Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

3I/ATLAS shows a polarization curve never seen in comets or asteroids

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-05 05:32 UTC pith:5D6TLLEM

load-bearing objection First polarimetry of 3I/ATLAS: the observed negative branch is real and unusually deep, but the headline Pmin and the TNO comparison rest on a modest fit extrapolation the authors themselves flag. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.05181 v1 pith:5D6TLLEM submitted 2025-09-05 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.GA

Extreme Negative Polarisation of New Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS

Zuri Gray , Stefano Bagnulo , Galin Borisov , Yuna G. Kwon , Alberto Cellino , Ludmilla Kolokolova , Rosemary C. Dorsey , Grigori Fedorets
show 8 more authors
Mikael Granvik Eric MacLennan Olga Mu\~noz Philippe Bendjoya Maxime Devog\`ele Simone Ieva Antti Penttil\"a Karri Muinonen
This is my paper
classification astro-ph.EP astro-ph.GA
keywords interstellar objectscomet polarimetry3I/ATLASnegative polarization branchinversion anglecometary dustwater icephase curve
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Using 18 R-band polarimetric observations obtained pre-perihelion, this paper reports that 3I/ATLAS, the third interstellar object ever discovered, has a polarization phase curve unlike any asteroid or comet observed to date, including the only other polarimetrically studied interstellar object, 2I/Borisov. The curve is dominated by a deep, narrow negative-polarization branch with a minimum of about -2.7% near 7 degrees phase angle and an unusually small inversion angle of 17 degrees, a combination that has never been seen in a planetary body. The authors interpret the curve as evidence of coma dust made of large, porous aggregates of icy and dark material, consistent with independent detections of water ice and a red surface. If the result holds, 3I represents a distinct type of comet and shows that interstellar objects span a wider range of dust properties than Solar System comets.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that 3I/ATLAS (C/2025 N1), the third interstellar object discovered and only the second observed polarimetrically, breaks the polarization patterns of all known comets and asteroids. From 18 R-band aperture-polarimetry measurements over phase angles 7.7 to 22.4 degrees, the paper derives a phase curve with a minimum polarization of about -2.7% near 7 degrees, an inversion angle around 17 degrees, and a slope at inversion of about 0.42% per degree. The minimum phase angle and inversion angle resemble those of rare F-type asteroids, but the negative branch is about twice as deep. Extrapolated to phase angles below 2 degrees, the curve matches the steep polarization

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the polarization phase curve, Pr(alpha), the degree of linear polarization of sunlight scattered by the coma as a function of phase angle. The paper fits the measurements with a three-parameter exponential-plus-linear model, Pr(alpha)=A(exp(-alpha/B)-1)+C alpha, and uses the derived parameters: minimum polarization Pmin, its phase angle alpha_min, the inversion angle alpha_0 where polarization changes sign, and the slope h at inversion, to compare 3I with databases of comet, asteroid, and trans-Neptunian polarimetry. Aperture polarimetry within a projected radius of roughly 2000 km isolates the coma's bulk signal, and polarimetric maps verify that the polarization is s

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the exponential-plus-linear fitting function describes 3I's polarization correctly down to phase angles below 7.7 degrees, where no measurements exist, so the reported minimum, its phase angle, and the TNO-like extrapolation are outputs of the fit and not direct observations.

What would settle it

Post-perihelion polarimetry covering phase angles from about 0 to 7 degrees is the decisive test: if the measured curve does not turn over and rise back toward zero near 6 to 7 degrees, or if the minimum is shallower than about -2.7%, the claimed deep narrow branch and its TNO/Centaur connection would need to be revised. A direct detection of a turn-over near 6 degrees with Pmin near -2.7% would confirm the claimed phase-curve shape.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • 3I/ATLAS is the first object known to combine an inversion angle near 17 degrees with a negative polarization branch as deep as -2.7%, placing it outside both standard cometary polarimetric classes and the Hale-Bopp-like class that includes 2I/Borisov.
  • The interstellar object population now has three members with distinct physical identities: an inert asteroid-like object, a Hale-Bopp-like active comet, and this new deep-negative-branch comet.
  • Polarimetric phase curves can discriminate interstellar comet dust types even when spectroscopy and imaging are ambiguous, so future ISOs can be classified by their Pmin, alpha_min, and alpha_0 parameters.
  • The similarity to TNO curves and to laboratory frost experiments indicates water-ice grains as a plausible physical driver of the deep branch, making polarimetry a possible remote diagnostic for icy dust in comets.
  • Post-perihelion observations in the phase-angle range 0 to 30 degrees will test and refine the claimed phase-curve shape and its interpretation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the deep branch is real, post-perihelion coverage down to phase angles below 7 degrees should reveal a steep turn-over toward zero; the exact shape will say whether the TNO-like extrapolation is physical or a by-product of the chosen fitting function.
  • The resemblance to unusual F-type asteroids with low inversion angles suggests some rare main-belt objects may be dormant or transitional cometary nuclei, and polarimetry could be used to identify more such candidates.
  • A concrete testable extension is to run laboratory or numerical scattering models of large, porous ice-dust aggregates and check whether they reproduce both the depth and the narrowness of 3I's negative branch.
  • If interstellar objects are this diverse, future surveys should trigger polarimetric follow-up while a new ISO is still at small phase angle, because the negative branch is only observable early in the apparition.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first polarimetric observations of interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS, obtained pre-perihelion with FORS2/VLT, ALFOSC/NOT, and FoReRo2/RCC over phase angles 7.7–22.4° and heliocentric distances 3.9–2.6 au. Aperture polarimetry in the R band (with some V-band points) shows a negative branch at small phase angles, rising to positive values near 18°. The authors fit the empirical linear-exponential model of Muinonen et al. (2009) (Eq. 1) and derive a minimum polarization of -2.7% at ~7°, an inversion angle of ~17°, and a slope at inversion of ~0.42% deg^-1. They argue that this combination is unprecedented among comets and asteroids, and that extrapolation to very small phase angles resembles steep-slope TNOs like Huya, Ixion, and Pholus. Imaging polarimetry shows a diffuse coma with no strong spatial polarization structure. The paper concludes that 3I may represent a distinct class of cometary dust.

Significance. If the result holds, this is the first polarimetric phase curve of a third interstellar object and the first example of a comet with such a deep and narrow negative polarization branch. The data are valuable, especially because interstellar objects are observed only once, and the comparison with 2I/Borisov and Solar System comets is of broad interest. The paper also connects the polarization behavior to independent evidence of water ice and red colors, which is a plausible physical interpretation. The strengths are the multi-instrument observational campaign, the quality of the direct measurements (small uncertainties, low U polarization), and the explicit caveats in the discussion. However, the headline parameters are fit-derived and partly extrapolated, and the abstract overstates them as measured quantities.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §3.1, Table 2] The claim 'reaching a minimum value of -2.7% at phase angle 7°' is not directly supported by the observations. The data have no point below 7.7°, and the paper itself states in §4 that P_min and α_min are 'upper limit only' because no turnover is observed. More seriously, the measured value at α=7.7° is -2.83±0.19%, which is deeper than the fitted P_min of -2.67±0.08%. Thus the abstract misrepresents both the value and the location of the minimum. The 'unprecedented combination' of P_min, α_min, and α_0 is partly an artifact of the chosen functional form (Eq. 1) and not uniquely determined by the data. Please revise the abstract and summary to distinguish the directly observed deep negative branch from the fitted parameters, and quantify the extrapolation uncertainty.
  2. [§2, Table 1/3 and §3.2] Phase angle and heliocentric distance are strongly correlated in this dataset: α increases from 7.7° at r=3.98 au to 22.4° at r=2.61 au. The comet's coma is also clearly evolving (Section 3.2: 'diffuse coma ... grew steadily as the heliocentric distance decreased'). The observed polarization trend could therefore be due in part to changes in dust properties with heliocentric distance rather than purely to phase angle. The fitted phase curve implicitly assumes all variation is due to α. This degeneracy affects the derived inversion angle, slope, and the extrapolation to small α, all of which are central to the 'unprecedented' classification. The paper should at least discuss this limitation, or ideally test whether a model with an r-dependent term can explain the data.
  3. [Table 1 and Table 3] The dates '2025-Jun-18' and '2025-Jun-19' in Table 1 and Table 3 predate the discovery of 3I on July 1, 2025, contradicting the stated observing window in §2 ('between July 17 and August 28, 2025'). These are likely typos for July 18/19. Similarly, '2024-Aug-27' and '2024-Aug-28' should be '2025-Aug-27/28'. Please correct these typographical errors, as they impede verification of the observing sequence.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] Grammar: 'an deep and narrow negative polarisation branch' should be 'a deep and narrow ...'; 'spatial resolved' should be 'spatially resolved' in §3.2.
  2. [Table 2 and §3.1] The fit parameters are quoted with uncertainties, but no fit quality metric (e.g., chi-square) or the number of degrees of freedom is given. This would help the reader judge how well Eq. 1 represents the data, especially given the deep point at 7.7°.
  3. [§4] The statement that P_min and α_min are 'upper limit only' is ambiguous because P_min is negative. Clarify that the data do not constrain the turnover, so the true minimum could be deeper and at a smaller phase angle.
  4. [Appendix A] Typo: 'European Sourthern Observatory' should be 'European Southern Observatory'.
  5. [References] Some reference text seems truncated (e.g., 'Asteroid Polarimetric Database' entry is missing the final digit in the DOI/ID). Please ensure all references are complete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; fitted parameters and extrapolations are explicitly labeled as such, and the core observational result is directly measured.

full rationale

The paper is a data-presentation letter. The central observational fact—3I/ATLAS shows strongly negative polarization at small phase angles (e.g., −2.83% at 7.7°) and a positive branch at larger angles—is directly measured and does not reduce to any fitted input. The headline parameters (P_min, α_min, α_0, h) are obtained by fitting the empirical model of Eq. (1), but the paper does not present them as independent predictions; it explicitly states that 'our measurements of P_min and α_min correspond to the upper limit only since our data does not show the expected turn-over towards zero polarisation for small phase angles' and that the TNO comparison 'remain[s] tentative' because of missing small-phase-angle data. The small-angle TNO-like slope is described as 'the extrapolated fit', not as a measurement. The fitting function is attributed to Muinonen et al. (2009), which includes two present co-authors, but this is a standard empirical phase-curve model, not a uniqueness theorem or a hidden ansatz; the qualitative conclusion (deep narrow negative branch) is robust to the exact functional form because it is already evident in the raw data. No step in the derivation chain equates the output to the input by construction. The acknowledged extrapolation limits are a correctness/robustness concern, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central phase-curve parameters come from fitting a three-parameter empirical curve to a single object's data. External inputs are the standard polarimetric calibration and literature phase curves of comparison objects; no new physical entity is introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • A (exponential amplitude in Eq. 1) = not reported
    Free parameter fit to the R-band measurements; controls the depth of the negative polarization branch.
  • B (exponential scale in Eq. 1) = not reported
    Free parameter fit to the data; controls how quickly the exponential term decays with phase angle.
  • C (linear slope in Eq. 1) = not reported
    Free parameter fit to the data; controls the linear positive trend at larger phase angles.
  • Aperture radius for polarimetry = approx 2000 km
    Chosen by hand to minimize background-star contamination; polarization of an extended coma depends on aperture size.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The empirical linear-exponential phase function (Eq. 1) adequately represents 3I's polarimetric phase curve over 7.7-22.4 deg and remains valid when extrapolated below 7.7 deg.
    All derived parameters (Pmin, alpha_min, alpha_0, h) and the small-angle TNO comparison come from this model; no data below 7.7 deg validate it.
  • domain assumption The dust coma's polarimetric properties are approximately constant over heliocentric distances 3.9-2.6 au, so the 18 epochs can be combined into one phase curve.
    Activity and dust properties may evolve with heliocentric distance; the paper does not model such evolution.
  • domain assumption Instrumental polarization is fully removed for all three telescopes and no significant inter-instrument offset remains after calibration.
    FORS2 relies on routine calibration; ALFOSC and FoReRo2 use standard stars; no explicit cross-check of overlapping epochs is discussed.
  • domain assumption Comparison phase curves for comets, asteroids, and TNOs from published databases are reliable and comparable in R band.
    Figure 1 overlays 3I with compiled data; (213) Lilaea V-band data are used despite a filter difference.

pith-pipeline@v1.4.0-alltime-deepseek-medium · 14629 in / 19377 out tokens · 184658 ms · 2026-08-05T05:32:02.881552+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Extreme Negative Polarisation of New Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5D6TLLEM

@misc{pith2026250905181,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Extreme Negative Polarisation of New Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5D6TLLEM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05181}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We present the first polarimetric observations of the third discovered interstellar object, 3I/ATLAS (C/2025 N1), obtained pre-perihelion with FORS2/VLT, ALFOSC/NOT, and FoReRo2/RCC, over a phase angle range of 7.7-22.4{\deg}. This marks the second ever polarimetric study of an interstellar object, the first distinguishing 2I/Borisov from most Solar System comets by its higher positive polarisation. Our polarimetric measurements as a function of phase angle reveal that 3I is characterised by an deep and narrow negative polarisation branch, reaching a minimum value of -2.7% at phase angle 7{\deg}, and an inversion angle of 17{\deg} -- a combination unprecedented among asteroids and comets, including 2I/Borisov. At very small phase angles, the extrapolated slope of the polarisation phase curve is consistent with that of certain small trans-Neptunian objects and Centaur Pholus, consistent with independent spectroscopic evidence for a red, possibly water-ice-bearing object. Imaging confirms a diffuse coma present from our earliest observations, though no strong polarimetric features are spatial resolved. These findings may demonstrate that 3I represents a distinct type of comet, expanding the diversity of known interstellar bodies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.05181 by Alberto Cellino, Antti Penttil\"a, Eric Maclennan, Galin Borisov, Grigori Fedorets, Karri Muinonen, Ludmilla Kolokolova, Maxime Devog\`ele, Mikael Granvik, Olga Mu\~noz, Philippe Bendjoya, Rosemary C. Dorsey, Simone Ieva, Stefano Bagnulo, Yuna G. Kwon, Zuri Gray.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Polarisation versus phase angle of 3I compared to various other objects. Solid lines with shaded areas represent best fit curves calculated according to Eq. 1 with ±1σ uncertainty. Left: ”other comets” refers to typical Solar System comets, such as 9P/Tempel 1, 22P/Kopff, 47P/Ashbrook-Jackson, 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, etc., sourced from the Database of Comet Polarimetry (Kiselev et al. 2017). Right: F-ty… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Deep imaging (top) and polarimetric (bottom) maps of 3I from a subset of VLT observations. The colour scale in the imaging maps does not reflect the absolute brightness of the comet. We display isophotes in the last three epochs only due to the large number of background stars in the first images. The colour of each pixel in the polarimetric maps represents the value of polarisation, as shown in the scale … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Transmission curves of R- and V-band filters used for observations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. 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

    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...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A., Merlin , F., Guilbert , A., & de Bergh , C

    Alvarez-Candal , A., Barucci , M. A., Merlin , F., Guilbert , A., & de Bergh , C. 2007, , 475, 369, 10.1051/0004-6361:20078123

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078123 2007

  2. [2]

    L., Lara , L

    Alvarez-Candal , A., Rizos , J. L., Lara , L. M., et al. 2025, , 700, L10, 10.1051/0004-6361/202556338

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556338 2025

  3. [3]

    1967, , 79, 136, 10.1086/128454

    Appenzeller , I. 1967, , 79, 136, 10.1086/128454

    doi:10.1086/128454 1967

  4. [4]

    2006, , 450, 1239, 10.1051/0004-6361:20054518

    Bagnulo , S., Boehnhardt , H., Muinonen , K., et al. 2006, , 450, 1239, 10.1051/0004-6361:20054518

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20054518 2006

  5. [5]

    D., et al

    Bagnulo , S., Landolfi , M., Landstreet , J. D., et al. 2009, , 121, 993, 10.1086/605654

    doi:10.1086/605654 2009

  6. [6]

    P., Boehnhardt , H., Vincent , J

    Bagnulo , S., Tozzi , G. P., Boehnhardt , H., Vincent , J. B., & Muinonen , K. 2010, , 514, A99, 10.1051/0004-6361/200913339

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/200913339 2010

  7. [7]

    2021, Nature Communications, 12, 1797, 10.1038/s41467-021-22000-x

    Bagnulo , S., Cellino , A., Kolokolova , L., et al. 2021, Nature Communications, 12, 1797, 10.1038/s41467-021-22000-x

    doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22000-x 2021

  8. [8]

    A., Alvarez-Candal , A., Merlin , F., et al

    Barucci , M. A., Alvarez-Candal , A., Merlin , F., et al. 2011, , 214, 297, 10.1016/j.icarus.2011.04.019

    doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2011.04.019 2011

  9. [9]

    Belskaya , I. N. 2013, Polarimetry of Transneptunian Objects and Centaurs V3.0 , NASA Planetary Data System, id. EAR-A-COMPIL-3-TNO-CEN-POLARIM-V3.0

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    N., Bagnulo , S., Barucci , M

    Belskaya , I. N., Bagnulo , S., Barucci , M. A., et al. 2010, , 210, 472, 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.06.005

    doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.06.005 2010

  11. [11]

    N., Levasseur-Regourd , A

    Belskaya , I. N., Levasseur-Regourd , A. C., Shkuratov , Y. G., & Muinonen , K. 2008, in The Solar System Beyond Neptune, ed. M. A. Barucci , H. Boehnhardt , D. P. Cruikshank , A. Morbidelli , & R. Dotson (University of Arizona Press), 115--127

    work page 2008

  12. [12]

    J., et al

    Belyakov , M., Fremling , C., Graham , M. J., et al. 2025, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 9, 194, 10.3847/2515-5172/adf059

    doi:10.3847/2515-5172/adf059 2025

  13. [13]

    P., Bagnulo , S., et al

    Boehnhardt , H., Tozzi , G. P., Bagnulo , S., et al. 2008, , 489, 1337, 10.1051/0004-6361:200809922

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:200809922 2008

  14. [14]

    T., Belyakov , M., Fremling , C., et al

    Bolin , B. T., Belyakov , M., Fremling , C., et al. 2025, , 10.1093/mnrasl/slaf078

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaf078 2025

  15. [15]

    2015, , 118, 187, 10.1016/j.pss.2015.06.012

    Borisov , G., Bagnulo , S., Nikolov , P., & Bonev , T. 2015, , 118, 187, 10.1016/j.pss.2015.06.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.pss.2015.06.012 2015

  16. [16]

    M., Heyer , H

    Bowell , E., West , R. M., Heyer , H. H., et al. 1992, , 5585, 1

    work page 1992

  17. [17]

    J., & Binzel , R

    Bus , S. J., & Binzel , R. P. 2002, , 158, 146, 10.1006/icar.2002.6856

    arXiv 2002

  18. [18]

    N., & Christou , A

    Cellino , A., Bagnulo , S., Belskaya , I. N., & Christou , A. A. 2018, , 481, L49, 10.1093/mnrasl/sly156

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly156 2018

  19. [19]

    2015, , 451, 3473, 10.1093/mnras/stv1188

    Cellino , A., Bagnulo , S., Gil-Hutton , R., et al. 2015, , 451, 3473, 10.1093/mnras/stv1188

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stv1188 2015

  20. [20]

    2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A80, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038246

    Cellino, A., Bendjoya, P., Delbo’, M., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 642, A80, 10.1051/0004-6361/202038246

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038246 2020

  21. [21]

    O., Bernardinelli , P

    Chandler , C. O., Bernardinelli , P. H., Juri \'c , M., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.13409, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.13409

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.13409 2025

  22. [22]

    A., Roth , N

    Cordiner , M. A., Roth , N. X., Kelley , M. S. P., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.18209, 10.48550/arXiv.2508.18209

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.18209 2025

  23. [23]

    R., Licandro , J., et al

    de la Fuente Marcos , R., Alarcon , M. R., Licandro , J., et al. 2025, , 700, L9, 10.1051/0004-6361/202556439

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556439 2025

  24. [24]

    O., & Sch \"o nrich , R

    Dehnen , W., Hands , T. O., & Sch \"o nrich , R. 2022, , 512, 4078, 10.1093/mnras/stab3666

    doi:10.1093/mnras/stab3666 2022

  25. [25]

    M., & Geake , J

    Dougherty , L. M., & Geake , J. E. 1994, , 271, 343, 10.1093/mnras/271.2.343

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/271.2.343 1994

  26. [26]

    G., & Toussaint , R

    Flekk y , E. G., & Toussaint , R. 2023, , 523, L9, 10.1093/mnrasl/slad049

    work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slad049 2023

  27. [27]

    2022, , 517, 5463, 10.1093/mnras/stac2895

    Frattin , E., Martikainen , J., Mu \ n oz , O., et al. 2022, , 517, 5463, 10.1093/mnras/stac2895

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stac2895 2022

  28. [28]

    A., de Sanctis , M

    Fulchignoni , M., Belskaya , I., Barucci , M. A., de Sanctis , M. C., & Doressoundiram , A. 2008, in The Solar System Beyond Neptune, ed. M. A. Barucci , H. Boehnhardt , D. P. Cruikshank , A. Morbidelli , & R. Dotson (University of Arizona Press), 181--192

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    2014, , 569, A122, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424238

    Gil-Hutton , R., Cellino , A., & Bendjoya , P. 2014, , 569, A122, 10.1051/0004-6361/201424238

    work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201424238 2014

  30. [30]

    2024A, , 5, 18, 10.3847/PSJ/ad0f18

    Gray , Z., Bagnulo , S., Granvik , M., et al. 2024A, , 5, 18, 10.3847/PSJ/ad0f18

    work page doi:10.3847/psj/ad0f18

  31. [31]

    2024B, , 531, 1638, 10.1093/mnras/stae1284

    Gray , Z., Bagnulo , S., Boehnhardt , H., et al. 2024B, , 531, 1638, 10.1093/mnras/stae1284

    work page doi:10.1093/mnras/stae1284

  32. [32]

    2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 53, 10.1038/s41550-019-0931-8

    Guzik , P., Drahus , M., Rusek , K., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 53, 10.1038/s41550-019-0931-8

    doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0931-8 2020

  33. [33]

    Hadamcik , E., & Levasseur-Regourd , A. C. 2003, , 403, 757, 10.1051/0004-6361:20030378

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030378 2003

  34. [34]

    O., & Dehnen , W

    Hands , T. O., & Dehnen , W. 2020, , 493, L59, 10.1093/mnrasl/slz186

    doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slz186 2020

  35. [35]

    E., et al

    Hasegawa, S., Marsset, M., DeMeo, F. E., et al. 2021, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 916, L6, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f05

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac0f05 2021

  36. [36]

    E., Marsset , M., et al

    Hasegawa , S., DeMeo , F. E., Marsset , M., et al. 2022, , 939, L9, 10.3847/2041-8213/ac92e4

    work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac92e4 2022

  37. [37]

    W., Adam , C

    Hergenrother , C. W., Adam , C. D., Chesley , S. R., & Lauretta , D. S. 2020, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 125, e06549, 10.1029/2020JE006549

    work page doi:10.1029/2020je006549 2020

  38. [38]

    J., Dorsey , R

    Hopkins , M. J., Dorsey , R. C., Forbes , J. C., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.05318, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.05318

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.05318 2025

  39. [39]

    A., Thomas , C

    Humes , O. A., Thomas , C. A., & McGraw , L. E. 2024A, , 5, 80, 10.3847/PSJ/ad2e99

    doi:10.3847/psj/ad2e99

  40. [40]

    Ishimaru , K., & Lauretta , D. S. 2024, , 59, 193, 10.1111/maps.14115

    work page doi:10.1111/maps.14115 2024

  41. [41]

    2023, , 672, A76, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244686

    Ivanova , O., Rosenbush , V., Luk'yanyk , I., et al. 2023, , 672, A76, 10.1051/0004-6361/202244686

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202244686 2023

  42. [42]

    2004, , 128, 3061, 10.1086/425888

    Jewitt , D. 2004, , 128, 3061, 10.1086/425888

    work page doi:10.1086/425888 2004

  43. [43]

    Hubble Space Telescope Observations of the Interstellar Interloper 3I/ATLAS

    Jewitt , D., Hui , M.-T., Mutchler , M., Kim , Y., & Agarwal , J. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.02934, 10.48550/arXiv.2508.02934

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.02934 2025

  44. [44]

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

    Kareta , T., Champagne , C., McClure , L., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.12234, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.12234

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.12234 2025

  45. [45]

    2015, Comets (Cambridge University), 379

    Kiselev , N., Rosenbush , V., Levasseur-Regourd , A.-C., & Kolokolova , L. 2015, Comets (Cambridge University), 379

    work page 2015

  46. [46]

    2017, Compilation of Comet Polarimetry from Published and Unpublished Sources , NASA Planetary Data System, urn:nasa:pds:compil-comet:polarimetry::1.0, 2017

    Kiselev , N., Shubina , E., Velichko , S., et al. 2017, Compilation of Comet Polarimetry from Published and Unpublished Sources , NASA Planetary Data System, urn:nasa:pds:compil-comet:polarimetry::1.0, 2017

    work page 2017

  47. [47]

    G., Bagnulo , S., Markkanen , J., et al

    Kwon , Y. G., Bagnulo , S., Markkanen , J., et al. 2024, , 168, 164, 10.3847/1538-3881/ad6b15

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ad6b15 2024

  48. [48]

    2015, in Polarimetry of Stars and Planetary Systems, ed

    Levasseur-Regourd , A.-C., Renard , J.-B., Shkuratov , Y., & Hadamcik , E. 2015, in Polarimetry of Stars and Planetary Systems, ed. L. Kolokolova , J. Hough , & A.-C. Levasseur-Regourd (Cambridge University Press), 35

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    2019, Asteroid Polarimetric Database (APD) V1.0 , NASA Planetary Data System, urn:nasa:pds:asteroid\_polarimetric\_database::1.0, 10.26033/z7xq-1x46

    Lupishko , D. 2019, Asteroid Polarimetric Database (APD) V1.0 , NASA Planetary Data System, urn:nasa:pds:asteroid\_polarimetric\_database::1.0, 10.26033/z7xq-1x46

    work page doi:10.26033/z7xq-1x46 2019

  50. [50]

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

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202243587 2022

  51. [51]

    J., Weryk , R., Micheli , M., et al

    Meech , K. J., Weryk , R., Micheli , M., et al. 2017, , 552, 378, 10.1038/nature25020

    doi:10.1038/nature25020 2017

  52. [52]

    J., et al

    Micheli , M., Farnocchia , D., Meech , K. J., et al. 2018, , 559, 223, 10.1038/s41586-018-0254-4

    doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0254-4 2018

  53. [53]

    C., et al

    Mu \ n oz , O., Moreno , F., G \'o mez-Mart \' n , J. C., et al. 2020, , 247, 19, 10.3847/1538-4365/ab6851

    doi:10.3847/1538-4365/ab6851 2020

  54. [54]

    2009, MAPS, 44, 1937

    Muinonen , K., Penttil \"a , A., Cellino , A., et al. 2009, MAPS, 44, 1937

    work page 2009

  55. [55]

    2021, , 650, L19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141245

    Opitom , C., Jehin , E., Hutsem \'e kers , D., et al. 2021, , 650, L19, 10.1051/0004-6361/202141245

    doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202141245 2021

  56. [56]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.05226, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.05226

    Opitom , C., Snodgrass , C., Jehin , E., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.05226, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.05226

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.05226 2025

  57. [57]

    2018, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 123, 2564, 10.1029/2018JE005753

    Poch , O., Cerubini , R., Pommerol , A., Jost , B., & Thomas , N. 2018, Journal of Geophysical Research (Planets), 123, 2564, 10.1029/2018JE005753

    work page doi:10.1029/2018je005753 2018

  58. [58]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.00808, 10.48550/arXiv.2508.00808

    Santana-Ros , T., Ivanova , O., Mykhailova , S., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.00808, 10.48550/arXiv.2508.00808

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.00808 2025

  59. [59]

    Z., Micheli , M., Farnocchia , D., et al

    Seligman , D. Z., Micheli , M., Farnocchia , D., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.02757, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.02757

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.02757 2025

  60. [60]

    Shurcliff , W. A. 1962, , 56, 269

    work page 1962

  61. [61]

    G., & Seligman , D

    Taylor , A. G., & Seligman , D. Z. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.08111, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.08111

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.08111 2025

  62. [62]

    Tholen , D. J. 1984, PhD thesis, University of Arizona

    work page 1984

  63. [63]

    2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.04675, 10.48550/arXiv.2508.04675

    Xing , Z., Oset , S., Noonan , J., & Bodewits , D. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.04675, 10.48550/arXiv.2508.04675

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.04675 2025

  64. [64]

    J., Connelley , M., & Keane , J

    Yang , B., Meech , K. J., Connelley , M., & Keane , J. V. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2507.14916, 10.48550/arXiv.2507.14916

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.14916 2025

  65. [65]

    1976, , 81, 262, 10.1086/111882

    Zellner , B., & Gradie , J. 1976, , 81, 262, 10.1086/111882

    work page doi:10.1086/111882 1976

  66. [66]

    2011, , 212, 403, 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.12.012

    Zubko , E., Videen , G., Shkuratov , Y., Muinonen , K., & Yamamoto , T. 2011, , 212, 403, 10.1016/j.icarus.2010.12.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.12.012 2011

  67. [67]

    , " * 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.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts ...

  68. [68]

    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.doi doi empty "" " " doi * " " * if FUNCTION format.pid doi empty eprint empty ur...

  69. [69]

    @ W=WAZVVƔ)SOqwwomq @ G \*fΜ 7 #xgXHII Ju^st:t:Ŋ* 6``0 I0 VZa @ hǮ ݻѾ)))_ @pq ڷob :L -IK+ MOOG aÆ 5 m۶ t^s^qF +j o۰F6ڵk;888 `ccCzz:#FhQ|H '==A ߊaֈ5>e X# رc

    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' environment \@ifnextchar \@reference \@latexerr Missing key on reference command E...

    2021