OC-TXH-011-A80, file C1OC11A80) –left, and Appley Bridge (LL6) meteorite, a chip pulse-laser irradiated (Sample…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Band Area Ratio (BAR) vs. Band I center for a sample of 48 ordinary chondrites computed by Dunn et al. (2010). The dashed-line region encloses the obtained values. Horizontal lines separate the regions mostly occupied by H, L, and LL ordinary chordates, as labeled in …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The extrapolated lightcurves observed around the stellar occultation event (marked by the black line) observed by citet2024PASJ..tmp...71A. The red circles corresponds to the observations obtained on March 04, the blue crosses are data obtained on March 05, and the gr…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The comparison between the spectrum of (99843) Torifune and (25143) Itokawa (Binzel et al. 2001a). All spectra are normalized at 0.55 µ.) Interestingly, Torifune has several common points, such as albedo, reflectance spectrum ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Graphical representation of the fit between the rest of the light curves and the best-obtained model for (98943) Torifune. The observed data is plotted as red dots, while the shape model is plotted as a solid blue line for each of the observations. The geometry is des…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (Continued). Fatka, P., Pravec, P., Kuˇsnir´ak, P., et al. 2023, 8th IAA Planetary Defense Conference Ferland, G. J., Porter, R. L., van Hoof, P. A. M., et al. 2013, RMxAA, 49, 137, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1302.4485 Fornasier, S., Dotto, E., Panuzzo, P., et al. 2024, A&A,…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (Continued). Henden, A. A., Templeton, M., Terrell, D., et al. 2016, VizieR Online Data Catalog: AAVSO Photometric All Sky Survey (APASS) DR9 (Henden+, 2016), VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/336. Originally published in: 2015AAS...22533616H Hirabayashi, M., Mimasu, Y.…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Comparison between the spectrum of (98943) Torifune reported in this work and the one presented by Geem et al. (2023). Both spectra were normalized at 1.25 µm. MACLennan, E. M., Emery, J. P., Lucas, M. P., MCClure, L. M., & Lindsay, S. S. 2024, M&PS, 59, 1329, doi: 10…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Refined rotational state and shape model of (98943) Torifune ahead of the Hayabusa2# flyby

    astro-ph.EP 2026-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

    Torifune’s sidereal period is refined to 5.0215221 h with a prograde pole near the north ecliptic pole and a/b ≈ 1.66; polar flattening remains poorly constrained ahead of the Hayabusa2# flyby.

  2. Thermal and Optical Characterization of Near-Earth Objects: Science Commissioning of the Recently Upgraded Mid-Infrared Camera MIRSI on the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility

    astro-ph.EP 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    First science results from the refurbished MIRSI mid-infrared camera on the NASA IRTF, yielding diameters and albedos for 31 near-Earth asteroids plus ejecta characterization for the DART impact.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1909.11230

    Akhlaghi , M. 2019, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1909.11230. 1909.11230

    arXiv 2019

  2. [2]

    2015, ApJS, 220, 1, 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/1

    Akhlaghi , M., & Ichikawa , T. 2015, ApJS, 220, 1, 10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/1

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/220/1/1 2015

  3. [3]

    R., Licandro , J., Serra-Ricart , M., et al

    Alarcon , M. R., Licandro , J., Serra-Ricart , M., et al. 2023, , 135, 055001, 10.1088/1538-3873/acd04a

    doi:10.1088/1538-3873/acd04a 2023

  4. [4]

    2024, , 10.1093/pasj/psae060

    Arimatsu , K., Yoshida , F., Hayamizu , T., et al. 2024, , 10.1093/pasj/psae060

    doi:10.1093/pasj/psae060 2024

  5. [6]

    2013 b , , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    ---. 2013 b , , 558, A33, 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 2013

  6. [8]

    2018 b , , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    ---. 2018 b , , 156, 123, 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f

    doi:10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f 2018

  7. [9]

    M., Lim , P

    Astropy Collaboration , Price-Whelan , A. M., Lim , P. L., et al. 2022, , 935, 167, 10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ac7c74 2022

  8. [10]

    2006, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin , E. 2006, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 351, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV, ed. C. Gabriel , C. Arviset , D. Ponz , & S. Enrique , 112

    2006

Show all 80 references
  1. [11]

    1996, , 117, 393, 10.1051/aas:1996164

    Bertin , E., & Arnouts , S. 1996, , 117, 393, 10.1051/aas:1996164

    1996 doi

  2. [12]

    2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol

    Bertin , E., Mellier , Y., Radovich , M., et al. 2002, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series, Vol. 281, Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XI, ed. D. A. Bohlender , D. Durand , & T. H. Handley , 228

    2002

  3. [13]

    P., Perozzi , E., Rivkin , A

    Binzel , R. P., Perozzi , E., Rivkin , A. S., et al. 2004, , 39, 351, 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2004.tb00098.x

    2004

  4. [15]

    2001 b , , 36, 1167, 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2001.tb01950.x

    ---. 2001 b , , 36, 1167, 10.1111/j.1945-5100.2001.tb01950.x

    2001

  5. [16]

    P., Morbidelli , A., Merouane , S., et al

    Binzel , R. P., Morbidelli , A., Merouane , S., et al. 2010, , 463, 331, 10.1038/nature08709

    2010 doi

  6. [17]

    P., DeMeo , F

    Binzel , R. P., DeMeo , F. E., Turtelboom , E. V., et al. 2019, , 324, 41, 10.1016/j.icarus.2018.12.035

    2019 doi

  7. [18]

    J., Nesvorn \'y , D., Sasaki , S., & Strazzulla , G

    Brunetto , R., Loeffler , M. J., Nesvorn \'y , D., Sasaki , S., & Strazzulla , G. 2015, in Asteroids IV, ed. P. Michel , F. E. DeMeo , & W. F. Bottke , 597--616, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816532131-ch031

    2015 doi

  8. [19]

    2006, , 184, 327, 10.1016/j.icarus.2006.05.019

    Brunetto , R., Vernazza , P., Marchi , S., et al. 2006, , 184, 327, 10.1016/j.icarus.2006.05.019

    2006 doi

  9. [20]

    2024, , 687, A38, 10.1051/0004-6361/202449789

    Carry , B., Peloton , J., Le Montagner , R., Mahlke , M., & Berthier , J. 2024, , 687, A38, 10.1051/0004-6361/202449789

    2024 doi

  10. [21]

    2010, in Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings, Vol

    Cepa , J. 2010, in Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings, Vol. 14, Highlights of Spanish Astrophysics V, 15, 10.1007/978-3-642-11250-8\_2

    2010 doi

  11. [22]

    G., et al

    Cepa , J., Aguiar , M., Escalera , V. G., et al. 2000, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 4008, Optical and IR Telescope Instrumentation and Detectors, ed. M. Iye & A. F. Moorwood , 623--631, 10.1117/12.395520

    2000 doi

  12. [23]

    C., Magnier , E

    Chambers , K. C., Magnier , E. A., Metcalfe , N., et al. 2016, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:1612.05560, 10.48550/arXiv.1612.05560

    2016 doi arXiv

  13. [24]

    E., Hapke , B., Pieters , C., & Britt , D

    Clark , B. E., Hapke , B., Pieters , C., & Britt , D. 2002, in Asteroids III, ed. J. Bottke , W. F., A. Cellino , P. Paolicchi , & R. P. Binzel , 585--599

    2002

  14. [25]

    A., Gaffey , M

    Cloutis , E. A., Gaffey , M. J., Jackowski , T. L., & Reed , K. L. 1986, , 91, 11,641, 10.1029/JB091iB11p11641

    1986 doi

  15. [26]

    B., Chalela , M., & S \'a nchez , B

    Colazo , M., Cabral , J. B., Chalela , M., & S \'a nchez , B. O. 2022, Astronomy and Computing, 38, 100533, 10.1016/j.ascom.2021.100533

    2022

  16. [27]

    C., Vacca , W

    Cushing , M. C., Vacca , W. D., & Rayner , J. T. 2004, , 116, 362, 10.1086/382907

    2004 doi

  17. [28]

    E., Binzel , R

    DeMeo , F. E., Binzel , R. P., Slivan , S. M., & Bus , S. J. 2009, , 202, 160, 10.1016/j.icarus.2009.02.005

    2009 doi

  18. [29]

    2018, , 304, 31, 10.1016/j.icarus.2017.12.026

    Devog \`e le , M., Tanga , P., Cellino , A., et al. 2018, , 304, 31, 10.1016/j.icarus.2017.12.026

    2018 doi

  19. [30]

    L., McCoy , T

    Dunn , T. L., McCoy , T. J., Sunshine , J. M., & McSween , H. Y. 2010, , 208, 789, 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.02.016

    2010 doi

  20. [31]

    2010, , 513, A46, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912693

    Durech , J., Sidorin , V., & Kaasalainen , M. 2010, , 513, A46, 10.1051/0004-6361/200912693

    2010 doi

  21. [32]

    W., Bateman, D., Hauberg, S., & Wehbring, R

    Eaton, J. W., Bateman, D., Hauberg, S., & Wehbring, R. 2021, GNU Octave version 6.3.0 manual: a high-level interactive language for numerical computations. https://www.gnu.org/software/octave/doc/v6.3.0/

    2021

  22. [33]

    2023, 8th IAA Planetary Defense Conference

    Fatka , P., Pravec , P., Ku s nir \' a k , P., et al. 2023, 8th IAA Planetary Defense Conference

    2023

  23. [34]

    J., Porter , R

    Ferland , G. J., Porter , R. L., van Hoof , P. A. M., et al. 2013, , 49, 137, 10.48550/arXiv.1302.4485

    2013 doi arXiv

  24. [35]

    2024, , 688, L7, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450447

    Fornasier , S., Dotto , E., Panuzzo , P., et al. 2024, , 688, L7, 10.1051/0004-6361/202450447

    2024 doi

  25. [36]

    K., et al

    Fujiwara , A., Kawaguchi , J., Yeomans , D. K., et al. 2006, Science, 312, 1330, 10.1126/science.1125841

    2006 doi

  26. [37]

    J., Bell , J

    Gaffey , M. J., Bell , J. F., Brown , R. H., et al. 1993, , 106, 573, 10.1006/icar.1993.1194

    1993

  27. [38]

    2018, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Gaia DR2 (Gaia Collaboration, 2018) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: I/345

    Gaia Collaboration . 2018, VizieR Online Data Catalog: Gaia DR2 (Gaia Collaboration, 2018) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: I/345. Originally published in: 2018A&A...616A...1G; doi:10.5270/esa-ycs, 10.26093/cds/vizier.1345

    2018 doi

  28. [39]

    Gaia Collaboration , Brown , A. G. A., Vallenari , A., et al. 2018, , 616, A1, 10.1051/0004-6361/201833051

    2018 doi

  29. [40]

    2023, , 525, L17, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad073

    Geem , J., Ishiguro , M., Granvik , M., et al. 2023, , 525, L17, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad073

    2023 doi

  30. [41]

    W., & Harris , A

    Harris , A. W., & Harris , A. W. 1997, , 126, 450, 10.1006/icar.1996.5664

    1997

  31. [42]

    A., Templeton , M., Terrell , D., et al

    Henden , A. A., Templeton , M., Terrell , D., et al. 2016, VizieR Online Data Catalog: AAVSO Photometric All Sky Survey (APASS) DR9 (Henden+, 2016) , VizieR On-line Data Catalog: II/336. Originally published in: 2015AAS...22533616H

    2016

  32. [43]

    2021, Advances in Space Research, 68, 1533, 10.1016/j.asr.2021.03.030

    Hirabayashi , M., Mimasu , Y., Sakatani , N., et al. 2021, Advances in Space Research, 68, 1533, 10.1016/j.asr.2021.03.030

    2021 doi

  33. [44]

    2006, , 443, 56, 10.1038/nature05073

    Hiroi , T., Abe , M., Kitazato , K., et al. 2006, , 443, 56, 10.1038/nature05073

    2006 doi

  34. [46]

    Howell , S. B. 2000, Handbook of CCD Astronomy

    2000

  35. [47]

    J., VanderPlas , J

    Ivezi \'c , Z ., Connolly , A. J., VanderPlas , J. T., & Gray , A. 2014, Statistics, Data Mining, and Machine Learning in Astronomy: A Practical Python Guide for the Analysis of Survey Data , 10.1515/9781400848911

    2014 doi

  36. [48]

    2017, , 208, 17, 10.1007/s11214-015-0227-y

    Kameda , S., Suzuki , H., Takamatsu , T., et al. 2017, , 208, 17, 10.1007/s11214-015-0227-y

    2017 doi

  37. [49]

    C., Sugita , S., Kamata , S., et al

    Koga , S. C., Sugita , S., Kamata , S., et al. 2018, , 299, 386, 10.1016/j.icarus.2017.08.016

    2018 doi

  38. [50]

    Landolt, A. U. 1992, The Astronomical Journal, 104, 340

    1992

  39. [51]

    2005, , 359, 1575, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09006.x

    Lazzarin , M., Marchi , S., Magrin , S., & Licandro , J. 2005, , 359, 1575, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2005.09006.x

    2005

  40. [52]

    M., Emery , J

    MACLennan , E. M., Emery , J. P., Lucas , M. P., MCClure , L. M., & Lindsay , S. S. 2024, , 59, 1329, 10.1111/maps.14150

    2024 doi

  41. [53]

    Mahlke , M., Carry , B., & Mattei , P. A. 2022, , 665, A26, 10.1051/0004-6361/202243587

    2022 doi

  42. [54]

    2011, , 741, 90, 10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/90

    Mainzer , A., Grav , T., Masiero , J., et al. 2011, , 741, 90, 10.1088/0004-637X/741/2/90

    2011 doi

  43. [55]

    Marchi , S., Paolicchi , P., & Richardson , D. C. 2012, , 421, 2, 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19952.x

    2012

  44. [56]

    2017, Astronomy and Computing, 18, 47, 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.11.002

    Mommert , M. 2017, Astronomy and Computing, 18, 47, 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.11.002

    2017 doi

  45. [57]

    N., Cellino , A., et al

    Muinonen , K., Belskaya , I. N., Cellino , A., et al. 2010, , 209, 542, 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.04.003

    2010 doi

  46. [58]

    2019, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 5, 015001, 10.1117/1.JATIS.5.1.015001

    Narita , N., Fukui , A., Kusakabe , N., et al. 2019, Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems, 5, 015001, 10.1117/1.JATIS.5.1.015001

    2019 doi

  47. [59]

    J., Pravec , P., Benner , L

    Ostro , S. J., Pravec , P., Benner , L. A. M., et al. 1999, Science, 285, 557, 10.1126/science.285.5427.557

    1999 doi

  48. [60]

    G., Wilkman , O., & Muinonen , K

    Penttil \"a , A., Shevchenko , V. G., Wilkman , O., & Muinonen , K. 2016, , 123, 117, 10.1016/j.pss.2015.08.010

    2016 doi

  49. [61]

    A., Fulchignoni , M., et al

    Perna , D., Barucci , M. A., Fulchignoni , M., et al. 2018, , 157, 82, 10.1016/j.pss.2018.03.008

    2018 doi

  50. [62]

    M., & Hiroi , T

    Pieters , C. M., & Hiroi , T. 2004, in Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, ed. S. Mackwell & E. Stansbery , Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 1720

    2004

  51. [63]

    Popescu , M., Birlan , M., & Nedelcu , D. A. 2012, , 544, A130, 10.1051/0004-6361/201219584

    2012 doi

  52. [64]

    2019, , 627, A124, 10.1051/0004-6361/201935006

    Popescu , M., Vaduvescu , O., de Le \'o n , J., et al. 2019, , 627, A124, 10.1051/0004-6361/201935006

    2019 doi

  53. [65]

    2021, in European Planetary Science Congress, EPSC2021--820, 10.5194/epsc2021-820

    Popescu , M., de Le \'o n , J., Licandro , J., et al. 2021, in European Planetary Science Congress, EPSC2021--820, 10.5194/epsc2021-820

    2021 doi

  54. [66]

    T., Toomey , D

    Rayner , J. T., Toomey , D. W., Onaka , P. M., et al. 2003, , 115, 362, 10.1086/367745

    2003 doi

  55. [67]

    L., Thomas , C

    Reddy , V., Dunn , T. L., Thomas , C. A., Moskovitz , N. A., & Burbine , T. H. 2015, in Asteroids IV, 43--63, 10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816532131-ch003

    2015 doi

  56. [68]

    2024, , 527, 6814, 10.1093/mnras/stad3488

    Rodr \' guez Rodr \' guez , J., D \' ez Alonso , E., Iglesias \'A lvarez , S., et al. 2024, , 527, 6814, 10.1093/mnras/stad3488

    2024 doi

  57. [69]

    A., Reddy , V., Nathues , A., et al

    Sanchez , J. A., Reddy , V., Nathues , A., et al. 2012, , 220, 36, 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.04.008

    2012 doi

  58. [70]

    2001, , 410, 555, 10.1038/35069013

    Sasaki , S., Nakamura , K., Hamabe , Y., Kurahashi , E., & Hiroi , T. 2001, , 410, 555, 10.1038/35069013

    2001 doi

  59. [71]

    2022, Science, 375, 1011, 10.1126/science.abj8624

    Tachibana , S., Sawada , H., Okazaki , R., et al. 2022, Science, 375, 1011, 10.1126/science.abj8624

    2022 doi

  60. [72]

    2019, , 325, 153, 10.1016/j.icarus.2019.01.015

    Tatsumi , E., Kouyama , T., Suzuki , H., et al. 2019, , 325, 153, 10.1016/j.icarus.2019.01.015

    2019 doi

  61. [73]

    2021, , 508, 2053, 10.1093/mnras/stab2548

    Tatsumi , E., Popescu , M., Campins , H., et al. 2021, , 508, 2053, 10.1093/mnras/stab2548

    2021 doi

  62. [74]

    A., Trilling , D

    Thomas , C. A., Trilling , D. E., Emery , J. P., et al. 2011, , 142, 85, 10.1088/0004-6256/142/3/85

    2011 doi

  63. [75]

    1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol

    Tody , D. 1986, in Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series, Vol. 627, Instrumentation in astronomy VI, ed. D. L. Crawford , 733, 10.1117/12.968154

    1986 doi

  64. [76]

    L., Stubbs , C

    Tonry , J. L., Stubbs , C. W., Lykke , K. R., et al. 2012, , 750, 99, 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/99

    2012 doi

  65. [77]

    D., Cushing , M

    Vacca , W. D., Cushing , M. C., & Rayner , J. T. 2003, , 115, 389, 10.1086/346193

    2003 doi

  66. [78]

    2004, , 116, 352, 10.1086/382906

    ---. 2004, , 116, 352, 10.1086/382906

    2004 doi

  67. [79]

    VanderPlas , J. T. 2018, , 236, 16, 10.3847/1538-4365/aab766

    2018 doi

  68. [80]

    Warner , B. D. 2023, Minor Planet Bulletin, 50, 217

    2023

  69. [81]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eprint howpublished institution journal key month number organization pages publisher school series title misctitle type volume year version url label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.stat...

  70. [82]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION format.url url empty "" new.block "" url * "" * if FUNCTION format.eprint eprint empty "" archivePrefix empty "" archivePrefix "arXiv" = new.block " " eprint * " " * new.block " " eprint * " " * if if if FUNCTION format.d...

  71. [83]

    acknowledgments ... acknowledgments

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' en...

    2021

  72. [84]

    ݺu| +**2( Ǐ iӦ RBB ;lWWWtbgg իl˿ -t0k<j( I '|#7sĉ 1t ҤI

    thebibliography [1] 20pt to REFERENCES 6pt =0pt -12pt 10pt plus 3pt =0pt =0pt =1pt plus 1pt =0pt =0pt -12pt =13pt plus 1pt =20pt =13pt plus 1pt \@M =10000 =-1.0em =0pt =0pt 0pt =0pt =1.0em @enumiv\@empty 10000 10000 `\.\@m \@noitemerr \@latex@warning Empty `thebibliography' en...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.