arxiv: 2603.10350 · v3 · submitted 2026-03-11 · 🌌 astro-ph.EP · astro-ph.GA

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Interstellar Object 3I/ATLAS Observed from Mars by China's Tianwen-1 Spacecraft

Xin Ren , Wei Yan , Ruining Zhao , Shu Wang , Xingye Gao , Qiang Fu , Qing Zhang , Bin Yang

show 15 more authors

Man-To Hui Zhiyong Xiao XiaoDong Liu Cunhui Li Renhao Tian Wenguang Liu Dong Wang Shaoran Liu Cong Ren Jie Dong Xinbo Zhu Pan Xie Jian-Yang Li Yan Geng Jianjun Liu

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 13:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.EP astro-ph.GA

keywords interstellar objectscometsdust dynamicsTianwen-1Marscoma morphologyFinson-Probstein

0 comments

The pith

Observations from Mars show the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS ejects large dust grains at low velocities.

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

China's Tianwen-1 Mars orbiter captured images of the third known interstellar object, 3I/ATLAS, during its close approach to Mars. These represent the first views from significantly out of the object's orbital plane, allowing new constraints on its dust. The images from three consecutive days show the coma and tail changing appearance, which dust models attribute to the shifting perspective rather than changes in the comet itself. Analysis indicates the coma consists primarily of large grains hundreds of micrometers across, ejected at 3 to 10 meters per second. The surface brightness profile supports a steady release of dust being pushed by sunlight.

Core claim

The Tianwen-1 HiRIC camera imaged interstellar object 3I/ATLAS from Mars, providing the first out-of-plane observations. Morphological evolution of the coma and tail across three epochs is explained by changing viewing geometry. Comparison with Finson-Probstein models shows dominance of large grains with β ≈ 10^{-3} to 10^{-2} (sizes of a few hundred μm) and ejection velocities of 3-10 m s^{-1}. The azimuthally averaged surface brightness profile is consistent with steady-state dust outflow under solar radiation pressure, with Afρ ~ 2×10^4 cm and dust mass loss rate ~10^3 kg s^{-1}.

What carries the argument

The Finson-Probstein dust dynamical models, which simulate particle trajectories under gravity and radiation pressure to interpret the observed coma shape and extent.

Load-bearing premise

That the observed changes in coma morphology result only from the spacecraft's changing viewing angle and not from any intrinsic variations in the comet's dust ejection over the short observing period.

What would settle it

If observations from a different vantage point during the same period showed a different dust grain size distribution or if the surface brightness profile changed in a way not predicted by steady-state outflow.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.10350 by Bin Yang, Cong Ren, Cunhui Li, Dong Wang, Jianjun Liu, Jian-Yang Li, Jie Dong, Man-To Hui, Pan Xie, Qiang Fu, Qing Zhang, Renhao Tian, Ruining Zhao, Shaoran Liu, Shu Wang, Wei Yan, Wenguang Liu, XiaoDong Liu, Xinbo Zhu, Xingye Gao, Xin Ren, Yan Geng, Zhiyong Xiao.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: The sky coordinate of 3I from Earth between 2025 July 1 and early 2026 January (blue line) and from Mars during the three epochs of Tianwen-1 observations (filled orange squares). The thin dashed curve marks the ecliptic plane. The vertical dotted line marks the RA of 3I from Earth at perihelion, and the shaded area marks the range of RA with solar elongation <45◦ . While no ground-based optical observatio… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Stacked images of 3I/ATLAS acquired by HiRIC CMOS camera onboard Tianwen-1 spacecraft (upper row) and the corresponding 1/ρ divided images (lower row) from the three epochs. All images are displayed north up and east to the left. The stacked images are displayed with logarithmic brightness stretch, and the enhanced images are displayed with a linear brightness stretch. The arrows in the upper panels mark t… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: The syndynes (solid curves) and synchrones (dashed lines) system of 3I/ATLAS corresponding to Tianwen-1 observations overlaid with the stacked images (upper row) and the 1/ρ ratioed images (lower row). The image orientations and brightness stretch are the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: (left) Surface brightness scan of the coma along the sun-antisun direction, normalized to the peak brightness. Left is the sunward direction, and right is the anti-sunward direction. The profile is averaged over a ∼10 ′′ wide strip. An obvious asymmetry is shown between the sunward (left) and anti-sunward (right) direction, consistent with the effect of SRP. (right) Azimuthally averaged surface brightness … view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Pre-perihelion heliocentric light curve of 3I/ATLAS. The measurements from this work (red squares, ρ = 5,000 km) are compared with space-based measurements from Q. Zhang & K. Battams (2026, blue triangles, ρ > 1 × 104 km), ground-based measurements from D. Jewitt & J. Luu (2025, yellow circles, ρ = 1×104 km), and CCD data from the COBS database (gray dots). Dashed lines indicate the brightening trends, whi… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

China's Tianwen-1 Mars orbiter successfully imaged the third interstellar object, 3I/ATLAS, during its close encounter with Mars using the onboard HiRIC CMOS camera. This is China's first deep-space observation of an astronomical object. These observations constitute the first imaging of this object from a vantage point significantly out of its orbital plane, providing a unique constraint on dust dynamics. Three observing epochs between 2025 September 30 and October 3 reveal clear changes in coma and tail morphology driven by the rapidly evolving viewing geometry. Comparison with Finson-Probstein dust dynamical models indicates that the coma is dominated by large grains with solar radiation pressure parameter $\beta \approx 10^{-3} $ - $10^{-2}$, corresponding to grain sizes of a few 100s $\mu$m. The extent of the sunward coma implies dust ejection velocities of $3$ - $10$ m s$^{-1}$. Despite the morphological evolution, the azimuthally averaged surface brightness profile remains nearly unchanged through the three epochs, transitioning from a radial slope near -1 close to the nucleus to slightly steeper than -1.5 at larger cometocentric distances, consistent with steady-state dust outflow accelerated by solar radiation pressure. Photometry yields an average $Af\rho \sim (2.0\pm0.2)\times10^4$ cm and a corresponding dust mass loss rate of $\dot{M} \sim 10^3$ kg s$^{-1}$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Tianwen-1's out-of-plane images give a new geometric handle on 3I/ATLAS dust, but the grain-size and velocity numbers rest on Finson-Probstein assumptions that could shift if gas drag or fragmentation matter.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this paper reports the first successful imaging of interstellar object 3I/ATLAS from a Mars orbiter vantage point well out of the orbital plane. That supplies a viewing geometry Earth observers did not have, and the three epochs show clear morphology changes in the coma and tail that track the expected geometric evolution. The authors match the sunward extent and overall shape to Finson-Probstein trajectories and extract beta values of roughly 10^{-3} to 10^{-2}, which they translate to grain sizes of a few hundred microns, plus ejection velocities of 3-10 m/s. The azimuthally averaged brightness profiles staying close to steady across epochs is a useful consistency check, and the reported Af rho and mass-loss rate give a concrete activity level for this object. Those are the concrete additions. The soft spot is that the numerical inferences assume radiation pressure is the dominant force shaping the observed distribution, with little room for gas drag near the nucleus or post-ejection fragmentation to alter trajectories. If either effect is non-negligible, the same images could be reproduced with different grain sizes or speeds, so the specific ranges are less tightly constrained than they appear. The abstract and summary-level model description do not include the full data tables, exact fitting code, or quantitative error budgets, which leaves the robustness of the numbers harder to judge from the text alone. This work is aimed at planetary scientists who track rare interstellar objects and cometary dust properties. It supplies a new data point in a useful geometry and follows standard modeling practice, so the observation itself is worth referee time even if the quantitative claims need more supporting detail on the fitting procedure and alternative-force checks.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first observations of interstellar object 3I/ATLAS from the Tianwen-1 Mars orbiter using the HiRIC CMOS camera, providing the first out-of-plane vantage point. Three epochs between 2025 Sep 30 and Oct 3 show evolving coma and tail morphology attributed to changing viewing geometry. Comparison to Finson-Probstein dust dynamical models yields β ≈ 10^{-3}–10^{-2} (grain sizes of a few 100s μm) and dust ejection velocities of 3–10 m s^{-1}. Azimuthally averaged surface brightness profiles remain stable (slope near -1 near the nucleus, steeper than -1.5 at larger distances), consistent with steady-state outflow under radiation pressure. Photometry gives Afρ ≈ (2.0 ± 0.2) × 10^4 cm and a dust mass-loss rate of ~10^3 kg s^{-1}.

Significance. If the modeling conclusions hold, the work supplies a unique geometric constraint on dust dynamics for an interstellar object, reinforcing the picture of large-grain-dominated comae with modest ejection speeds. The reported stability of the radial profiles across epochs provides supporting evidence for steady dust production rather than strong temporal variability. These results add to the small sample of characterized interstellar objects and could inform future mission planning for close encounters.

major comments (2)

[Dust dynamical modeling (comparison with Finson-Probstein models)] The central inference of β ≈ 10^{-3}–10^{-2} and grain sizes of a few 100s μm rests on matching the observed sunward coma extent and morphology to Finson-Probstein trajectories. No quantitative assessment is provided of how gas drag near the nucleus or post-ejection fragmentation would alter the required β or velocity values to reproduce the same three-epoch evolution; if either effect contributes appreciably, the specific numerical ranges would not be unique.
[Photometry and mass-loss rate derivation] The dust mass-loss rate of ~10^3 kg s^{-1} is obtained from the measured Afρ without an explicit statement of the assumed grain density, size distribution power-law index, or terminal velocity used in the conversion. Because these parameters directly scale the mass-loss estimate, the reported value and its uncertainty cannot be independently verified from the given information.

minor comments (2)

[Surface brightness profiles] The abstract states the surface-brightness profile transitions 'from a radial slope near -1 close to the nucleus to slightly steeper than -1.5'; a figure or table showing the fitted slopes with uncertainties for each epoch would make this claim more precise.
[Observations] The three observing epochs are given only as date ranges; listing the exact UTC times and the corresponding heliocentric and observer distances would allow readers to reproduce the viewing-geometry calculations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and insightful comments, which have helped clarify several aspects of our analysis. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The central inference of β ≈ 10^{-3}–10^{-2} and grain sizes of a few 100s μm rests on matching the observed sunward coma extent and morphology to Finson-Probstein trajectories. No quantitative assessment is provided of how gas drag near the nucleus or post-ejection fragmentation would alter the required β or velocity values to reproduce the same three-epoch evolution; if either effect contributes appreciably, the specific numerical ranges would not be unique.

Authors: We acknowledge that the Finson-Probstein model does not explicitly incorporate near-nucleus gas drag or post-ejection fragmentation, and a full quantitative sensitivity analysis of these effects is not present in the original manuscript. For the large grain sizes (hundreds of μm) and modest ejection velocities (3–10 m s^{-1}) inferred here, gas drag is expected to be negligible beyond the acceleration zone, and fragmentation of such grains is unlikely under the observed conditions; these points are standard assumptions in similar studies of cometary dust. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section explaining these assumptions, their justification for 3I/ATLAS, and the expected magnitude of any corrections, together with references to hydrodynamic modeling of other comets. A complete numerical re-derivation incorporating gas drag would require new simulations beyond the scope of this observational work. revision: partial
Referee: The dust mass-loss rate of ~10^3 kg s^{-1} is obtained from the measured Afρ without an explicit statement of the assumed grain density, size distribution power-law index, or terminal velocity used in the conversion. Because these parameters directly scale the mass-loss estimate, the reported value and its uncertainty cannot be independently verified from the given information.

Authors: We agree that the conversion from Afρ to mass-loss rate requires explicit parameter values for independent verification. In the revised manuscript we will state the adopted values (grain density 500 kg m^{-3}, differential size-distribution index q = −3.5, terminal velocity 5 m s^{-1} consistent with the modeled ejection speeds), include the conversion equation, and discuss the sensitivity of the derived rate to these choices. The uncertainty on the mass-loss rate will be updated to reflect the range of plausible parameters. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: parameters inferred from external standard model

full rationale

The paper's central inferences for β ≈ 10^{-3}–10^{-2} and ejection velocities 3–10 m s^{-1} are obtained by direct morphological matching of observed coma/tail evolution across three epochs to the established Finson-Probstein dust trajectory framework (a 1968 external model, not derived or cited from the present authors). Observational surface brightness profiles, Afρ photometry, and viewing-geometry changes are independent inputs; the model supplies the dynamical mapping without the paper redefining or fitting the model parameters to its own outputs. No self-citation chain, self-definitional loop, or renaming of fitted quantities as predictions occurs. The derivation remains self-contained against the external benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on fitting established dust-dynamical models to new spacecraft images; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)

beta = 10^{-3} to 10^{-2}
Radiation pressure parameter range fitted to reproduce observed coma and tail morphology.
ejection_velocity = 3 to 10 m s^{-1}
Dust speed range inferred from the spatial extent of the sunward coma.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Finson-Probstein model assumptions hold for this interstellar object's dust
Invoked to interpret morphological changes and derive grain sizes and velocities.
domain assumption Surface brightness profile reflects steady-state dust outflow
Used to interpret the radial slope as consistent with constant production and radiation-pressure acceleration.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5646 in / 1599 out tokens · 63894 ms · 2026-05-15T13:42:47.458705+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

[1]

D., & Thompson, D

Feldman, P. D., & Thompson, D. T. 1984, AJ, 89, 579, doi: 10.1086/113552 Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., et al. 2013, A&A, 558, A33, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201322068 Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Sip˝ ocz, B. M., et al. 2018, AJ, 156, 123, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A. M., Li...

work page doi:10.1086/113552 1984
[2]

H., Podolak, M., & Prialnik, D

Beer, E. H., Podolak, M., & Prialnik, D. 2006, Icarus, 180, 473, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2005.10.018

work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2005.10.018 2006
[3]

The Volatile Inventory of 3I/ATLAS as seen with JWST/MIRI

Belyakov, M., Wong, I., Bolin, B. T., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.22034, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.22034

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.22034 2026
[4]

W., Feldman, P

Bodewits, D., Noonan, J. W., Feldman, P. D., et al. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 867, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1095-2

work page doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1095-2 2020
[5]

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

Bolin, B. T., Belyakov, M., Fremling, C., et al. 2025, MNRAS, 542, L139, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/slaf078

work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/slaf078 2025
[6]

A., Lamy, P

Burns, J. A., Lamy, P. L., & Soter, S. 1979, Icarus, 40, 1, doi: 10.1016/0019-1035(79)90050-2

work page doi:10.1016/0019-1035(79)90050-2 1979
[7]

Casagrande, L., & VandenBerg, D. A. 2018, MNRAS, 479, L102, doi: 10.1093/mnrasl/sly104

work page doi:10.1093/mnrasl/sly104 2018
[8]

X., Micheli, M., et al

Cordiner, M., Roth, N. X., Micheli, M., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.06911, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.06911

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.06911 2026
[9]

A., Roth, N

Cordiner, M. A., Roth, N. X., Kelley, M. S. P., et al. 2025, ApJL, 991, L43, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae0647

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae0647 2025
[10]

2025, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, 5625, 1 16Ren et al

Crovisier, J., Biver, N., & Bockelee-Morvan, D. 2025, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, 5625, 1 16Ren et al. de la Fuente Marcos, R., Alarcon, M. R.,

work page 2025
[11]

2025, A&A, 700, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556439 de Le´ on, J., Licandro, J., de la Fuente Marcos, C., et al

Licandro, J., et al. 2025, A&A, 700, L9, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556439 de Le´ on, J., Licandro, J., de la Fuente Marcos, C., et al. 2020, MNRAS, 495, 2053, doi: 10.1093/mnras/staa1190

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556439 2025
[12]

2025, Minor Planet Electronic Circulars, 2025-N12, doi: 10.48377/MPEC/2025-N12

Denneau, L., Siverd, R., Tonry, J., et al. 2025, Minor Planet Electronic Circulars, 2025-N12, doi: 10.48377/MPEC/2025-N12

work page doi:10.48377/mpec/2025-n12 2025
[13]

M., Bills, B

Eubanks, T. M., Bills, B. G., Hibberd, A., et al. 2025, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2508.15768, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2508.15768

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.15768 2025
[14]

Sunshine, J. M. 2025, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 9, 266, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ae109f

work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ae109f 2025
[15]

L., Samarasinha, N

Farnham, T. L., Samarasinha, N. H., Mueller, B. E. A., & Knight, M. M. 2007, AJ, 133, 2001, doi: 10.1086/513186

work page doi:10.1086/513186 2007
[16]

L., & Schleicher, D

Farnham, T. L., & Schleicher, D. G. 2005, Icarus, 173, 533, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2004.08.021

work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2004.08.021 2005
[17]

D., Noonan, J

Feinstein, A. D., Noonan, J. W., & Seligman, D. Z. 2025, ApJL, 991, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfd4d

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfd4d 2025
[18]

2012, Icarus, 221, 721, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.09.001

Fink, U., & Rubin, M. 2012, Icarus, 221, 721, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.09.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.09.001 2012
[19]

L., & Probstein, R

Finson, M. L., & Probstein, R. F. 1968, ApJ, 154, 327, doi: 10.1086/149761 Gaia Collaboration, Prusti, T., de Bruijne, J. H. J., et al. 2016, A&A, 595, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201629272 Gaia Collaboration, Vallenari, A., Brown, A. G. A., et al. 2023, A&A, 674, A1, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202243940

work page doi:10.1086/149761 1968
[20]

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

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20030378 2003
[21]

J., Agarwal, J., & Kim, Y

Hui, M.-T., Jewitt, D., Mutchler, M. J., Agarwal, J., & Kim, Y. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.21569, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.21569

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.21569 2026
[22]

Tholen, D. J. 2020, AJ, 160, 92, doi: 10.3847/1538-3881/ab9df8 Hutsem´ ekers, D., Manfroid, J., Jehin, E., et al. 2026, A&A, 706, A43, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202557484

work page doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab9df8 2020
[23]

2024, A&A, 691, A148, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451589

Jang, H., Waters, R., Kaeufer, T., et al. 2024, A&A, 691, A148, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202451589

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202451589 2024
[24]

2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17515, 1

Jehin, E., Hmiddouch, S., Aravind, K., et al. 2025, The Astronomer’s Telegram, 17515, 1

work page 2025
[25]

1991, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol

Jewitt, D. 1991, in Astrophysics and Space Science Library, Vol. 167, IAU Colloquium 116: Comets in the post-Halley era, ed. R. L

work page 1991
[26]

Neugebauer, & J

Newburn, Jr., M. Neugebauer, & J. Rahe, 19, doi: 10.1007/978-94-011-3378-4 2

work page doi:10.1007/978-94-011-3378-4
[27]

2020, ApJL, 888, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab621b

Jewitt, D., Hui, M.-T., Kim, Y., et al. 2020, ApJL, 888, L23, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab621b

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab621b 2020
[28]

2025, ApJL, 990, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf8d8

Agarwal, J. 2025, ApJL, 990, L2, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adf8d8

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adf8d8 2025
[29]

2025, ApJL, 994, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1832

Jewitt, D., & Luu, J. 2025, ApJL, 994, L3, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae1832

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae1832 2025
[30]

2010, AJ, 139, 1782, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/5/1782

Roweis, S. 2010, AJ, 139, 1782, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/139/5/1782

work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/139/5/1782 2010
[31]

2021, SSRv, 217, 26, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00803-0

Li, C., Tang, S., Hu, X., et al. 2021, SSRv, 217, 26, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00803-0

work page doi:10.1007/s11214-021-00803-0 2021
[32]

M., Bach, Y

Lisse, C. M., Bach, Y. P., Bryan, S., et al. 2025, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 9, 242, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ae0293

work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ae0293 2025
[33]

M., Bach, Y

Lisse, C. M., Bach, Y. P., Bryan, S. A., et al. 2026, Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, 10, 26, doi: 10.3847/2515-5172/ae3f95

work page doi:10.3847/2515-5172/ae3f95 2026
[34]

DiSanti, M. A. 2020, ApJL, 889, L10, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ab64ed

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab64ed 2020
[35]

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

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

work page doi:10.1038/nature25020 2017
[36]

2021, SSRv, 217, 42, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00823-w

Meng, Q., Wang, D., Wang, X., et al. 2021, SSRv, 217, 42, doi: 10.1007/s11214-021-00823-w

work page doi:10.1007/s11214-021-00823-w 2021
[37]

J., et al

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

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0254-4 2018
[38]

2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1426, doi: 10.21105/joss.01426

Mommert, M., Kelley, M., de Val-Borro, M., et al. 2019, The Journal of Open Source Software, 4, 1426, doi: 10.21105/joss.01426

work page doi:10.21105/joss.01426 2019
[39]

Mueller, B. E. A., Samarasinha, N. H., Farnham, T. L., & A’Hearn, M. F. 2013, Icarus, 222, 799, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.08.014

work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.08.014 2013
[40]

2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.07187, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.07187

Opitom, C., Manfroid, J., Hutsem´ ekers, D., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.07187, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.07187 Ram´ ırez, I., Michel, R., Sefako, R., et al. 2012, ApJ, 752, 5, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/752/1/5

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.07187 2026
[41]

M., Ward-Thompson, D., & Andr´ e, P

Lodato, G. 2006, MNRAS, 373, 1619, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11113.x 3I/ATLAS Observed by Tianwen-1 Orbiter17 Salazar Manzano, L. E., Paneque-Carre˜ no, T.,

work page doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2006.11113.x 2006
[42]

Water D/H in 3I/ATLAS as a Probe of Formation Conditions in Another Planetary System

Cordiner, M. A., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.07026, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.07026

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.07026 2026
[43]

H., & Larson, S

Samarasinha, N. H., & Larson, S. M. 2014, Icarus, 239, 168, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2014.05.028

work page doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2014.05.028 2014
[44]

2025, A&A, 702, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556717

Santana-Ros, T., Ivanova, O., Mykhailova, S., et al. 2025, A&A, 702, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202556717

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202556717 2025
[45]

2026a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.10860, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.10860

Scarmato, T., & Loeb, A. 2026a, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2601.10860, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2601.10860

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.10860
[46]

2026b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.18512, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.18512

Scarmato, T., & Loeb, A. 2026b, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2602.18512, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2602.18512

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.18512
[47]

G., & Bair, A

Schleicher, D. G., & Bair, A. N. 2011, AJ, 141, 177, doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/141/6/177

work page doi:10.1088/0004-6256/141/6/177 2011
[48]

Serra-Ricart, M., Licandro, J., & Alarcon, M. R. 2026, A&A, 705, L3, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/202558072

work page doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202558072 2026
[49]

2026, ApJL, 998, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae3c97

Tan, H., Yan, X., & Li, J.-Y. 2026, ApJL, 998, L22, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae3c97

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae3c97 2026
[50]

G., & Seligman, D

Taylor, A. G., & Seligman, D. Z. 2025, ApJL, 990, L14, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/adfa28

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adfa28 2025
[51]

X., Wang, C., Li, C

Wan, W. X., Wang, C., Li, C. L., & Wei, Y. 2020, Nature Astronomy, 4, 721, doi: 10.1038/s41550-020-1148-6

work page doi:10.1038/s41550-020-1148-6 2020
[52]

2025, ApJL, 991, L50, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae08ab

Xing, Z., Oset, S., Noonan, J., & Bodewits, D. 2025, ApJL, 991, L50, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae08ab

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae08ab 2025
[53]

J., Connelley, M., Zhao, R., & Keane, J

Yang, B., Meech, K. J., Connelley, M., Zhao, R., & Keane, J. V. 2025, ApJL, 992, L9, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae08a7

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae08a7 2025
[54]

Ye, Q., Kelley, M. S. P., Hsieh, H. H., et al. 2025, ApJL, 993, L31, doi: 10.3847/2041-8213/ae147b

work page doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae147b 2025
[55]

2026, PASP, 138, 014403, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ae2e88

Zhang, Q., & Battams, K. 2026, PASP, 138, 014403, doi: 10.1088/1538-3873/ae2e88

work page doi:10.1088/1538-3873/ae2e88 2026
[56]

Post-perihelion Coma Composition of the Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS from Optical Spectroscopy

Zhao, R., Zhang, X., Yang, B., et al. 2026, arXiv e-prints, arXiv:2603.07718, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2603.07718

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.07718 2026
[57]

2021, Advances in Space Research, 67, 812, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2020.11.005

Zou, Y., Zhu, Y., Bai, Y., et al. 2021, Advances in Space Research, 67, 812, doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2020.11.005

work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2020.11.005 2021