Paper detail

De-biased Populations of Kuiper Belt Objects from the Deep Ecliptic Survey

The Deep Ecliptic Survey (DES) discovered hundreds of Kuiper Belt objects from 1998-2005. Follow-up observations yielded 304 objects with good dynamical classifications (Classical, Scattered, Centaur, or 16 mean-motion resonances with Neptune). The DES search fields are well documented, enabling us to calculate the probability of detecting objects with particular orbital parameters and absolute magnitudes at a randomized point in each orbit. Grouping objects together by dynamical class leads, we estimate the orbital element distributions (a, e, i) for the largest three classes (Classical, 3:2, and Scattered) using maximum likelihood. Using H-magnitude as a proxy for the object size, we fit a power law to the number of objects for 8 classes with at least 5 detected members (246 objects). The best Classical slope is alpha=1.02+/-0.01 (observed from 5<=H<=7.2). Six dynamical classes (Scattered plus 5 resonances) are consistent in slope with the Classicals, though the absolute number of objects is scaled. The exception to the power law relation are the Centaurs (non-resonant with perihelia closer than Neptune, and thus detectable at smaller sizes), with alpha=0.42+/-0.02 (7.5<H<11). This is consistent with a knee in the H-distribution around H=7.2 as reported elsewhere (Bernstein et al. 2004, Fraser et al. 2014). Based on the Classical-derived magnitude distribution, the total number of objects (H<=7) in each class are: Classical (2100+/-300 objects), Scattered (2800+/-400), 3:2 (570+/-80), 2:1 (400+/-50), 5:2 (270+/-40), 7:4 (69+/-9), 5:3 (60+/-8). The independent estimate for the number of Centaurs in the same H range is 13+/-5. If instead all objects are divided by inclination into &#34;Hot&#34; and &#34;Cold&#34; populations, following Fraser et al. (2014), we find that alphaHot=0.90+/-0.02, while alphaCold=1.32+/-0.02, in good agreement with that work.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.

Institutions

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.