pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.27516 · v1 · pith:TB2337JKnew · submitted 2026-05-26 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · astro-ph.EP

DebrisWatch II: Digging deeper for geosynchronous debris

James A. Blake , Benjamin F. Cooke , Cristina Paragini , William Feline , Christopher A. Onken , Don Pollacco , Grant Privett , Toshifumi Yanagisawa
show 22 more authors
Robert Airey Ioannis Apergis Roberto Armellin Lily Beesley Paul Chote Anna-Maria Cutolo Stuart Eves Tomoko Fujiwara Daisuke Kuroda Isobel S. Lockley Alexander MacManus James McCormac Morgan A Mitchell Tokuhiro Nimura Kota Nishiyama Shin-Ichiro Okumura Thomas Schildknecht Billy Shrive Seitaro Urakawa Dimitri Veras Phineas Whitlock Christian Wolf
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 16:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.EP
keywords geosynchronous debrisspace debris surveyblind stackingastrometric calibrationlight curve analysisdebris detectiontumbling fragments
0
0 comments X

The pith

A blind stacking technique on Isaac Newton Telescope data recovers 25 previously missed geosynchronous debris tracklets and extends detection one magnitude fainter.

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

The paper reprocesses an existing geosynchronous debris survey from the 2.54 m Isaac Newton Telescope by overhauling the astrometric calibration and object detection steps. A blind stacking approach is introduced to combine frames and recover targets that single-frame methods overlooked, yielding 25 new tracklets and reaching fainter limits. The identical algorithm is run on simultaneous 36 cm telescope images to benchmark recovery performance between large and small apertures. Light curves extracted from the trailing detections show that faint fragments vary more than bright derelicts, consistent with rapid tumbling. These results improve the ability to monitor the faint end of the high-altitude debris population.

Core claim

The central claim is that the revised pipeline with blind stacking applied to the INT survey data recovers 25 tracklets missed by prior single-frame extraction, pushes the sensitivity limit one magnitude fainter, achieves sub-arcsecond astrometric accuracy for short-arc orbit solutions, and reveals through high-cadence light curves that faint fragments are proportionally more variable and often exhibit signatures of rapid tumbling.

What carries the argument

Blind stacking technique that combines multiple frames to boost detection of moving targets without requiring prior orbit information.

If this is right

  • Sub-arcsecond astrometry from the improved calibration supports short-arc initial orbit solutions for the recovered detections.
  • High-cadence light curves indicate that faint fragments are more photometrically variable than bright derelicts, frequently showing rapid tumbling signatures.
  • Recovery of INT detections from the 36 cm dataset provides a direct benchmark for the stacking method's performance on smaller apertures.
  • Preliminary multi-national follow-up observations using telescopes in Australia, Japan, and La Palma extend characterization of the debris environment.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The stacking approach could be tested on other large-telescope archives to check whether similar numbers of hidden tracklets appear in different datasets.
  • Knowledge of tumbling rates in faint debris may help refine models that predict how fragments interact with sunlight and solar radiation pressure.
  • As space monitoring expands beyond geosynchronous altitudes, the same pipeline could be adapted to characterize debris at higher orbits.

Load-bearing premise

The blind stacking and detection pipeline identifies real debris tracklets without introducing a significant number of false positives.

What would settle it

Independent follow-up imaging of the 25 new tracklets at the predicted positions and times that either recovers matching objects at the expected brightness or fails to detect them.

read the original abstract

The geosynchronous (GSO) debris environment is continually evolving. Regular monitoring of the region is consequently of great importance, though the trade-off between coverage and sensitivity makes this challenging for the population of optically faint debris, where collecting area becomes a pivotal factor. Surveys conducted with large-aperture telescopes have provided crucial insights into the nature of this largely uncharacterised population. In this paper, we revisit a survey conducted with the 2.54 m Isaac Newton Telescope (INT), presenting an overhaul of the astrometric calibration and object detection stages of the original analysis pipeline. We apply a blind stacking technique to boost target recovery, unearthing 25 tracklets previously missed by single-frame extraction methods, and pushing the sensitivity limit fainter by 1 magnitude. The same algorithm is applied to a contemporaneous dataset, captured with a 36 cm astrograph, enabling performance benchmarking through the attempted recovery of INT detections from commercial-off-the-shelf observations. We achieve sub-arcsecond astrometric accuracy through a combination of improved star trail centroiding and iterative distortion fitting, allowing short arc initial orbit solutions to be obtained. High-cadence light curves extracted for trailing detections indicate that faint fragments are proportionally more variable than bright derelicts, with many exhibiting photometric signatures of rapid tumbling, often straddling the image noise floor. Lastly, we present preliminary findings from a follow-up multi-national observation campaign, utilising telescopes in Australia, Japan and La Palma. As space traffic management concerns begin to extend beyond GSO altitudes, scientifically-driven surveys of high-altitude orbits have an important role to play in characterising the faint debris environment.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reprocesses a geosynchronous debris survey from the 2.54 m Isaac Newton Telescope with an overhauled astrometric calibration and object detection pipeline. It applies a blind stacking technique that recovers 25 previously missed tracklets and extends the sensitivity limit by approximately 1 magnitude. The same pipeline is tested on contemporaneous 36 cm astrograph data for benchmarking, sub-arcsecond astrometric accuracy is achieved via improved star-trail centroiding and distortion fitting, light curves are extracted for trailing detections, and preliminary results from a multi-national follow-up campaign are presented.

Significance. If the new tracklets are robustly validated, the work would improve empirical constraints on the faint end of the GSO debris population, which is directly relevant to space situational awareness and traffic management. The blind-stacking approach and cross-aperture benchmarking constitute a methodological contribution to survey reprocessing; the multi-telescope follow-up and light-curve variability results add further value for characterizing tumbling fragments.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / blind-stacking results] Abstract and results section on blind stacking: the central claim that 25 new tracklets were unearthed and sensitivity was pushed 1 magnitude fainter rests on the post-stack detection step returning predominantly real objects. No Monte-Carlo false-positive rate, noise-only stack statistics, or external cross-match purity estimate for these 25 detections is described, leaving the headline empirical result without the quantitative validation required to support it.
  2. [Benchmarking with 36 cm dataset] Benchmarking section with 36 cm data: the attempted recovery of INT detections from the commercial-off-the-shelf observations is offered as performance validation, yet the INT detections themselves lack an independent purity assessment. This circularity weakens the benchmark and prevents a clear statement of the pipeline's overall reliability at the new threshold.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states sub-arcsecond astrometric accuracy but does not quote the achieved RMS or number of reference stars used; adding these numbers would strengthen the claim.
  2. [Light-curve analysis] Light-curve variability statements (faint fragments more variable than bright derelicts) would benefit from a quantitative metric such as the fraction of objects exceeding a given amplitude threshold or a statistical test against the bright sample.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and insightful comments on our manuscript. The two major comments raise valid points about the need for quantitative validation of the blind-stacking detections and the independence of the benchmarking exercise. We address each below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / blind-stacking results] Abstract and results section on blind stacking: the central claim that 25 new tracklets were unearthed and sensitivity was pushed 1 magnitude fainter rests on the post-stack detection step returning predominantly real objects. No Monte-Carlo false-positive rate, noise-only stack statistics, or external cross-match purity estimate for these 25 detections is described, leaving the headline empirical result without the quantitative validation required to support it.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit false-positive assessment would strengthen the central claim. The manuscript currently validates the 25 tracklets through their absence in single-frame processing, consistency across multiple stacked frames, and preliminary confirmation for a subset via the multi-national follow-up campaign. However, these steps do not constitute a formal purity estimate. In revision we will add a dedicated subsection presenting Monte-Carlo noise-only stack statistics and an external catalog cross-match for the new tracklets, allowing a quantitative false-positive rate to be reported. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Benchmarking with 36 cm dataset] Benchmarking section with 36 cm data: the attempted recovery of INT detections from the commercial-off-the-shelf observations is offered as performance validation, yet the INT detections themselves lack an independent purity assessment. This circularity weakens the benchmark and prevents a clear statement of the pipeline's overall reliability at the new threshold.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes the dependence on the INT reference set. The 36 cm dataset is independent in both instrument and observing conditions, and the recovery exercise demonstrates the pipeline's transferability to lower-aperture data. Nevertheless, the lack of an independent purity metric for the faintest INT detections does introduce a degree of circularity at the sensitivity limit. In the revised manuscript we will explicitly state this limitation, restrict the benchmark claims to the brighter subset where INT purity is higher, and add a cross-match with an external catalog for a representative sample of the recovered objects to provide an independent check. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical reprocessing of observational data

full rationale

The paper presents an observational reanalysis of INT and 36 cm telescope datasets using an improved astrometric pipeline and blind stacking for tracklet recovery. No derivations, model equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear. Claims rest on direct application of stacking to real images and reported recovery counts, with no reduction of outputs to inputs by construction. This is the expected finding for a data-driven astronomy survey paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on abstract only; the paper describes observational data processing improvements with no mathematical model, free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5962 in / 1096 out tokens · 34783 ms · 2026-07-01T16:05:37.947029+00:00 · methodology

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. Streak detection in the VST/OmegaCAM archive using deep learning

    astro-ph.IM 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A two-stage deep learning pipeline (HT-LCNN detector + VGG6 classifier) trained on augmented real and simulated data detects streaks in OmegaCAM frames with F1 > 0.95 on test sets and 0.99 precision on real 2023 data,...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Blake, J.A.: Looking out for a sustainable space. Astronomy & Geophysics63(2), 2–14220 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1093/astrogeo/atac022 39 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Number of reference stars per chip 0 100Count 3 4 1 25.1 25.2 25.3 0 25 50 75 100 125Count 3 25.1 25.2 25.3 Zero Point (Johnson V ) 4 25.1 25.2 25.3 1 Fig. 20Photometric results for the INT surve...

    work page doi:10.1093/astrogeo/atac022 2022

  2. [2]

    Nature Astronomy6(4), 428–435 (2022)

    Lawrence, A., Rawls, M.L., Jah, M., Boley, A., Di Vruno, F., Garrington, S., Kramer, M., Lawler, S., Lowenthal, J., McDowell, J.,et al.: The case for space environmentalism. Nature Astronomy6(4), 428–435 (2022)

    2022

  3. [3]

    The Astrophysical Journal Letters892(2), 36 (2020) 40 Stacked (raw)Stacked (binned)Blind stack output Binned Binned 1408411 1408412 1408413 1408414 1408415 Binned Binned Binned Fig

    McDowell, J.C.: The low earth orbit satellite population and impacts of the SpaceX Starlink constellation. The Astrophysical Journal Letters892(2), 36 (2020) 40 Stacked (raw)Stacked (binned)Blind stack output Binned Binned 1408411 1408412 1408413 1408414 1408415 Binned Binned Binned Fig. 21An example recovery of a new INT target, with range-corrected brig...

    2020

  4. [4]

    https://www.sdo.esoc.esa.int/publications/Space Environment Report- I9R1 20251021.pdf

    ESA: Space Environment Report, GEN-DB-LOG-00288-OPS-SD. https://www.sdo.esoc.esa.int/publications/Space Environment Report- I9R1 20251021.pdf. Accessed: 2026-01-31 (2025)

    2026

  5. [5]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2021)

    George, S., Agathanggelou, A., Privett, G., Halpin, P., Feline, W., Ash, A., Chote, P., Scott, L., Skuljan, J., Alvino, J., Frith, J.: Phantom Echoes 2: A Five-Eyes SDA Experiment on GEO Proximity Operations. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    Secure World Foundation, May (2022)

    Weeden, B.: Chinese Military and Intelligence Rendezvous and Proximity Oper- ations. Secure World Foundation, May (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    Ingram, C., Bishop, J., Cunio, P., Hendrix, D., Jeffries, M., Solutions, E.: ExoALERT: 1 Year of AI-Enabled Space Traffic Management Services at GEO. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) 41 Stacked (raw)Stacked (binned)Blind stack output Binned Binned 1407379 1407380 1407381 1407382 1407383 Binned Binned Binned Fig. 2...

    2022

  8. [8]

    https://www.space-track.org/

    Space-Track: API, US Government. https://www.space-track.org/. Accessed: 2026-01-31 (2025)

    2026

  9. [9]

    Orbital Debris Quaterly News29(1) (2025)

    NASA: Orbital Debris Program Office. Orbital Debris Quaterly News29(1) (2025)

    2025

  10. [10]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2025)

    Pavy, M., Baral, V., Delande, E., Gary, Y., Richard, P., Ferme, R.: Rapid Tracking and Cataloguing Fragmentation in Orbit Using Three Telescopes: The Intelsat 33E Case. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2025)

    2025

  11. [11]

    In: 42 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Rate [ ′′s−1] 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Flux [ADU] Stacks 2 3 Fig

    Pirovano, L., Khatri, Y., Gollu, N., Budoni, M., Escribano Bl´ azquez, G.: NorthStar’s Fragmentation Analysis of the Intelsat 33e Breakup in GEO. In: 42 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Rate [ ′′s−1] 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200Flux [ADU] Stacks 2 3 Fig. 23Extracted flux measurements for the 25 targets found by applying the adapted blind stacking algorithm ...

    2025

  12. [12]

    International Journal of Impact Engineering180, 104669 (2023)

    Cowardin, H., Cruz, C., Murray, J., Seago, J., Manis, A., Gates, D., Reyes, J., Opiela, J.: Updates on the DebriSat hypervelocity experiment and characteriza- tion of fragments in support of environmental models. International Journal of Impact Engineering180, 104669 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    In: 8th European Conference on Space Debris, p

    Braun, V., Horstmann, A., Lemmens, S., Wiedemann, C., B¨ ottcher, L.: Recent developments in space debris environment modelling, verification and validation with MASTER. In: 8th European Conference on Space Debris, p. 18 (2021). ESA Space Debris Office Darmstadt, Germany

    2021

  14. [14]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2017)

    Cunio, P.M., Bantel, M., Flewelling, B.R., Therien, W., Jeffries Jr, M.W., Mon- toya, M., Butler, R., Hendrix, D.: Photometric and other analyses of energetic events related to 2017 GEO RSO anomalies. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2017)

    2017

  15. [15]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2019) 43

    Schildknecht, T., Vananti, A., Cordelli, E., Flohrer, T.: ESA optical surveys to characterize recent fragmentation events in GEO and HEO. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2019) 43

    2019

  16. [16]

    In: First International Orbital Debris Conference, vol

    Cunio, P.M., Flewelling, B.R., Bantel, M., Hendrix, D., Therien, W.: Remote Sensing-Enabled Methods for Attributing Energetic On-Orbit Anomalies to Nat- ural or Artificial Causes. In: First International Orbital Debris Conference, vol. 2109, p. 6160 (2019)

    2019

  17. [17]

    Technical report, NASA/TP-20220019160 (2023)

    Anz-Meador, P., Opiela, J., Liou, J.-C.: History of on-orbit satellite fragmenta- tions. Technical report, NASA/TP-20220019160 (2023)

    2023

  18. [18]

    In: Space Debris, vol

    Jarvis, K., Africano, J., Sydney, P., Stansbery, E., Thumm, T., Jorgensen, K., Mulrooney, M.: Observations of the geosynchronous Earth orbital debris environ- ment using NASA’s CCD Debris Telescope. In: Space Debris, vol. 473, pp. 95–99 (2001)

    2001

  19. [19]

    Advances in Space Research34(5), 1139–1142 (2004)

    Seitzer, P., Smith, R., Africano, J., Jorgensen, K., Stansbery, E., Monet, D.: MODEST observations of space debris at geosynchronous orbit. Advances in Space Research34(5), 1139–1142 (2004)

    2004

  20. [20]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference, p

    Schildknecht, T., P¨ arli, F., Vananti, A., Patole, P., Pessev, P., Flohrer, T., Siminski, J.: Recent Evolution of the Sub-Catalogue Space Debris Population in High-altitude Orbital Regions. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference, p. 4 (2024)

    2024

  21. [21]

    In: 9th European Conference on Space Debris (2025)

    Cruz, C., Buckalew, B., Melo, J., Lambert, M., Manis, A.: Detection and Analysis Techniques for Optical Telescope Data and Machine Learning Applications. In: 9th European Conference on Space Debris (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    Advances in space research59(1), 181–192 (2017)

    Silha, J., Schildknecht, T., Hinze, A., Flohrer, T., Vananti, A.: An optical survey for space debris on highly eccentric and inclined MEO orbits. Advances in space research59(1), 181–192 (2017)

    2017

  23. [23]

    Advances in Space Research41(7), 1039–1045 (2008)

    Schildknecht, T., Musci, R., Flohrer, T.: Properties of the high area-to-mass ratio space debris population at high altitudes. Advances in Space Research41(7), 1039–1045 (2008)

    2008

  24. [24]

    In: 4th European Conference on Space Debris, vol

    Africano, J., Kervin, P., Hall, D., Sydney, P., Ross, J., Payne, T., Gregory, S., Jorgensen, K., Jarvis, K., Parr-Thumm, T.,et al.: Understanding photometric phase angle corrections. In: 4th European Conference on Space Debris, vol. 587, p. 141 (2005)

    2005

  25. [25]

    Advances in Space Research (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.02.027

    Airey, R.J.S., Chote, P., Blake, J.A., Cooke, B.F., McCormac, J., Allen, P., Mac- Manus, A., Pollacco, D., Shrive, B., West, R.: A comprehensive survey of the GEO-belt using simultaneous four-colour observations with STING. Advances in Space Research (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2025.02.027

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2025.02.027 2025

  26. [26]

    Acta Astronautica85, 73–82 (2013) 44

    McKnight, D.S., Di Pentino, F.R.: New insights on the orbital debris collision hazard at GEO. Acta Astronautica85, 73–82 (2013) 44

    2013

  27. [27]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference, vol

    Molotov, I., Agapov, V., Khutorovsky, Z., Titenko, V., Rumyantsev, V., Biryukov, V., Minikulov, N., Gulyamov, M., Abdulloev, B., Andrievsky, S.,et al.: Faint high orbit debris observations with ISON optical network. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference, vol. 21 (2009)

    2009

  28. [28]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2012)

    Schildknecht, T., Vananti, A., Hinze, A., Herzog, J., Ploner, M.: Long-term evolu- tion of high area-to-mass ratio objects in different orbital regions. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2012)

    2012

  29. [29]

    Astrophysics and Space Science 369(8), 77 (2024)

    Molotov, I., Zhao, H., Li, B., Zhang, C., Elenin, L., Streltsov, A., Abdelaziz, A., Stepanyants, V., Ehgamberdiev, S., Schildknecht, T.,et al.: International ISON project & databases on space debris and asteroids. Astrophysics and Space Science 369(8), 77 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference, p

    Bolden, M., Sydney, P., Kervin, P.: Pan-STARRS status and Geo Observations Results. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference, p. 33 (2011)

    2011

  31. [31]

    In: International Orbital Debris Conference (IOC) (2019)

    Murray, J., Cowardin, H., Liou, J.-C., Sorge, M., Fitz-Coy, N., Huynh, T.: Anal- ysis of the DebriSat fragments and comparison to the NASA standard satellite breakup model. In: International Orbital Debris Conference (IOC) (2019)

    2019

  32. [32]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Confer- ence, p

    Seitzer, P., Barker, E., Buckalew, B., Burkhardt, A., Cowardin, H., Frith, J., Kaleida, C., Lederer, S.M.: A Search for Debris from Two Titan 3C Transtage Breakups at GEO with a 6.5-m Magellan Telescope. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Confer- ence, p. 33 (2017)

    2017

  33. [33]

    Advances in Space Research67(1), 360–370 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.08.008

    Blake, J.A., Chote, P., Pollacco, D., Feline, W., Privett, G., Ash, A., Eves, S., Greenwood, A., Harwood, N., Marsh, T.R., Veras, D., Watson, C.: DebrisWatch I: A survey of faint geosynchronous debris. Advances in Space Research67(1), 360–370 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.08.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr.2020.08.008 2021

  34. [34]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2025)

    Blake, J.A., Cooke, B.F., Privett, G.,et al.: Improved astrometry and sensitivity for a survey of faint geosynchronous debris. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2025)

    2025

  35. [35]

    PhD thesis, University of Warwick (2021)

    Blake, J.A.: Optical imaging of space debris in low and high altitude orbits. PhD thesis, University of Warwick (2021). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11557. 22247

    work page doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.11557 2021

  36. [36]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2019) 45

    Blake, J.A., Chote, P., Pollacco, D., Veras, D., Ash, A., Feline, W., Harwood, N., Privett, G.: Optical imaging of faint geosynchronous debris with the Isaac Newton Telescope. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2019) 45

    2019

  37. [37]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2020)

    Blake, J.A., Chote, P., Pollacco, D., Veras, D., Ash, A., Feline, W., Privett, G., Pirovano, L.: Supplementing a survey of geosynchronous debris with commercial- off-the-shelf equipment. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2020)

    2020

  38. [38]

    The astronomical journal139(5), 1782 (2010)

    Lang, D., Hogg, D.W., Mierle, K., Blanton, M., Roweis, S.: Astrometry.net: Blind astrometric calibration of arbitrary astronomical images. The astronomical journal139(5), 1782 (2010)

    2010

  39. [39]

    The Astropy Project: Sustaining and Growing a Community-oriented Open-source Project and the Latest Major Release (v5.0) of the Core Package

    Astropy Collaboration, Price-Whelan, A.M., Lim, P.L., Earl, N., Starkman, N., Bradley, L., Shupe, D.L., Patil, A.A., Corrales, L., Brasseur, C.E., N¨ othe, M., Astropy Project Contributors: The Astropy Project: Sustaining and Growing a Community-oriented Open-source Project and the Latest Major Release (v5.0) of the Core Package. Astrophys. J.935(2), 167 ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    The Astronomical Journal157(3), 98 (2019)

    Ginsburg, A., Sip˝ ocz, B.M., Brasseur, C., Cowperthwaite, P.S., Craig, M.W., Deil, C., Groener, A.M., Guillochon, J., Guzman, G., Liedtke, S.,et al.: Astroquery: an astronomical web-querying package in Python. The Astronomical Journal157(3), 98 (2019)

    2019

  41. [41]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific125(927), 548 (2013)

    McCormac, J., Skillen, I., Todd, I., Watson, C.: DONUTS: A science frame auto- guiding algorithm with sub-pixel precision, capable of guiding on defocused stars. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific125(927), 548 (2013)

    2013

  42. [42]

    Nature585(7825), 357–362 (2020)

    Harris, C.R., Millman, K.J., Van Der Walt, S.J., Gommers, R., Virtanen, P., Cournapeau, D., Wieser, E., Taylor, J., Berg, S., Smith, N.J.,et al.: Array programming with NumPy. Nature585(7825), 357–362 (2020)

    2020

  43. [43]

    Astrophysics Source Code Library, 1609 (2016)

    Bradley, L., Sipocz, B., Robitaille, T., Tollerud, E., Deil, C., Vin´ ıcius, Z., Barbary, K., G¨ unther, H.M., Bostroem, A., Droettboom, M., et al.: Photutils: Photometry tools. Astrophysics Source Code Library, 1609 (2016)

    2016

  44. [44]

    Nature methods 17(3), 261–272 (2020)

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T.E., Haberland, M., Reddy, T., Cour- napeau, D., Burovski, E., Peterson, P., Weckesser, W., Bright, J.,et al.: SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nature methods 17(3), 261–272 (2020)

    2020

  45. [45]

    The Journal of Open Source Software1(6), 59 (2016)

    Barbary, K.: SEP: Source Extractor as a library. The Journal of Open Source Software1(6), 59 (2016)

    2016

  46. [46]

    Astronomy and astrophysics supplement series117(2), 393–404 (1996)

    Bertin, E., Arnouts, S.: SExtractor: Software for source extraction. Astronomy and astrophysics supplement series117(2), 393–404 (1996)

    1996

  47. [47]

    Advances in Space Research47(6), 1043–1053 (2011) 46

    Montojo, F.J., Moratalla, T.L., Abad, C.: Astrometric positioning and orbit determination of geostationary satellites. Advances in Space Research47(6), 1043–1053 (2011) 46

    2011

  48. [48]

    The Astronomical Journal125(1), 359 (2003)

    Wright, C.O., Egan, M.P., Kraemer, K.E., Price, S.D.: The Tycho-2 spectral type catalog. The Astronomical Journal125(1), 359 (2003)

    2003

  49. [49]

    Astronomy & astrophysics616, 1 (2018)

    Brown, A.G.A., Vallenari, A., Prusti, T., De Bruijne, J.H.J., Babusiaux, C., Bailer-Jones, C.A.L., Biermann, M., Evans, D.W., Eyer, L., Jansen, F.,et al.: Gaia data release 2-summary of the contents and survey properties. Astronomy & astrophysics616, 1 (2018)

    2018

  50. [50]

    Astronomy & Astrophysics674, 1 (2023)

    Vallenari, A., Brown, A.G.A., Prusti, T., De Bruijne, J.H.J., Arenou, F., Babu- siaux, C., Biermann, M., Creevey, O.L., Ducourant, C., Evans, D.W.,et al.: Gaia data release 3-summary of the content and survey properties. Astronomy & Astrophysics674, 1 (2023)

    2023

  51. [51]

    0) of the core package

    Price-Whelan, A.M., Lim, P.L., Earl, N., Starkman, N., Bradley, L., Shupe, D.L., Patil, A.A., Corrales, L., Brasseur, C.E., N¨ othe, M.,et al.: The Astropy Project: sustaining and growing a community-oriented open-source project and the latest major release (v5. 0) of the core package. The Astrophysical Journal935(2), 167 (2022)

    2022

  52. [52]

    VizieR Online Data Catalog, 336 (2016)

    Henden, A.A., Templeton, M., Terrell, D., Smith, T.C., Levine, S., Welch, D.: VizieR online data catalog: AAVSO photometric all sky survey (APASS) DR9 (Henden+, 2016). VizieR Online Data Catalog, 336 (2016)

    2016

  53. [53]

    European Space Agency, Paris, France (2023)

    Carrasco, J.M., Bellazzini, M.:GaiaData Release 3 Documentation: Photometric relationships with other photometric systems. European Space Agency, Paris, France (2023)

    2023

  54. [54]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2019)

    Chote, P., Blake, J.A., Pollacco, D.: Precision Optical Light Curves of LEO and GEO Objects. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2019)

    2019

  55. [55]

    Advances in Space Research72(4), 907–921 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr

    Cooke, B.F., Chote, P., Pollacco, D., West, R., Blake, J.A., McCormac, J., Airey, R., Shrive, B.: Simulated recovery of LEO objects using sCMOS blind stacking. Advances in Space Research72(4), 907–921 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr. 2023.05.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asr 2023

  56. [56]

    Advances in Space Research44(11), 1270–1278 (2009)

    Laas-Bourez, M., Blanchet, G., Bo¨ er, M., Ducrott´ e, E., Klotz, A.: A new algorithm for optical observations of space debris with the TAROT telescopes. Advances in Space Research44(11), 1270–1278 (2009)

    2009

  57. [57]

    The Astronomy and Astro- physics Review14(1), 41–111 (2007)

    Schildknecht, T.: Optical surveys for space debris. The Astronomy and Astro- physics Review14(1), 41–111 (2007)

    2007

  58. [58]

    Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 132, 1–27 (2020) 47

    Pirovano, L., Santeramo, D.A., Armellin, R., Di Lizia, P., Wittig, A.: Probabilistic data association: the orbit set. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 132, 1–27 (2020) 47

    2020

  59. [59]

    Complexity10, 3 (2021)

    ˇSilha, J., Zigo, M., Hrob´ ar, T., Jevˇ c´ ak, P., Vereˇ sv´ arska, M.: Light curves appli- cation to space debris characterization and classification. Complexity10, 3 (2021)

    2021

  60. [60]

    Photometric patterns method

    Koshkin, N., Shakun, L., Korobeynikova, E., Melikyants, S., Strakhova, S., Dragomiretsky, V., Ryabov, A., Terpan, S., Golubovskaya, T.: Determination of the spacecraft’s spin axis orientation. Photometric patterns method. Advances in Space Research74(11), 5725–5744 (2024)

    2024

  61. [61]

    RAS Techniques and Instruments4, 058 (2025)

    Airey, R.J., Chote, P., Blake, J.A., McCormac, J., Shrive, B., Pollacco, D., Cooke, B.F.: Lord of the (sub-) Rings: Mapping the surface reflectance and spin-axis of Ajisai. RAS Techniques and Instruments4, 058 (2025)

    2025

  62. [62]

    Advances in Space Research 75(1), 1077–1095 (2025)

    Isoletta, G., Opromolla, R., Fasano, G.: Attitude motion classification of resident space objects using light curve spectral analysis. Advances in Space Research 75(1), 1077–1095 (2025)

    2025

  63. [63]

    The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences67(3), 1063–1091 (2020)

    Linares, R., Furfaro, R., Reddy, V.: Space objects classification via light-curve measurements using deep convolutional neural networks. The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences67(3), 1063–1091 (2020)

    2020

  64. [64]

    In: 8th European Conference on Space Debris, vol

    Kerr, E., Falco, G., Maric, N., Petit, D., Talon, P., Petersen, E.G., Dorn, C., Eves, S., S´ anchez-Ortiz, N., Gonzalez, R.D.,et al.: Light curves for GEO object characterisation. In: 8th European Conference on Space Debris, vol. 5 (2021). Darmstadt, Germany: ESA Space Debris Office

    2021

  65. [65]

    RAS Techniques and Instruments3(1), 247–256 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1093/rasti/rzae018

    Shrive, B., Pollacco, D., Chote, P., Blake, J.A., Cooke, B.F., McCormac, J., West, R., Airey, R., MacManus, A., Allen, P.: Classifying LEO satellite platforms with boosted decision trees. RAS Techniques and Instruments3(1), 247–256 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1093/rasti/rzae018

    work page doi:10.1093/rasti/rzae018 2024

  66. [66]

    The Astrophys- ical Journal Supplement Series236(1), 16 (2018)

    VanderPlas, J.T.: Understanding the lomb–scargle periodogram. The Astrophys- ical Journal Supplement Series236(1), 16 (2018)

    2018

  67. [67]

    Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society385(3), 1279–1285 (2008)

    Baluev, R.V.: Assessing the statistical significance of periodogram peaks. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society385(3), 1279–1285 (2008)

    2008

  68. [68]

    Advances in Space Research61(1), 122–144 (2018)

    Albuja, A.A., Scheeres, D.J., Cognion, R.L., Ryan, W., Ryan, E.V.: The YORP effect on the GOES 8 and GOES 10 satellites: A case study. Advances in Space Research61(1), 122–144 (2018)

    2018

  69. [69]

    The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences68(3), 728–749 (2021)

    Benson, C.J., Naudet, C.J., Scheeres, D.J., Jao, J.S., Snedeker, L.G., Ryan, W.H., Ryan, E.V., Silva, M.A., Lagrange, J.K., Bryant, S.H.,et al.: Radar and opti- cal study of defunct geosynchronous satellites. The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences68(3), 728–749 (2021)

    2021

  70. [70]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia41, 061 (2024)

    Onken, C.A., Wolf, C., Bessell, M.S., Chang, S.-W., Luvaul, L.C., Tonry, J.L., 48 White, M.C., Da Costa, G.S.: SkyMapper Southern Survey: Data Release 4. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia41, 061 (2024)

    2024

  71. [71]

    Advances in Space Research34(5), 917–920 (2004)

    Isobe, S., Asami, A., Asher, D., Hashimoto, N., Nakano, S.-i., Nishiyama, K., Ohshima, Y., Terazono, J., Umehara, H., Urata, T.,et al.: A new 1 m telescope for space debris survey observations. Advances in Space Research34(5), 917–920 (2004)

    2004

  72. [72]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan64(3), 47 (2012)

    Okumura, S.-i., Nishiyama, K., Urakawa, S., Sakamoto, T., Takahashi, N., Yoshikawa, M.: Wide-Band Optical Filter Optimized for Deep Imaging of Small Solar-System Bodies. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan64(3), 47 (2012)

    2012

  73. [73]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific135(1047), 055001 (2023)

    Alarcon, M.R., Licandro, J., Serra-Ricart, M., Joven, E., Gaitan, V., Sousa, R.: Scientific CMOS sensors in astronomy: IMX455 and IMX411. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific135(1047), 055001 (2023)

    2023

  74. [74]

    Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific134(1033), 035003 (2022)

    Law, N.M., Corbett, H., Galliher, N.W., Gonzalez, R., Vasquez, A., Walters, G., Machia, L., Ratzloff, J., Ackley, K., Bizon, C.,et al.: Low-cost access to the deep, high-cadence sky: the argus optical array. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific134(1033), 035003 (2022)

    2022

  75. [75]

    In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance (AMOS) Technologies Conference (2023)

    Blake, J.A., Pollacco, D., Airey, R., Chote, P., Cooke, B.F., McCormac, J., Shrive, B., West, R.G., Davis, J., Feline, W., Kerr, E., Privett, G., Akiyama, Y., Hinagawa, H., Nakamura, S., Yanagisawa, T., McFadden, R., Eves, S.: Explor- ing SDA sensor architectures for the surveillance of geosynchronous spacecraft. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optic...

    2023

  76. [76]

    The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences66(2), 125–141 (2019) 49

    Cohen, G., Afshar, S., Morreale, B., Bessell, T., Wabnitz, A., Rutten, M., Van Schaik, A.: Event-based sensing for space situational awareness. The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences66(2), 125–141 (2019) 49

    2019