Paper detail

Asteroids' Size Distribution and Colors from HiTS

We report the observations of solar system objects during the 2015 campaign of the High cadence Transient Survey (HiTS). We found 5740 bodies (mostly Main Belt asteroids), 1203 of which were detected in different nights and in $g&#39;$ and $r&#39;$. Objects were linked in the barycenter system and their orbital parameters were computed assuming Keplerian motion. We identified 6 near Earth objects, 1738 Main Belt asteroids and 4 Trans-Neptunian objects. We did not find a $g&#39;-r&#39;$ color-size correlation for $14<H_{g&#39;}<18$ ($1<D<10$ km) asteroids. We show asteroids&#39; colors are disturbed by HiTS&#39; 1.6 hour cadence and estimate that observations should be separated by at most 14 minutes to avoid confusion in future wide-field surveys like LSST. The size distribution for the Main Belt objects can be characterized as a simple power law with slope $\sim0.9$, steeper than in any other survey, while data from HiTS 2014&#39;s campaign is consistent with previous ones (slopes $\sim0.68$ at the bright end and $\sim0.34$ at the faint end). This difference is likely due to the ecliptic distribution of the Main Belt since 2015&#39;s campaign surveyed farther from the ecliptic than did 2014&#39;s and most previous surveys.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.