Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 12 cited by

Snapshot of a new interstellar comet: 3I/ATLAS has a red and featureless spectrum

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At 4.47 au from the Sun, interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS has a red, featureless, dust-only coma.

desk verdict A solid, honest MUSE snapshot of 3I/ATLAS that confirms the red, featureless coma; crowded-field contamination is the main uncertainty, but the independent Seligman slope keeps the central claim safe. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.05226 v2 pith:GCAT72WC submitted 2025-07-07 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.GA

Cyrielle Opitom , Colin Snodgrass , Emmanuel Jehin , Michele T. Bannister , Erica Bufanda , Sophie E. Deam , Rosemary Dorsey , Marin Ferrais
show 14 more authors
Said Hmiddouch Matthew M. Knight Rosita Kokotanekova Brayden Leicester Michaël Marsset Brian Murphy Vincent Okoth Ryan Ridden-Harper Mathieu Vander Donckt Léa Ferellec Damien Hutsemekers Manuela Lippi Jean Manfroid Zouhair Benkhaldoun
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA
keywords interstellarobjects3I/ATLAScometspectroscopyMUSEintegralfieldspectrographreflectancespectrumdustcomatrans-Neptuniancometaryactivity
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

Using VLT/MUSE observations taken two days after discovery, this paper establishes an initial physical baseline for the third interstellar object, 3I/ATLAS, at 4.47 au from the Sun. The comet's coma is red and featureless, with a normalised reflectivity gradient of $(18\pm4)\%/1000\,\text{Å}$ between 5000 and 9000 Å, redder than most Solar System comets and similar to the surfaces of some Trans-Neptunian Objects and Centaurs. A dedicated search finds no emission from C$_2$, NH$_2$, CN, or [OI], so at this distance the coma appears entirely dusty. Because 3I will reach perihelion at 1.35 au in late October 2025, this spectrum is the baseline against which the onset of gas activity and colour evolution can be measured.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing instrument is the MUSE integral-field spectrograph on the VLT, covering 4800–9200 Å with a $1'\times1'$ field of view, which simultaneously provides spectra and two-dimensional maps of any coma emission. The analysis divides the median comet spectrum by a SOLSPEC solar reference spectrum to obtain reflectance, fits a normalised reflectivity gradient, and uses MUSE's spatial information to search for [OI] as a central enhancement against the sky pattern. This combination lets the authors separate the comet from a crowded background-star field and tie the gas non-detections to a dust-dominated reflectance.

What would settle it

Take the public MUSE data cubes, extract the comet in apertures of 0.5, 1, and 1.5 arcseconds with different telluric masks, and compare the reflectance slopes; if the slope leaves the $14$–$22\%/1000\,\text{Å}$ range or stellar absorption features appear, the red featureless conclusion is an artifact. A second independent spectrum at the same epoch showing a neutral slope or gas lines would also settle it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that 3I/ATLAS was already active at 4.47 au, showing a compact coma extended roughly sunward at a position angle near 290 degrees, and that its optical reflectance is dominated by dust with no detectable gas emission. Extracted in a 1-arcsec aperture from a median combination of seven uncontaminated MUSE spectra, with one contaminated frame discarded and telluric regions masked, the reflectance spectrum is featureless and red across the MUSE range, with slopes of $(18\pm3)\%/1000\,\text{Å}$ from 5000 to 7000 Å, $(17\pm4)\%/1000\,\text{Å}$ from 7000 to 9000 Å, and $(18\pm4)\%/1000\,\text{Å}$ from 5000 to 9000 Å. The red colour is consistent with independent early photometry and spectroscopy by Seligman et al. (2025), while some broadband colours appear more neutral or variable, which the authors attribute to the crowded galactic-plane field and calibration difficulties. The non-detection of C$_2$, NH$_2$, CN, and [OI] is consistent with the comet's large heliocentric distance, since gas has been seen in much brighter comets at similar distances. The authors interpret the red coma as possibly exposing surface layers similar to outer Solar System bodies rather than fresh interior material, placing 3I between typical comets and the reddest Kuiper Belt objects.

Load-bearing premise

The red colour is real only if the single spectrum was not contaminated by a background star and was not distorted by the calibration, given that the comet was crossing a crowded part of the Milky Way at a galactic latitude of 1.6 degrees.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • 3I/ATLAS becomes the third interstellar object with a measured optical colour, and its red, featureless, dust-only coma at 4.47 au is a baseline for all later epochs.
  • If the spectrum is representative, the colour of 3I is closer to Trans-Neptunian Object and Centaur surfaces than to typical cometary comae, supporting the idea that its coma currently samples outer-surface material rather than fresh interior ice.
  • The non-detection of C$_2$, NH$_2$, CN, and [OI] at 4.47 au is consistent with expectations for Solar System comets at that distance, so the absence of gas does not yet distinguish 3I from the native cometary population.
  • As 3I approaches perihelion at 1.35 au, solar heating increases by roughly a factor of 11 from discovery, and future MUSE observations should reveal whether gas emission and a colour change appear, testing predictions such as a high water mass fraction from a thick-disk origin.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the red slope is set by unaltered surface layers, the coma should become bluer or begin showing gas emission once volatile sublimation starts inside about 3 au; the authors' own monitoring programme can test this.
  • The spread between the spectroscopic slope and some broadband colours is not fully explained, so a re-analysis of the same data cubes with different apertures, or a new spectrum from a different telescope, would determine whether the residual differences are stellar contamination or real wavelength-dependent colour.
  • Because 3I's encounter speed is near 60 km/s, thermal lag could delay activity onset, so comparing its brightening and gas-production curves with Solar System comets at equal heliocentric distance could separate dynamical from compositional effects.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This Letter reports VLT/MUSE integral-field spectroscopy of the interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS obtained two days after discovery, when the comet was at 4.47 au from the Sun and 3.46 au from Earth. After extracting spectra in a 1 arcsec radius aperture and median-combining seven of eight frames, the authors divide by a SOLSPEC solar reference to obtain a reflectance spectrum. They measure a normalized reflectivity gradient of (18 ± 4)%/1000 Å over 5000–9000 Å, find the spectrum featureless, and report no detections of C2, NH2, CN, or [OI]. TRAPPIST broadband photometry gives a mean slope of ~15%/1000 Å. The paper interprets the red slope as similar to some TNO/Centaur surfaces and argues the coma is currently dust-dominated. It also highlights the object's future observing campaign and compares 3I with 1I, 2I, and Solar System comet populations.

Significance. If the measured spectral slope and featureless nature are secure, this is a valuable addition to the very small sample of interstellar objects, providing an early baseline for an object that will be intensely monitored through perihelion. The paper's strengths include the rapid ToO trigger, use of the standard MUSE pipeline with an external solar reference, explicit (if qualitative) treatment of gas non-detections, consistency with the independent Seligman et al. (2025) slope, and a clear statement that the data will become publicly available through the ESO archive. However, the central claim depends on the 1 arcsec aperture extraction being free of background-star contamination in a crowded b = 1.6° field, and this is not quantitatively demonstrated. Because the result is a single-object measurement with no cross-check internal to the reduction, the missing contamination assessment is a load-bearing issue that should be addressed before publication.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2 (Observations), aperture extraction] The manuscript states that a 1 arcsec radius aperture was used 'to avoid contamination from background stars' and that one of eight spectra was discarded 'due to strong contamination from a background star', but it provides no estimate of residual stellar flux in the surviving seven apertures. In a field at galactic latitude 1.6° with a target at m_r ~ 17 and seeing ~ 1 arcsec, a faint red star that appears in several dithered frames could survive the median combination and redden the measured reflectance. The quoted ±4%/1000 Å uncertainty is only the fit uncertainty and does not include this systematic. Please add a quantitative contamination check: for example, list field stars from Gaia or PanSTARRS within 1–2 arcsec of the target, compare the aperture counts with a synthetic PSF, or re-extract the spectrum with a smaller aperture (e.g., 0.5 arcsec) and show that the slope is unchanged within errors. Without this, the central red-slope claim is not fully supported by the MUSE data alone.
  2. [Section 3 (Results), Figure 1] The white-light image shows an object with FWHM ~ 2 arcsec versus ~ 1 arcsec seeing, extended toward the west, and this is attributed to coma. In the same crowded field, an unresolved or partially blended background star could produce the same morphology. The dither/rotation plus median strategy removes stars that appear in only a few frames, but a star blended with the target PSF in several frames would survive. To support the coma detection and the interpretation of the aperture spectrum, please demonstrate that the western extension tracks the comet across the individual dithered frames, or show radial profiles against a field star PSF from the same data. If the extension is not cometary, the slope measurement would still be valid if the star is outside the 1 arcsec aperture, but the claim of detected activity from MUSE needs this check.
  3. [Section 4 (Discussion and Conclusions), photometric comparison] The paper explains the spread between TRAPPIST colours, the Bolin et al. (2025) colours, and the spectroscopic slope as due to the 'challenging nature' of the observations, including crowding and galactic-plane extinction affecting calibration. This is plausible, but no quantitative test is provided. If stellar contamination affects the photometry, it could also affect the spectroscopy, and the two are not independent as presented. Please provide a quantitative sanity check: for example, estimate the colour difference expected from a plausible contaminating star (from the local stellar population) and show that it cannot produce the observed (18 ± 4)%/1000 Å slope, or compare the spectrum extracted in two independent sub-apertures. The current discussion is too dismissive of the discordant photometry to fully secure the spectroscopic result.
minor comments (4)
  1. [References] References 'Opitom et al. 2020a' and 'Opitom et al. 2020b' are listed with identical bibliographic details (A&A 644, A143). Please correct the entry for the 67P reflectance comparison, which should be a different work.
  2. [Section 2 (Observations), TRAPPIST photometry] The photometry description states that an aperture of 4 pixels radius was used, but with 1.2 arcsec/pixel this is 4.8 arcsec, quite large for a target in a crowded field. Please clarify whether this radius was chosen to include the coma and whether the contamination check explicitly evaluated stars inside this aperture for every image.
  3. [Figure 2] The caption says 'Red: Continuum-subtracted spectrum' but the text does not describe any noticeable residual emission or absorption features in that panel. A one-sentence description of what the red curve shows (e.g., absence of features at the wavelengths of C2, NH2, CN, [OI]) would help the reader.
  4. [Abstract] The abstract says 'reveal a red coma with a spectral slope of (18 ± 4)%/1000 Å', but the body reports (18 ± 3)%/1000 Å in the 5000–7000 Å range, (17 ± 4)%/1000 Å in 7000–9000 Å, and (18 ± 4)%/1000 Å in 5000–9000 Å. Please ensure the abstract value matches the full-range fit and is not mistaken as the only measurement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the spectral slope and featureless continuum are direct measurements against an external SOLSPEC solar reference, with no fitted parameter recycled as a prediction.

full rationale

The central result is an observational measurement, not a derivation. The reflectance spectrum is computed by dividing the median comet spectrum by the SOLSPEC solar spectrum and normalising at 6000 Å, then fitting a slope; this is a direct measurement against an independent external standard. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then used to predict a closely related quantity: the quoted (18±4)%/1000 Å slope is the fit itself, and the gas non-detections are visual and mapping-based upper limits rather than outputs of a fitted model. The self-citations (Opitom et al. 2020a for the [OI] search methodology and earlier MUSE comet demonstrations) concern data-reduction techniques and are not load-bearing for the claim that 3I is red and featureless. The acknowledged vulnerability—background-star contamination in a crowded field at galactic latitude 1.6°—is a data-quality or correctness risk, not a circularity: the result could be biased without being tautological. The paper also checks itself against independent external benchmarks (Seligman et al. 2025, Bolin et al. 2025, TRAPPIST photometry) and explicitly discusses discrepancies, which further indicates that the inference is not self-referential. No step in the claimed chain reduces by construction to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result is a measured spectral slope, so the only free parameter is the slope itself. The analysis relies on standard assumptions about solar references, dust dominance, and linear slope fitting. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Normalised reflectivity gradient (spectral slope) = (18±4)%/1000 Å over 5000-9000 Å
    Linear fit to the reflectance spectrum; this is the central measured quantity, not an input to the analysis.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The SOLSPEC solar spectrum (Meftah et al. 2018) is an appropriate reference for computing reflectance, and division by it removes solar features from the comet spectrum.
    Section 2: 'A reference solar spectrum from SOLSPEC ... was used to perform dust continuum subtraction and compute the spectrum reflectance.' A mismatched solar reference could introduce artificial features or slopes.
  • domain assumption The measured continuum light is dominated by dust in the coma of 3I rather than by the nucleus or unresolved background stars.
    Section 3: the object is extended with FWHM about 2 arcsec versus seeing of about 1 arcsec, and the authors state the spectral reflectance is likely dominated by the dust coma. Residual stellar contamination could bias the slope.
  • domain assumption A linear fit to the reflectance over 5000-9000 Å adequately represents the colour; unmodeled curvature could change the slope.
    Result section: slopes are quoted for three wavelength ranges and agree within errors, supporting linearity, but the 'featureless' description assumes no significant curvature beyond the fitted line.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Snapshot of a new interstellar comet: 3I/ATLAS has a red and featureless spectrum." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GCAT72WC

@misc{pith2026250705226,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Snapshot of a new interstellar comet: 3I/ATLAS has a red and featureless spectrum},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GCAT72WC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.05226}
}
abstract

The interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS is only the third interstellar object to be discovered. Pre-perihelion measurements provide a unique opportunity to study its activity and composition, which may alter as it is heated in the coming months. We provide an initial baseline from optical spectroscopic observations obtained only two days after discovery, using the MUSE instrument on the VLT on 2025 July 3, while 3I was at 4.47 au from the Sun and 3.46 au from the Earth. These observations confirm the cometary nature of 3I, and reveal a red coma with a spectral slope of $(18\pm4)\%/1000$~\AA, redder than most Solar System comets but similar to the surface colour of some Solar System Trans-Neptunian Objects or Centaurs. We searched for but did not detect gas emission from C$_2$, NH$_2$, CN, and [OI], which is consistent with volatile non-detections for Solar System comets at this heliocentric distance. At present, the coma appears entirely dusty. Future observations of 3I as it comes closer to the Sun will provide an invaluable opportunity to witness the evolution of its activity, study its composition, test predictions of interstellar object population models, and compare 3I to Solar System comets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.05226 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Combined white light image of 3I/ATLAS, created by median stacking white light images produced by collapsing in wavelength individual data cubes. The field of view displayed is 40′′ × 40′′. Intensities are in units of 10−20 erg/s/cm2 . eight individual spectra. The sixth spectrum was discarded due to strong contamination from a background star. Regions strongly af￾fected by telluric absorption that could not be comp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Black: Extracted spectrum in a 1′′radius aperture. The spectrum is a median combination of the 7 uncontaminated spectra extracted from the reduced datacubes. Red: Continuum-subtracted spectrum. The vertical grey bands denote regions of the spectrum affected by telluric feature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Optical reflectance spectrum of 3I compared to 1I (Fitzsimmons et al. 2019) and 2I (de León et al. 2020) and 67P (Opitom et al. 2020b). The extracted spectrum is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Normalised spectral slopes (in %/1000 Å) for the three ISOs compared with various Solar System populations. Based on a figure by Jewitt & Seligman (2023), using data from Hainaut et al. (2012). Vertical dashed, dotted, and full lines represent the values for 1I, 2I (bo…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 12 Pith papers

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

  1. Extreme Negative Polarisation of New Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS

    astro-ph.EP 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    First polarimetric observations of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS show an unprecedentedly deep and narrow negative polarization branch, with a minimum near -2.7% at about 7 degrees and inversion at 17 degrees.

  2. Discovery and Preliminary Characterization of a Third Interstellar Object: 3I/ATLAS

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    3I/ATLAS is a confirmed third interstellar object, a weakly active red comet entering the inner solar system at roughly 58 km/s.

  3. Origin and evolution of NiI and FeI in the coma of the interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS throughout its trajectory

    astro-ph.EP 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Post-perihelion UVES spectra of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS reveal elevated NiI and FeI production explained by direct sublimation of Ni(CO)4 and Fe(CO)5 from subsurface layers, with a transient heat source accounting...

  4. University of Hawaii 88-inch Telescope Observations of the Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS: Spectrophotometric Blue-Sensitive Spectral Time Series Spanning Two Months from Discovery

    astro-ph.EP 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A two-month SNIFS spectral time series shows 3I/ATLAS had stable red colors while CN, Ni, and possible Fe emission developed during its pre-perihelion approach.

  5. Precovery Observations of 3I/ATLAS from TESS Suggests Possible Distant Activity

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Archival TESS images show 3I/ATLAS was brighter than distance effects alone can explain, implying possible cometary activity at ~6 au from the Sun.

  6. Assessing interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS with the 10.4 m Gran Telescopio Canarias and the Two-meter Twin Telescope

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    3I/ATLAS, the third interstellar object, has a red TNO-like spectrum, an active dust coma, a rotation period of 16.79 hours, and a kinematic trace toward the Galactic thin disk.

  7. Near-Discovery Observations of Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS with the NASA Infrared Telescope Facility

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    New observations of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS produce the first near-infrared spectrum, showing a red slope that turns neutral at longer wavelengths, no water ice absorption, and a model-dependent upper limit of <7%...

  8. Interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS: discovery and physical description

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    3I/ATLAS is the third known interstellar object and an active red comet with measured dust mass loss of order 0.1-1 kg/s.

  9. Palomar and Apache Point Spectrophotometry of Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    3I/ATLAS, the third interstellar object, has a red spectral slope of about 19%/100 nm from 420 to 700 nm and a neutral 6%/100 nm slope from 700 to 1000 nm, with no obvious C2 or CO+ emission.

  10. The Kinematic Age of 3I/ATLAS and its Implications for Early Planet Formation

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    3I/ATLAS is likely an old, active comet about 2 km across, and its high speed implies it formed roughly 3 to 11 billion years ago around a low-metallicity star.

  11. X-SHOOTER Spectrum of Comet 3I/ATLAS: Insights into a Distant Interstellar Visitor

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    3I/ATLAS, the third known interstellar visitor, shows a red reflectance spectrum and no detectable OH or CN emission at 4.4 AU, with derived upper limits.

  12. NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory Observations of Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS (C/2025 N1)

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

    Rubin Observatory delivers the earliest large-telescope astrometry and grizy photometry of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS, including colors and a dust-to-nucleus cross-section ratio lower limit.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 12 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Deep g'-band Imaging of Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS from the Two-meter Twin Telescope (TTT)

    Alarcon M. R., Serra-Ricart M., Licandro J., Arencibia S. G., Cejudo I. R., Trujillo I., 2025, "Deep g'-band Imaging of Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS from the Two-meter Twin Telescope (TTT)", https://astronomerstelegram.org/?read=17264

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Aravind K., Ganesh S., Venkataramani K., Sahu D., Angchuk D., Sivarani T., Unni A., 2021, @doi [Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society] 10.1093/mnras/stab084 , 502, 3491

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab084 2021

  3. [3]

    E., Wizinowich P

    Arsenault R., et al., 2008, in Hubin N., Max C. E., Wizinowich P. L., eds, Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series Vol. 7015, Adaptive Optics Systems. p. 701524, @doi 10.1117/12.790359

    doi:10.1117/12.790359 2008

  4. [4]

    T., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa07c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017ApJ...851L..38B 851, L38

    Bannister M. T., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aaa07c , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2017ApJ...851L..38B 851, L38

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaa07c 2017

  5. [5]

    T., et al., 2020, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2001.11605 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200111605B p

    Bannister M. T., et al., 2020, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2001.11605 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020arXiv200111605B p. arXiv:2001.11605

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.11605 2020

  6. [6]

    Bodewits D., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-020-1095-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatAs...4..867B 4, 867

    doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1095-2 2020

  7. [7]

    T., et al., 2025, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250705252B p

    Bolin B. T., et al., 2025, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250705252B p. arXiv:2507.05252

    arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Cabral N., Guilbert-Lepoutre A., Bitsch B., Lagarde N., Diakite S., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202243882 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...673A.117C 673, A117

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243882 2023

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    L., Cochran W

    Cochran A. L., Cochran W. D., 1991, @doi [ ] 10.1016/0019-1035(91)90077-7 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1991Icar...90..172C 90, 172

    1991 doi

  2. [10]

    A., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-020-1087-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatAs...4..861C 4, 861

    Cordiner M. A., et al., 2020, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-020-1087-2 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatAs...4..861C 4, 861

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    Deam S., et al., 2025, Submitted to PSJ

    2025

  4. [12]

    Decock A., Jehin E., Hutsem \'e kers D., Manfroid J., 2013, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201220414 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013A&A...555A..34D 555, A34

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    C., Hopkins M

    Dorsey R. C., Hopkins M. J., Bannister M. T., Lawler S. M., Lintott C., Parker A. H., Forbes J. C., 2025, @doi [arXiv e-prints] 10.48550/arXiv.2502.16741 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250216741D p. arXiv:2502.16741

    2025 doi arXiv

  6. [14]

    Drahus M., et al., 2020, The Astronomer's Telegram, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ATel13549....1D 13549, 1

    2020

  7. [15]

    L., Kelley M

    Farnham T. L., Kelley M. S. P., Bauer J. M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ac323d , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021PSJ.....2..236F 2, 236

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    Fitzsimmons A., et al., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-017-0361-4 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018NatAs...2..133F 2, 133

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Fitzsimmons A., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab49fc , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApJ...885L...9F 885, L9

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    C., Pravec P., Fitzsimmons A., Lacerda P., Bannister M

    Fraser W. C., Pravec P., Fitzsimmons A., Lacerda P., Bannister M. T., Snodgrass C., Smoli \'c I., 2018, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-018-0398-z , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018NatAs...2..383F 2, 383

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    N., Kaib N., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ad7f4e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024PSJ.....5..243G 5, 243

    Gkotsinas A., Nesvorn \'y D., Guilbert-Lepoutre A., Raymond S. N., Kaib N., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ad7f4e , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024PSJ.....5..243G 5, 243

    2024 doi

  12. [20]

    Guzik P., Drahus M., Rusek K., Waniak W., Cannizzaro G., Pastor-Marazuela I., 2020, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-019-0931-8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020NatAs...4...53G 4, 53

    2020 doi

  13. [21]

    R., Boehnhardt H., Protopapa S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219566 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...546A.115H 546, A115

    Hainaut O. R., Boehnhardt H., Protopapa S., 2012, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201219566 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012A&A...546A.115H 546, A115

    2012 doi

  14. [22]

    E., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ad8e38 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024PSJ.....5..273H 5, 273

    Holt C. E., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ad8e38 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024PSJ.....5..273H 5, 273

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    J., Lintott C., Bannister M

    Hopkins M. J., Lintott C., Bannister M. T., Mackereth J. T., Forbes J. C., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad03e6 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023AJ....166..241H 166, 241

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Hopkins M., Dorsey R., Forbes J., Lintott C., Bannister M., Leicester B., 2025a, Submitted to ApJL

  17. [25]

    J., Bannister M

    Hopkins M. J., Bannister M. T., Lintott C., 2025b, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ad9eb3 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025AJ....169...78H 169, 78

    doi

  18. [26]

    J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9df8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160...92H 160, 92

    Hui M.-T., Ye Q.-Z., F \"o hring D., Hung D., Tholen D. J., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9df8 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AJ....160...92H 160, 92

    2020 doi

  19. [27]

    C., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/338692 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.1039J 123, 1039

    Jewitt D. C., 2002, @doi [ ] 10.1086/338692 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002AJ....123.1039J 123, 1039

    2002 doi

  20. [28]

    Jewitt D., 2015, @doi [ ] 10.1088/0004-6256/150/6/201 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AJ....150..201J 150, 201

    2015 doi

  21. [29]

    Jewitt D., Luu J., 2025, The Astronomer's Telegram, 17263, 1

    2025

  22. [30]

    Z., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-054221 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ARA&A..61..197J 61, 197

    Jewitt D., Seligman D. Z., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1146/annurev-astro-071221-054221 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023ARA&A..61..197J 61, 197

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    Jewitt D., Luu J., Rajagopal J., Kotulla R., Ridgway S., Liu W., Augusteijn T., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9b2f , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...850L..36J 850, L36

    2017 doi

  24. [32]

    Jewitt D., Kim Y., Mutchler M., Weaver H., Agarwal J., Hui M.-T., 2020, @doi [The Astrophysical Journal Letter] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab99cb , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...896L..39J 896, L39

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    Kareta T., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab6a08 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...889L..38K 889, L38

    2020 doi

  26. [34]

    M., Protopapa S., Kelley M

    Knight M. M., Protopapa S., Kelley M. S. P., Farnham T. L., Bauer J. M., Bodewits D., Feaga L. M., Sunshine J. M., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9d81 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...851L..31K 851, L31

    2017 doi

  27. [35]

    M., Vincent J.-B., 2025, in 2514-3433, Centaurs

    Kokotanekova R., Guilbert-Lepoutre A., Knight M. M., Vincent J.-B., 2025, in 2514-3433, Centaurs. IOP Publishing, pp 7--1 to 7--35, @doi 10.1088/2514-3433/ada267ch7 , https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2514-3433/ada267ch7

    2025 doi

  28. [36]

    G., Opitom C., Lippi M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202345989 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...674A.206K 674, A206

    Kwon Y. G., Opitom C., Lippi M., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202345989 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...674A.206K 674, A206

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    M., Snodgrass C., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202453565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025A&A...697A.210L 697, A210

    Lacerda P., Guilbert-Lepoutre A., Kokotanekova R., Inno L., Epifani E. M., Snodgrass C., 2025, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202453565 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025A&A...697A.210L 697, A210

    2025 doi

  30. [38]

    W., Lee C.-H., Gerdes D

    Lin H. W., Lee C.-H., Gerdes D. W., Adams F. C., Becker J., Napier K., Markwardt L., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab6bd9 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...889L..30L 889, L30

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    T., Mackereth J

    Lintott C., Bannister M. T., Mackereth J. T., 2022, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ac41d5 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022ApJ...924L...1L 924, L1

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    Mazzotta Epifani E., Dotto E., Ieva S., Perna D., Palumbo P., Micheli M., Perozzi E., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731224 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...620A..93M 620, A93

    2018 doi

  33. [41]

    Mazzotta Epifani E., Dotto E., Perna D., Ieva S., Giunta A., Palumbo P., Micheli M., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1016/j.pss.2021.105341 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021P&SS..20805341M 208, 105341

    2021

  34. [42]

    J., Cochran A

    McKay A. J., Cochran A. L., Dello Russo N., DiSanti M. A., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/ab64ed , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020ApJ...889L..10M 889, L10

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    J., Svoren J., 2004, Using cometary activity to trace the physical and chemical evolution of cometary nuclei

    Meech K. J., Svoren J., 2004, Using cometary activity to trace the physical and chemical evolution of cometary nuclei . pp 317--335

    2004

  36. [44]

    J., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature25020 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.552..378M 552, 378

    Meech K. J., et al., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.1038/nature25020 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017Natur.552..378M 552, 378

    2017 doi

  37. [45]

    Meftah M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201731316 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018A&A...611A...1M 611, A1

    2018 doi

  38. [46]

    Micheli M., et al., 2018, @doi [ ] 10.1038/s41586-018-0254-4 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2018Natur.559..223M 559, 223

    2018 doi

  39. [47]

    Mommert M., 2017, @doi [Astronomy and Computing] 10.1016/j.ascom.2016.11.002 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017A&C....18...47M 18, 47

    2017 doi

  40. [48]

    P., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ad0a87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023PSJ.....4..238M 4, 238

    Murphy B. P., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.3847/PSJ/ad0a87 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023PSJ.....4..238M 4, 238

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    Opitom C., et al., 2019, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/201936959 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019A&A...631L...8O 631, L8

    2019 doi

  42. [51]

    Opitom C., Guilbert-Lepoutre A., Besse S., Yang B., Snodgrass C., 2020b, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202039017 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...644A.143O 644, A143

    doi

  43. [52]

    Opitom C., et al., 2021, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202141245 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A&A...650L..19O 650, L19

    2021 doi

  44. [53]

    Opitom C., et al., 2023, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202345960 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A&A...671L..11O 671, L11

    2023 doi

  45. [54]

    'Oumuamua ISSI Team et al., 2019, @doi [Nature Astronomy] 10.1038/s41550-019-0816-x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019NatAs...3..594O 3, 594

    2019 doi

  46. [55]

    C., Seccull T., 2025, in 2514-3433, Centaurs

    Peixinho N., Licandro J., Lilly E., Alvarez-Candal A., Souza-Feliciano A. C., Seccull T., 2025, in 2514-3433, Centaurs. IOP Publishing, pp 5--1 to 5--21, @doi 10.1088/2514-3433/ada267ch5 , https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2514-3433/ada267ch5

    2025 doi

  47. [56]

    P., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae539 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.3521P 529, 3521

    Prodan G. P., et al., 2024, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/stae539 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.529.3521P 529, 3521

    2024 doi

  48. [57]

    Rauer H., et al., 2003, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361:20021550 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003A&A...397.1109R 397, 1109

    2003 doi

  49. [58]

    Z., et al., 2025, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250702757S p

    Seligman D. Z., et al., 2025, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2025arXiv250702757S p. arXiv:2507.02757

    2025 arXiv

  50. [59]

    C., Fitzsimmons A., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11121.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.373.1590S 373, 1590

    Snodgrass C., Lowry S. C., Fitzsimmons A., 2006, @doi [ ] 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11121.x , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006MNRAS.373.1590S 373, 1590

    2006

  51. [60]

    A., 2003, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Natur.424..639S 424, 639

    Stern S. A., 2003, , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003Natur.424..639S 424, 639

    2003

  52. [61]

    Tonry J., 2011, in Gajadhar S., et al., eds, Telescopes from Afar. p. 24

    2011

  53. [62]

    M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202037855 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...641A..28W 641, A28

    Weilbacher P. M., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1051/0004-6361/202037855 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020A&A...641A..28W 641, A28

    2020 doi

  54. [63]

    L., 1978, @doi [Moon and Planets] 10.1007/BF00896489 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978M&P....18..343W 18, 343

    Whipple F. L., 1978, @doi [Moon and Planets] 10.1007/BF00896489 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978M&P....18..343W 18, 343

    1978 doi

  55. [64]

    Yang B., Kelley M. S. P., Meech K. J., Keane J. V., Protopapa S., Bus S. J., 2019, arXiv e-prints, https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019arXiv191205318Y p. arXiv:1912.05318

    2019 arXiv

  56. [65]

    Ye Q.-Z., Zhang Q., Kelley M. S. P., Brown P. G., 2017, @doi [ ] 10.3847/2041-8213/aa9a34 , http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017ApJ...851L...5Y 851, L5

    2017 doi

  57. [66]

    de Le \'o n J., et al., 2020, @doi [ ] 10.1093/mnras/staa1190 , https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020MNRAS.495.2053D 495, 2053

    2020 doi

  58. [67]

    and Thomas C., Green S., Fitzsimmons A., Pravec P., Scheirich P., 2023, , In preparation

    de Léon J., Opitom C., Migliorini A., Snodgrass C. and Thomas C., Green S., Fitzsimmons A., Pravec P., Scheirich P., 2023, , In preparation

    2023

  59. [68]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.stat...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.