首页> 外文期刊>The Astrophysical journal >SYSTEMATIC BIASES IN THE OBSERVED DISTRIBUTION OF KUIPER BELT OBJECT ORBITS
【24h】

SYSTEMATIC BIASES IN THE OBSERVED DISTRIBUTION OF KUIPER BELT OBJECT ORBITS

机译:库伯带状物体轨道的观测分布中的系统性偏差

获取原文
           

摘要

The orbital distribution of Kuiper Belt objects (KBOs) provides important tests of solar system evolution models. However, our understanding of this orbital distribution can be affected by many observational biases. An important but difficult to quantify bias results from tracking selection effects; KBOs are recovered or lost depending on assumptions made about their orbital elements when fitting the initial (short) observational arc. Quantitatively studying the effects and significance of this bias is generally difficult, because only the objects where the assumptions were correct are recovered and thus available to study "the problem," and because different observers use different assumptions and methods. We have used a sample of 38 KBOs that were discovered and tracked, bias-free, as part of the Canada-France Ecliptic Plane Survey to evaluate the potential for losing objects based on the two most common orbit and ephemeris prediction sources: the Minor Planet Center (MPC) and the Bernstein and Khushalani (BK) orbit fitting code. In both cases, we use early discovery and recovery astrometric measurements of the objects to generate ephemeris predictions that we then compare to later positional measurements; objects that have large differences between the predicted and actual positions would be unlikely to be recovered and are thus considered "lost." We find systematic differences in the orbit distributions which would result from using the two orbit-fitting procedures. In our sample, the MPC-derived orbit solutions lost slightly fewer objects (five out of 38) due to large ephemeris errors at one year recovery, but the objects which were lost belonged to more "unusual" orbits such as scattering disk objects or objects with semimajor axes interior to the 3:2 resonance. Using the BK code, more objects (seven out of 38) would have been lost due to ephemeris errors, but the lost objects came from a range of orbital regions, primarily the classical belt region. We also compare the accuracy of orbits calculated from one year arcs against orbits calculated from multiple years of observations and find that two-opposition orbits without additional observations acquired at least two months from opposition are unreliable for dynamical modeling.
机译:柯伊伯带天体(KBO)的轨道分布为太阳系演化模型提供了重要的测试。但是,我们对这种轨道分布的理解可能会受到许多观测偏差的影响。一个重要的但难以量化的偏见来自跟踪选择效应的结果;当拟合初始(短)观测弧时,KBO的恢复或丢失取决于其轨道元素的假设。通常很难定量研究这种偏差的影响和重要性,因为只有假设正确的对象才能被回收,因此可以用来研究“问题”,并且由于不同的观察者使用不同的假设和方法。作为加拿大-法国黄道平面调查的一部分,我们使用了38个KBO样本,这些样本被发现和追踪且无偏差,根据两个最常见的轨道和星历预测源:小行星,评估了丢失物体的可能性中心(MPC)以及伯恩斯坦和库沙兰尼(BK)的轨道拟合代码。在这两种情况下,我们都使用物体的早期发现和恢复天文测量来生成星历表预测,然后将其与以后的位置测量结果进行比较。预测位置与实际位置之间存在较大差异的对象将不太可能恢复,因此被视为“丢失”。我们发现使用两种轨道拟合程序会导致轨道分布出现系统差异。在我们的样本中,MPC衍生的轨道解决方案由于在恢复一年后出现大的星历误差而丢失了较少的物体(38个中有五个),但是丢失的物体属于更多的“异常”轨道,例如散射磁盘物体或物体半长轴位于3:2共振内部。使用BK代码,由于星历表错误会丢失更多的对象(38个对象中的七个),但是丢失的对象来自一定范围的轨道区域,主要是经典带区域。我们还比较了从一年弧计算的轨道的精度与从多年观测得到的轨道的精度,发现在没有至少两个月从对冲获得的额外观测的情况下,两对立轨道对于动力学建模是不可靠的。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号