Paper detail

Sizes of main-belt asteroids by combining shape models and Keck adaptive aptics observations

We select 50 main-belt asteroids with a diameter between 20 and 400 km for which we have (i) shape models derived by the lightcurve inversion method (LI) and (ii) resolved observations of good quality collected with the Keck II adaptive optics (AO) system in the near-infrared. We derive the size of these asteroids by minimizing the difference between the contours from deconvolved AO images and the projected silhouettes calculated from the shape model at the time of the AO observations. We compute the volume-equivalent diameters for 48 of these asteroids. For 15 of them, we remove the ambiguity of the pole orientation typical for shape models derived by the LI. We have found that our equivalent diameters are smaller by 3%, 7%, and 2% compared with the effective diameters derived from mid-IR photometric observations provided by IRAS, WISE and AKARI. For 40 asteroids with previously determined mass estimates, we compute their bulk densities and discuss the mass-density dependence with respect to taxonomic types.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.